Skip to comments.Russia Upgrades Air Defenses
Posted on 05/11/2010 4:50:23 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The Russian air force took delivery of the first Pantsyr-S short-range air-defense systems in March. The Pantsyrs will gradually replace the old Tunguska antiaircraft weapons. The first 10 systems were released from KBP Instrument Design Bureaus assembly site in Tula and transported to Alabino, near Moscow, and will be part of the Victory Day parade in Red Square on May 9.
Whats unusual is that the first Pantsyr systems are being deployed to protect high-end surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) against aircraft, missiles and bombs.
The Pantsyr battery will be deployed to the 606th air-defense regiment in Elektrostal, near Moscow, says Lt. Gen. Sergey Razygraev, deputy commander of air defense. A few years ago this regiment became the first to get the new S-400 Triumf long-range SAMs that will now be guarded by the Pantsyrs. Each S-400 system will be protected by three Pantsyr launch vehicles, Razygraev says.
KBP started to develop the Pantsyr in the 1990s, basing it on the Tunguska missile-gun system. The new air-defense weapon is designed to provide short-range protection from air attack to military units and strategic military and industrial sites. Its main task, however, will be to guard long-range S-300 SAMs, Triumfs predecessors. The first Pantsyr prototype was completed in 1994 and unveiled a year later at the MAKS air show in Zhukovsky. But then development was almost entirely suspended due to insufficient government funding.
The program was revived in the early 2000s when the United Arab Emirates (UAE) ordered 50 Pantsyr-S1 export-modified weapons for $734 million, with an option for 28 more. Pantsyr thus became the first new Russian weapon system designed for export. Under the contract, KBP should have completed development within two years and delivered the system in 2005. The deliveries were delayed, however, because designers completed an improved version in 2006.
(Excerpt) Read more at aviationweek.com ...
SAM’s designed to defen SAM’s.
I think more of a layered defense. The Russians did a trial of the Pantsyr and the S-400 together in a live fire exercise. The S-400 missed the target but the Pantsyr took out the warhead.
While reading the brief, I could not believe that the S-400 missed(especially with all the radar equipment the S-400 has) and this puny missile system took out the warhead.
So, who’s their potential enemy, the Amish? Poland (interesting that the cream of Poland’s military was wiped out in the recent plane crash)? The Chechyan guerrillas’ air force (three gliders and a hot-air balloon)?
Red China? North Korea? Iran? Denmark?
Paranoia run amuck under the communist thugocracy of Putin and Medvedev.
I think they designed the system to be sold abroad.
And some sort of back up in case the other Russians missile systems fail.
Might be more agile in-flight
The Russians also use Tor M1 systems to protect their S-300’s and S-400’s.
The trick is that with weapons they have no enemies, and without weapons everyone and their dog would want a piece (that's how it played out in the past, at least - many European rulers took a stab at conquering Russia.)
So the question is like asking a police officer who is his enemy, since he wears a gun. He doesn't have any, and he'd like to keep it that way.
The USA is no different; not only nobody [sane] proposes to disarm, the country keeps working on new weapons. Many new designs are specifically constructed to fight wars as humanely as possible. Today a Predator may be deployed against a single hut; but back in the days of WWII several airplanes would have bombed a few square miles at and around the hut, killing everything that moves (and possibly missing the target.)
One area where the USA is behind is the demographic weapon that Mexico is deploying. None are so blind that don't want to see.
It tells us that their S-300 and S-400 are a piece of expensive Russian junk.
I don’t think so. I heard the latest patriot is based on an evaluation of S-300 USAF got in 1994. There are no 100% effective systems so I bet a single missed missile is not a big deal. Especially considering a fact S-400 is a part of more complex system which is actually worked.
A missed missile though can mean everything especially you are in the heat of battle.
But you are correct.
Read the purpose of the pairing of the S400 and the short range missiles ...the S400 is the big stick, with even a limited anti ballistic missile ability, and a highly effective anti aircraft capability. What shorter range missiles do is to protect the S400 from (say) JSOW and (high altitude launch) JDAMs (eg from a high alttude launch by a Raptor) that is targeting the S400. The Triumf (like the Patriot) cannot effectively target a bomb ...shorter range missiles like the Tor can.
Not necessarily, the whole point of layered defences is to protect your high value target against attack at all altitudes and speeds. Pantsyr may be more effective at low altitude engagements, i.e. against helicopters.
It seems the S-400 failed when it missed the warhead and the Pantsyr destroyed.
I agree with you.
All good points
It does not mean the S-400 is weak, but instead actually makes the S-400 an even more dangerous system by improving its survivability even further. The greatest threat to legacy fighters (like the F-18, F-16, F-15, Tornado etc) is not enemy air (not even advanced variants of the Flanker like the SU-35, or even op-air 5th Gen fighters like the PakFa prototype), but rather the proliferation creep of advanced double-digit SAMs like the S-300 and the HQ-9 (a Chinese clone of the 300). Those systems will effectively deny airspace to legacy airframes. The S-400 simply makes it worse for legacy airframes. Now, the way the Tor and other shorter range systems come in, is that they remove a major weakness of the S-3/400 ...that is, standoff weapons or expanded range weapons launched by a stealthy platform. A deep IADS penetrator like the Raptor can launch a JDAM or SDB from a very high altitude at supercruise, giving the weapon a vastly expanded range. The Raptor would be able to penetrate deeper into an advanced enemy IADS than what a F-15 or similar could, thus it is quite possible for a Raptor to launch several Small Diameter Bombs (basically missiles without engines due to their shape and pop-out wings), which can be used to target S-300/400/HQ-9 systems at the periphery, and thus the Raptor force could simply use attrition attacks from the outside going in. However, the Pantsyr-S is not able to intercept these incoming weapons, leaving the S-3/400/HQ-9 launch vehicles and their radars safer.
This makes a bad situation worse. Particularly for nations like Taiwan which have a series of platforms for the Chinese IADS along China's coast, some of which can reach into the Strait.
Anyways, I really enjoy your threads, and you should start a ping list.
I enjoy reading your posts. I learn from it very much. Thanks for the compliment for starting a ping list.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.