Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • TR1
    TR1
    http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
    • Oct 2010
    • 9808

    Ka-62 at Progress:



    Tor-M2DT (Arctic) testing:

    sigpic

    Comment

    • haavarla
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Dec 2008
      • 6672

      Are those the Max 45km range missiles, or are those only for Tor SM?
      Edit:
      Never mind, i am confusing the Pantsir SA with Tor M2DT..
      Last edited by haavarla; 17th February 2018, 10:49.
      Thanks

      Comment

      • stealthflanker
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Sep 2015
        • 1009

        I wonder what change we could expect in future TOR's. I would expect increase in target handling capacity tho, beside fire on the move. because today is the era of mass precision munitions. adversary could be expected to employ large numbers of decoys or bombs.
        ---

        Design wise, tor engagement radar (at least the early version) make heavy use of "thinned array" design with element spacing of 3 wavelengths and about 3000 elements. Electronic scanning ability is thereby limited to 7 degrees. BUT it have like 40Db gain and very narrow beamwidth, suitable for low angle target engagement. and of course very low cost.

        Comment

        • haavarla
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2008
          • 6672

          STEALTHFLANKER@
          ideal speaking, such army detachement as Tor would operate under larger Anti-air systems coverage, like Pantsir, BUK, Vitaz 450, S-300, S-400.
          If the Counterpart try to jam.. they will also jam themself to a great extent.

          We know the Russians do this in East Ukraine and Syria, and thus their different units has to operate under their own sensor as opposed to their larger network of target ack, since the larger battle picture can be disrupted by noise(enemy and their own).
          Thanks

          Comment

          • MadRat
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Aug 2006
            • 5033

            Some of this new Russian stuff looks custom tailored for museums. Where is the real new stuff?
            Go Huskers!

            Comment

            • Dr.Snufflebug
              Boggleboople snufflebug
              • Aug 2012
              • 524

              Just a nice shot, from last year:



              Also, bit random but I've always had a soft spot for the Il-96 (and 86), they have this elegance to them somehow, despite being huge widebody airliners (from 2015):

              sigpic

              Comment

              • haavarla
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Dec 2008
                • 6672

                Some of this new Russian stuff looks custom tailored for museums. Where is the real new stuff?

                Go Huskers!
                Not sure what you are trying to say..
                If it was towards Russian Anti-air systems.
                Then a S-125 just recently shoot down a F-16I.

                Not bad for Museums stuff..
                Thanks

                Comment

                • Levsha
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Jan 2006
                  • 2837

                  Not sure what you are trying to say..
                  If it was towards Russian Anti-air systems.
                  Then a S-125 just recently shoot down a F-16I.

                  Not bad for Museums stuff..
                  I thought I read somewhere it was a Buk system shot down the F-16?

                  Comment

                  • TR1
                    TR1
                    http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                    • Oct 2010
                    • 9808

                    What are you referring to when you say "museum pieces"?

                    Su-30SM in Syria:





                    And some museum pieces specially for Madrat :

                    sigpic

                    Comment

                    • haavarla
                      Rank 5 Registered User
                      • Dec 2008
                      • 6672

                      I thought I read somewhere it was a Buk system shot down the F-16?
                      Well the jury is still out on that account.
                      But, there are two pointer in S-125 favor.
                      1st. There are some wreckage of S-125 rockets inside Israel(or inside Golan..), which mean they had the reach for the F-16I.
                      2nd. Yes the reach/range.. Its doubtfully the newer post Cold war Russian produced BUK's was positioned close enough to reach past the Golan heights. Its not the latest BUK M2 with 70km range, but older BUK with 50 km range.
                      3rd. The warhead on S-125 is quite large compare to BUK. Its seems on various youtube clips and reported pilot interview, that the F-16 came apart instantly, and pilots ejecting in mere second upon hit. Might have been the S-125 warhead.
                      Last edited by haavarla; 17th February 2018, 23:13.
                      Thanks

                      Comment

                      • TR1
                        TR1
                        http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                        • Oct 2010
                        • 9808

                        Re. Ka-52:

                        https://ria.ru/arms/20180214/1514588957.html

                        Progress plans to make about 25 of the type this year, and 22-25 in 2019. Obviously split between Egypt and VKS.
                        In 2017, 27 Ka-52s were produced.

                        https://ria.ru/economy/20180214/1514586840.html?inj=1

                        As for the long-gestating Ka-62, tentative plans are to start serial production in 2020...

                        Couple more SM shots from Syria:









                        sigpic

                        Comment

                        • Levsha
                          Rank 5 Registered User
                          • Jan 2006
                          • 2837

                          Well the jury is still out on that account.
                          But, there are two pointer in S-125 favor.
                          1st. There are some wreckage of S-125 rockets inside Israel(or inside Golan..), which mean they had the reach for the F-16I.
                          It's said that S-125, S-200 and Buk missile types were fired at the Israeli planes that night - the S-125 missiles which crashed on the ground were the missiles which did not shoot down the F-16.

                          2nd. Yes the reach/range.. Its doubtfully the newer post Cold war Russian produced BUK's was positioned close enough to reach past the Golan heights.
                          why wouldn't they be positioned close to the border like any other missile system might be?

                          3rd. The warhead on S-125 is quite large compare to BUK. Its seems on various youtube clips and reported pilot interview, that the F-16 came apart instantly, and pilots ejecting in mere second upon hit. Might have been the S-125 warhead.
                          Buk warhead is smaller than that on the S-125 - you sure about that? Wikipedia says otherwise.

                          Comment

                          • TR1
                            TR1
                            http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                            • Oct 2010
                            • 9808

                            MiG-31BM looking beautiful:











                            And the pilot:



                            Algerian Mi-28NE, with the updated defensive suite:

                            sigpic

                            Comment

                            • stealthflanker
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Sep 2015
                              • 1009

                              would love to see R-37 on the BM's. But apparently there are still alot of R-33 around.

                              Comment

                              • TR1
                                TR1
                                http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                • Oct 2010
                                • 9808

                                "Coming soon (TM)"

                                Given how leisurely the R-77-1 induction is going, we are going to be waiting for some more years.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                • stealthflanker
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Sep 2015
                                  • 1009

                                  Im curious if Russia will offer 300Km range RVV-BD for export or they will just gimp it to 200 km as in brochure. That's gonna make best available anti AEW/ standoff jammer missile in export market.

                                  Comment

                                  • paralay
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Aug 2005
                                    • 1400

                                    The range of the missile's flight depends on the speed of the fighter. Perhaps 200 km allows the RVV-BD to reach the launch from the Su-35S, 300 km - MiG-31BM

                                    Comment

                                    • haavarla
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Dec 2008
                                      • 6672

                                      The range of the missile's flight depends on the speed of the fighter. Perhaps 200 km allows the RVV-BD to reach the launch from the Su-35S, 300 km - MiG-31BM
                                      As always, its a combination of Launch KIAS and Altitude.
                                      Thanks

                                      Comment

                                      • maurobaggio
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jul 2008
                                        • 521

                                        I guess about the information available from RVV-BD (R-37M) it will equipping Su-57 (PAK-FA) first, since Su-57 could have been designed for the missions that were planned for the MiG-31M, instead it did not go into production the MiG-31M , once it were supposed to replace the MiG-25BM withdrawn from service in 2005.

                                        Perhaps the MiG-31BM which has been modernized from MiG-31B / BS, it has taken over the missions from MiG-25BM. The MiG-31BM should have been capable the to launch the anti-radiation missiles Kh-58 and Kh-31P from MiG-25BM, so far there has not been any indication that the MiG-31BMs has received the R-37Ms, that were essential to the MiG-31M concept, as well as the R-77(RVV-AE) and R-77-1(RVV-SD) missiles.

                                        Still such delicate issue with a long history, in poor resume: just around 1999 it were announced that the radar seeker ARH ( Active Radar Homing) from R-37 seeker had been offered to equip the SAM SA-11 / SA-17 (BUK M1 / ​​BUK M2 ) missiles to replace or complement the SARH( Semi Active Radar Homing) missiles.

                                        In fact, there were not indication of customers from ARH missiles from BUK M1 / ​​2, perhaps because the SA-17 (BUK-M2) were equipped with PESA radar that has been allowed each TEL to to engage 04 targets simultaneously with SARH missiles, while SA-11 (BUK-M1) each TEL could engage only one target with SARH missiles. Maybe should be more reasonable to purchase the SA-17 or upgrade the SA-11 for the SA-17 standard that to acquire ARH missiles to equip the SA-11 or even the SA-17.

                                        However, now the situation are quite different, since the Russia Army and Navy has been receiving the BUK-M3 with ARH missiles, in this case of the Army each TEL can carry 06 missiles and simultaneously engage 06 targets, while in the BUK-M2 each TEL could carry 04 missiles and engage at the maximum 04 targets.

                                        If the radar seeker from R-37's were compatible with the SA-11/17( BUK M1/2) missiles, then it could have been possible to assume that radar seekers ARH from BUK-M3 can be compatible with the R-37Ms, and how the radar seeker from BVR missile has been the most complex and expensive part from ARH missile, then it would not be an obscene cost to put the R-37M in production to equip the MiG-31BM.

                                        Otherwise could have been other option even less obscene that to put the R-37M in production, once it would be possible to modernize the R-33 with ARH seeker from BUK-M3. After all with the modernization of the MiG-31BM the legacy R-33 missiles with ARH seeker could become the weak chain without such modernization program to face new STEALTH threats( cruise missiles, fighters, bombers) as well as new modes of ECM( Electronic Counter Measures) from AESA T/R modules.

                                        So far I did not received any substantial information that SARH R-33 missiles could have been modernized even at more advanced SARH mode, but it could be possible that at least such part of the R-33 would receive ARH seeker to deal with anti-AWACS mission, in that case the MiG-31BM should perform several missions that were designed from MiG-31M. Indeed such R-33 ARH would be less maneuverability that R-37M( Mach 5 from R-33 against Mach 8 from R-37M) , and with less range that R-37M, but the R-33 with ARH seeker could engage targets maybe with MiG-31BM at the 200 Km( 108 NM) while the R-33 with SARH seeker has been restricted at the 120 Km( 65 NM) .

                                        Probably the RVV-BD will be more advanced over legacy R-37M, at least the radar seeker could have been capable to operate in two bands( X/Ka Band), while the radar seeker from R-37M were capable to operate only in X Band. Until the RVV-BD won't become operational, maybe such version of the R-37M or R-33 with ARH seeker from BUK-M3 could have been implemented with MiG-31BM, at least the R-77-1 with MiG-31BM could give much better range that R-33 with SARH seeker.

                                        Comment

                                        • paralay
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Aug 2005
                                          • 1400

                                          I remind you, it is possible to start the RVV-DB only with AKU-610. Therefore, on the MiG-31BM, this rocket can be suspended only under the wing, under the fuselage can not be (there AKU-410)
                                          Still there is a long-range missile "product 810" for T-50

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X