Fire-control protocol - the Buk-M1 air defense complex

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
Hi all and good wishes! TankovayaVoyska here, with a question regarding the Buk-M1 air defense complex.

I wasn't sure if this was the appropriate place to ask regarding air defense systems. If it's not, please redirect me as necessary. As far as I know, surface-to-air missiles were under the jurisdiction of ground forces, but that probably varies from army to army. Either way, I suppose its role in knocking out air targets and denying hostile aviation air superiority makes it a question for the air force and aviation.

Onto business. If you all have been keeping up with the news, then you'll notice that it has become very notorious for the downing of the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17.

Let me get this out of the way here : I am not interested in discussing the political backdrop and etc regarding the flight or the conflict in Ukraine. I am not here to assign blame on who did what in Eastern Ukraine, so I appreciate it if you all completely refrain from discussing that part of the topic. I am here to ask questions in order to understand the capabilities and operations of aforementioned system. As a tank enthusiast, I understand that air defense is a very crucial part of protecting all ground forces, be it tanks or infantry. So in my readings of tank actions (the Arab-Israeli Wars especially comes to mind in that regard), it became clear to me that the understanding and proper employment of adequate air defenses, be it ground or air-based, is a very important factor in the success of any ground operation.

What few things I know of the missile system are regarding its battalion level organization, service ceiling and maximum range. From what I've gathered from NII Priborostroyenya and wikipedia (I am aware that wikipedia counts for little in the way of information, so please correct me as I go) , a typical battalion of Buk-M1s will consist of the battalion CP, the (TAR) target acquisition radar, 6 TELARs (transporter-erector-launcher-radar) and 3 TELs (transporter-erector-launcher). I am assuming here that the battalion is organized into three distinct batteries, each with 3 TELARs and 1 TEL.

I know that the battalion CP and TAR help to acquire targets at 85km. The CP relays that info to the individual batteries, which can then proceed to engage the target (which I understood to be something in the following groups - mid-altid aicraft, helicopters, mortars, and tactical ballistic missiles) at a maximum range of 30km with a ceiling of 22km.

I know that only TELARs can fire independently of data from battalion CP and TAR, but TELs need to be uplinked to the TELARs to fire. TELs can act both as a launching unit, similar to the 2K12 Kub, and as a reloading vehicle with its own crane.

Understand that again, my understanding of the Buk-M1 comprises of this much, and I hope to be corrected in my understanding of the system as part of a much wider network of air defenses that comprise other systems.

Now here is what I want to know :

1) Fire control protocol. This is probably more a question of army organization and order of battle than a technical question or aspect of the complex itself, but I am curious to know anyway. Does the battalion commander have the independence from say, brigade command, to identify and destroy targets slated within the spectrum it was designed to defend? This leads to my next question.

2) What is the process? From what I can assume, if the battalion CP has the green light to open fire, then obviously all it has to do is relay CP information to battery commanders, which in turn will fire. Is this correct? Please do not refrain from going into detail to explain this further.

3) Does the battalion CP have the ability, with its own TAR, to discriminate targets? The Buk-M1 is slated to target mid-altid aircraft, rotary wing aircraft (aka helos), tactical ballistic missiles (something I am quite surprised to know), UAVs, and mortar rounds. I am assuming that to be able to effectively engage this, would this also by logical deduction mean that a battalion level TAR would have the ability to distinguish the signature of what it is firing at, or are the targets just blips to be smashed to oblivion without care?

4) And in relation to that, can the TAR distinguish the radar profiles of civilian aircraft vs military aircraft? Because these things are computerized, I also assume that there would be logs to record all fire control activity, no? And lastly, can the TAR also determine target altitude and speed, aside from the obvious things like general direction, range and heading? I would assume yes, but like I said, I am not sure.

5) Since the objective of the TAR is to acquire targets, I am assuming the fire control radar of the TELAR will not be so complex beyond its ability to find targets in its sector and illuminate it. Once the TAR data has been relayed to TELAR and TEL batteries, what happens? Aside from waiting for the target to come into range, that is? Can the TELAR's fire control system tell the difference in the identity of the target independently of the TAR? ie, would the battery commander know what it would be firing at if battalion CP did not tell them?

Thank you for taking the time to read. Please do not refrain from pointing out anything that I said or understood wrongly. I am here to learn and accept that my failings as a human can sometimes give me the wrong impression or understanding of what I read. I hope to receive a quick response from anyone qualified or knowledgeable enough to respond.

Have a nice day. :)
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The Buk can be fired from the launcher without any of the other vehicles present

It will be less discriminatory in the sense that a launch only release means that it effectively then hunts for anything with the box - ie its a "hail mary" release

fundamental breaches of process occurred in the launch of that missile.
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
The Buk can be fired from the launcher without any of the other vehicles present

It will be less discriminatory in the sense that a launch only release means that it effectively then hunts for anything with the box - ie its a "hail mary" release

fundamental breaches of process occurred in the launch of that missile.
So essentially, an individual TELAR or a TEL, not using its own radar, can launch a missile, and someone could guide it from somewhere else using their own radar? That's what I am trying to picture.
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #4
The Buk can be fired from the launcher without any of the other vehicles present

It will be less discriminatory in the sense that a launch only release means that it effectively then hunts for anything with the box - ie its a "hail mary" release

fundamental breaches of process occurred in the launch of that missile.
So you pop one up in the air, and basically the missile will hunt for a target on its own, or does that mean you pop one up in the air, and somebody can direct it to a target of their choosing?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
So essentially, an individual TELAR or a TEL, not using its own radar, can launch a missile, and someone could guide it from somewhere else using their own radar? That's what I am trying to picture.

yes.

the difference however is going from a targeted shot to what is effectively a free fire shoot without checks, balances, discrimination, deliberation and safeguards on

eg in a western system there are safeguards and procedures to follow.

eg speed, alt, heading, is it maintaining, is it a threat, validation with other info providers in the loop, and finally getting clearance from a command layer for permission to shoot (as they provide another layer of security and integrity checking)

in a controlled and disciplined environment its never a situation of:

see unidentified plane
launch
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
yes.

the difference however is going from a targeted shot to what is effectively a free fire shoot without checks, balances, discrimination, deliberation and safeguards on
thank you for that quick reply.

Can I trouble you to provide any further documentation on the capabilities of the Buk? I'd like to use them for future references.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
thank you for that quick reply.

Can I trouble you to provide any further documentation on the capabilities of the Buk? I'd like to use them for future references.
there's a fair bit of open source material on the net - but some of the specific capability (even though its not a western system) has publication restrictions on it.

IHS Weapons Systems pubs should be a good source (ex Janes)
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
eg think of the basic Buk system

it comprises a launcher, a track manager/controller and a radar system

if you can't track and manage the threat then you are resorting to fundamentally a free fire capability. any discrimination and tracking is done organically

missiles don't discriminate organically as effectively as a controller does

its a recipe for disaster in complex air space
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
eg think of the basic Buk system

it comprises a launcher, a track manager/controller and a radar system

if you can't track and manage the threat then you are resorting to fundamentally a free fire capability. any discrimination and tracking is done organically

missiles don't discriminate organically as effectively as a controller does

its a recipe for disaster in complex air space
Noted. Especially if your own units are operating in the area. That would be a total recipe for disaster.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Noted. Especially if your own units are operating in the area. That would be a total recipe for disaster.
you have a missile that can reach up to 76k - commercial jet aircraft are at 30-35k

square the range with the altitude and that's a huge killbox (or to be more precise, dome)

every thing in between is a potential target

the missle can't tell the difference between an IL76 or 777 - or a BAE-146
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
you have a missile that can reach up to 76k - commercial jet aircraft are at 30-35k

square the range with the altitude and that's a huge killbox (or to be more precise, dome)

every thing in between is a potential target

the missle can't tell the difference between an IL76 or 777 - or a BAE-146
The missile can't, but radar operators with sufficient training and data from their target acquisition radars can, correct? But not with their individual fire control radars?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The missile can't, but radar operators with sufficient training and data from their target acquisition radars can, correct? But not with their individual fire control radars?
It depends on the system - and it also depends on how their information awareness is backfilled by other systems

thats why any individual tasked with launching such a weapon would seek confirmation before release.

often a commander will not approve release of a weapon unless people can qualify their confidence

even then people can get it wrong - but in this case you have an aircraft on a fixed alt, fixed speed, fixed heading and its not on a threat approach - and its not exhibiting threatening behaviour (eg hasn't changed tack, hasn't started to descend on an attack profile, and is basically following commercial flight path (as had aeroflot and other commercial operators aircraft had dome - right up to the shootdown)

unless you were in a free fire mode then you would not loose the weapon - and as it was still being trafficked by other commercial aircraft,then that would be a significant constraint.

even in free fire mode there would be warnings issued to all commercial aircraft that they should not enter that space - now as even aeroflot were still using that airspace for their own aircraft in transit, then there would have been no indication that any commercial aircraft were at risk

at a minimum the launch operator should have checked to see if any commercial aircraft were in that range ring - and as the flight manifest had been lodged then its evident by simple checks

thats why there is a release chain of decision making

nobody just relies on the system display - there are a series of things that need to be done. otherwise the launch keys get turned left or the safety lock stays on
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
Interesting how the weapon's fire control protocol is almost like launching that of a nuclear missile. Seeing how dangerous the weapon can be, I can understand.

On to something tangential to the topic; if Wild Weasels are flying SEAD missions against the Buk, what would be the instinct of ground operators? Turn off their radars? Or is there any means of active and passive defense vs HARM weapons?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Interesting how the weapon's fire control protocol is almost like launching that of a nuclear missile. Seeing how dangerous the weapon can be, I can understand.
Telar control station

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...l_console_of_Buk-M2E_missile_system_TELAR.jpg

and you can appreciate how there is skepticism that an untrained operator could use one


On to something tangential to the topic; if Wild Weasels are flying SEAD missions against the Buk, what would be the instinct of ground operators? Turn off their radars? Or is there any means of active and passive defense vs HARM weapons?
the natural instinct would be to shutdown. The USAF was able to kill SAM systems even when switched off
 

Rimasta

Member
Interesting how the weapon's fire control protocol is almost like launching that of a nuclear missile. Seeing how dangerous the weapon can be, I can understand.

On to something tangential to the topic; if Wild Weasels are flying SEAD missions against the Buk, what would be the instinct of ground operators? Turn off their radars? Or is there any means of active and passive defense vs HARM weapons?
Best defense against a SEAD mission ? Fighters on a combat air patrol with AWACS support. SAM's are a defensive system, and he who sits behind his defenses, typically looses. Wild Weasal missions will first seek out search and acquisition radars for the HARM's, most likely too they'll come in on a wagon wheel approach or a semi-circle-it spreads out the defenses further by attacking from all compass points at once-then most likely they attacking aircraft will drop cluster munitions to further suppress the battery, killing troops, blowing up launch vehicles, etc...
However, Russia has been adapting its SAM batteries to better weather such an attack. More decentralized control allowing surviving launchers/radars to operate in a degraded state. It makes the SEAD mission much harder because now you have to find and kill the entire AA battery.
Also missiles like the HARM or the British ALARM missile will attack the last known position of the hostile radar/launcher, in the event the crew realizes they are being attacked and decide to switch off. So they'd have to move, and fast!
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
If I recall correctly, ALARM has a function in which the missile deploys a chute and loiters in the area until it picks up a signal. Not sure if other anti-radiation missiles - Western or otherwise - have this feature.

A few years ago Air Forces's Monthly had an article about the Serbs in Kosovo. There was some mention of a locally designed decoy radar emitter that was apparently quite successful in drawing away NATO anti-radiation missiles from the real targets.
 

TankovayaVoyska

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
Can short-range air defenses like the Tunguska or Pantsyr-M1 pick up HARM missiles and engage them? I'd imagine they can double as a sort-of CWIS or CRAM.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
I believe that's fairly unique- the missile can be set to do a zoom climb to max alt, nose over and start a descent on a chute, and if it detects a pre-registered threat, the chute gets popped and the thing starts an unpowered attack on the emitter.

Basically, designed for those annoying people who think they can get away with that sort of high-jinks...
 

Rimasta

Member
I believe that's fairly unique- the missile can be set to do a zoom climb to max alt, nose over and start a descent on a chute, and if it detects a pre-registered threat, the chute gets popped and the thing starts an unpowered attack on the emitter.

Basically, designed for those annoying people who think they can get away with that sort of high-jinks...
The ALARM uses a secondary rocket motor in loiter attack mode. It detaches the chute and launches at the target. Unless you were talking about something else.
And yes, it is the only anti-radar that has a loiter attack option, however it can also be launched just like a normal HARM.
 
Top