Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures




Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence








Russian Air Force News & Discussion

This is a discussion on Russian Air Force News & Discussion within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Haavarla https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Z2...youtu.be&t=196 A good view of the new Artic Pantsir unit with its 18 missile tubes among ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 13 votes, 3.85 average.
Old April 17th, 2017   #1711
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,920
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haavarla View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Z2...youtu.be&t=196

A good view of the new Artic Pantsir unit with its 18 missile tubes among others.
18 tubes and I didn't see any cannons. Is this the Pantsyr-S2?
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 18th, 2017   #1712
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 45
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
18 tubes and I didn't see any cannons. Is this the Pantsyr-S2?
Панцирь-СА

And it is still goes as :
"Боевая машина зенитного ракетно-пушечного комплекса "Панцирь-СА"

So cannons are there, somewhere
Strannik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2017   #1713
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
18 tubes and I didn't see any cannons. Is this the Pantsyr-S2?
On that Artic Pantsyr, i've seen the Designation Pantsyr-S2U.

With the Tor-M2U as well.
We might see another version of Pantsir(Pantsir-S2?) with guns. But bare in mind, the more weapons you mount on, the heavier it will become. Guess there is some requirements to weight as well.

Anyway, it was reported that those 18 tubes fields a increased range of missile. Would be interesting to measure them in size with the older versions.
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2017   #1714
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,920
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haavarla View Post
On that Artic Pantsyr, i've seen the Designation Pantsyr-S2U.

With the Tor-M2U as well.
We might see another version of Pantsir(Pantsir-S2?) with guns. But bare in mind, the more weapons you mount on, the heavier it will become. Guess there is some requirements to weight as well.

Anyway, it was reported that those 18 tubes fields a increased range of missile. Would be interesting to measure them in size with the older versions.
Tor-M2DT is the index for the Tor vehicle.

Tor-M2U is a different variant. Also the DT probably refers to the DT-30 transporter used.

EDIT: It might be that the Pantsyr requires modifications to the SAM or the radar to make it work in Arctic conditions, while the Tor just needed a new chassis for standardization and mobility.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2017   #1715
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
Tor-M2DT is the index for the Tor vehicle.

Tor-M2U is a different variant. Also the DT probably refers to the DT-30 transporter used.

EDIT: It might be that the Pantsyr requires modifications to the SAM or the radar to make it work in Arctic conditions, while the Tor just needed a new chassis for standardization and mobility.
Yeah, well i thought the "U" was due to the the platform was mounted on tracks instead of wheels.. but all the Russian designations can be a challange.. at least for me.

The Radar on Pantsir-S2/S2U is a new design with a paired ESA array from its older versions. It get a better real time picture this way.

And the new Pantsir is a modular system, it can link up with S-400 command unit for better SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQwOD6IoY58

I'm not sure if Tor-M2U can link up with S-400 system, it being an Army unit and all.. perhaps it can link up with the upcoming S-350 system once it get operational.

Speaking of S-350, it is a beefed up BUK system, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS2d5QRkKZk

Looks like a twelve tube launcher, and the idea of reloading it is probably much faster and easier than the standard BUK systems.

Edit:
Never mind, S-350 is not the same missile as BUK. The size is clearly different, seen here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2czmbM7Vro

So S-350 fields a smaller new missile.. interesting.
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2017   #1716
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 491
Threads:
If I'm not wrong the S-350 uses the 9M96, which is also used as one of the missiles in the S-400, wasn't it?
Sandhi Yudha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2017   #1717
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandhi Yudha View Post
If I'm not wrong the S-350 uses the 9M96, which is also used as one of the missiles in the S-400, wasn't it?
Did you do a little research on this?
Clearly the missile tubes on S-350 is much smaller than anything seen before on S-400.

Like i posted above. I don't know what kind of missiles the S-350 fields, but the tubes seems way slimmer vs even the BUK missiles.


Edit:
The S-350 is an army unit.
What gets me is why we don't see a slightly more standardize production of anti air missiles, not just between Army and Air/Space defence, but also between Navy and land systems.

There seems to be severe problems with the Navy SAM system, Poliment-Redut*with 9M96*missiles isn’t ready, and will have to be fitted right to finished frigates.

I don't understand what this means.. perhaps there are several versions like short to medium range of them.

I think the S-350 is severly delayed.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 01.jpg6fc59c04-df1f-4d0f-991e-979f20df36d4Original.jpg (96.9 KB, 3 views)
File Type: jpg 127431320_14224195918591n.jpg (72.7 KB, 2 views)

Last edited by Haavarla; April 21st, 2017 at 07:52 AM.
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2017   #1718
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,920
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haavarla View Post
Yeah, well i thought the "U" was due to the the platform was mounted on tracks instead of wheels.. but all the Russian designations can be a challange.. at least for me.

The Radar on Pantsir-S2/S2U is a new design with a paired ESA array from its older versions. It get a better real time picture this way.

And the new Pantsir is a modular system, it can link up with S-400 command unit for better SA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQwOD6IoY58

I'm not sure if Tor-M2U can link up with S-400 system, it being an Army unit and all.. perhaps it can link up with the upcoming S-350 system once it get operational.

Speaking of S-350, it is a beefed up BUK system, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS2d5QRkKZk

Looks like a twelve tube launcher, and the idea of reloading it is probably much faster and easier than the standard BUK systems.

Edit:
Never mind, S-350 is not the same missile as BUK. The size is clearly different, seen here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2czmbM7Vro

So S-350 fields a smaller new missile.. interesting.
Tor can definitely link up with both S-300 and S-400. Both the Greeks and the Chinese use the Tor together with the S-300.

The S-350 allegedly uses the 9M96 and 9M100 missiles.

Poliment-Redut is delayed, with the Redut being the missile component, and Poliment being the radar. Redut is online on the 20380 corvettes but iirc only with the shorter range SAMs.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2017   #1719
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
Some unconfirmed source says the T-50-9 has flown.

The new mission computer for T-50, it runs at 150Gflops.
The time it has taken for PakFa program has made it necessary to change and improve avionics as time progress.

Both the Su-35S' and current T-50's fire control computers (СОЛО-35.01/SOLO-35.01 & СОЛО-21/SOLO-21 respectively) peak @ 80Gflops:
Attached Images
File Type: png computer.png (299.9 KB, 13 views)
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2017   #1720
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 14,920
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haavarla View Post
Some unconfirmed source says the T-50-9 has flown.

The new mission computer for T-50, it runs at 150Gflops.
The time it has taken for PakFa program has made it necessary to change and improve avionics as time progress.

Both the Su-35S' and current T-50's fire control computers (СОЛО-35.01/SOLO-35.01 & СОЛО-21/SOLO-21 respectively) peak @ 80Gflops:
Regarding the T-50 program. It looks like the idea of the early variant T-50 with the 1st tier engines has been scrapped, and instead they're going for a better machine from the get-go, relying on upgraded Flankers to fill the gap. Remember, initially the PAK-FA was to share avionics with the Su-35S.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2017   #1721
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
Regarding the T-50 program. It looks like the idea of the early variant T-50 with the 1st tier engines has been scrapped, and instead they're going for a better machine from the get-go, relying on upgraded Flankers to fill the gap. Remember, initially the PAK-FA was to share avionics with the Su-35S.
About the next engines, we shall see. If the T-50-9 has flown, then there only remains one or two more prototypes before the Pre-Serial production commence.
They should be able to finnish all the prototypes this year.

Its not that Sukhoi cannot recall the first 12 PakFa to factory and refit the necessary equipment. They did it with both Su-34 and Su-35S.

And if F-35 is any metric.. There is a 100 F-35 target for block upgrade, even if minor ones.
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2017   #1722
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Porterville, I CA
Posts: 1
Threads:
Why does Western Media only criticize the Russian designed air craft?

As a fan of news I hardly come upon articles where the Russian design aircraft are not ridicule it is a common practice in Western media to say everything that is flawed with Russian designed aircraft and praise everything regarding the Western aircraft
VChinikailo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2017   #1723
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 491
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by VChinikailo View Post
As a fan of news I hardly come upon articles where the Russian design aircraft are not ridicule it is a common practice in Western media to say everything that is flawed with Russian designed aircraft and praise everything regarding the Western aircraft
From what I read in western media, they are not really praise western aircraft, but every time a Russian made aircraft got an accident, they always tell that it was Russian made, in an obsessively way, which they never do if it was a European or American made aircraft. A good example is a recent incident of an Aeroflot 777 flying to Bangkok, in the article it was written that the airline was Russian, but not that it was an aircraft of an American brand/American product. I have never seen in a news report something like "American made McDonnell Douglas aircraft" or "the American designed Sikorsky", but if the crashed aircraft was an Antonov/Ilyushin/Tupolev, then they always, really always, have to add that it was Russian made or "designed by the Russians". (Yes, I know, the Antonov Design Bureau is actually Ukrainian, but most journalists don't know that). Also some years ago a Sukhoi SSJ-100 crashed against an Indonesian mountain, in the comments of the readers below the news article, it was 'again a proof' that Russian made aircraft are as bad and inferior as their makers... So, actually normal people without any knowledge of aviation have a really bad view on Russian aircrafts, because they are in fact brainwashed by the western media.
There are some exceptions, in the Dutch defense magazine "Herkenning", they almost always wrote positive articles about every aircraft or weapon system regardless the origin, so also if it was a Soviet/Russian product.

(Note: I am not Russian)

Last edited by Sandhi Yudha; May 9th, 2017 at 06:25 PM. Reason: lack of variety in words and additional text
Sandhi Yudha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2017   #1724
Senior Member
Lieutenant Colonel
Haavarla's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,191
Threads:
T--50-9 is out:
I think there is some smaller improvements on the airframe, but lets wait for better resolution pictures for that..
Attached Images
File Type: jpg T50-9 - 20170512 - 1.jpg (124.4 KB, 25 views)
Haavarla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12th, 2017   #1725
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 491
Threads:
This beauty looks really cool... Thanks for sharing the picture!
Sandhi Yudha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:49 AM.