Russian firm developing Arctic Anti-Aircraft Weapon

[CougarKing]

To the moderators, PLEASE keep this separate from the Russian Military merged thread- Army for now.

International Business Times

Russian Firm To Develop Arctic Anti-Aircraft Weapon
By Dennis Lynch @neato_itsdennis on April 22 2015 9:45 PM EDT

The makers of Russia’s Pantsir self-propelled anti-aircraft gun want to develop a tracked version of the gun for deployment in the Arctic, according to a senior director at a subsidiary of one of Russia’s largest defense manufacturing firms.

The KBP Instrument Design Bureau is investigating what is needed to allow its Pantsir-S1, which goes by the NATO reporting name SA-22 Greyhound, to operate in the harsh Arctic environment. The $14 million rocket, cannon and radar system is Russia’s premier anti-aircraft weapon and is used by nine other countries. It can be built as a stationary or self-propelled system.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[MilEME09]

with a 20km range, a mobile platform like that is a threat, but with how large the arctic is, a aircraft could easily break through

 

[Ostrozac]

with a 20km range, a mobile platform like that is a threat, but with how large the arctic is, a aircraft could easily break through

It's a short range system. It's not for blocking a wide area to prevent enemy aircraft from penetrating -- it's for defending point targets, like airfields, radar sites and communications installations.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

with a 20km range, a mobile platform like that is a threat, but with how large the arctic is, a aircraft could easily break through

With a 20km range it would be a good SHORAD/HIMAD system (more on the "medium" side than the "high" side). But, the point of AD systems is to block aircraft (and realistically in the arctic its probably more for counter-surveillance/counter-UAS purposes) from a certain point vice just denying block access to the entire area.

 

[Kirkhill]

The other way of looking at it is:

The Russians don't have confidence that their existing stock of SAM Systems will work in the "High Arctic".

And given their recent record in rocket and missile failures I don't blame them.

Failure Video 2015-1

Failure Video 2015-2

Failure Video 2010

Failure Video 2000

6 Proton Failures in 3.5 years

Bulava SLBM Failure Article

'There are problems'

In the wake of the 2011 Soyuz booster failure, Roscosmos chief Vladimir Popovkin was blunt as to the reasons behind the spate of rocket failures.

"There are problems. There is aging of many resources. We need to optimize everything. We need to modernize," said Popovkin during a press conference in Moscow. "It’s also aging of human resources. Given the troubles we had in the ‘90s, quite a lot of people left and nobody came to replace them."

Could the crash of the Proton-M on July 2 be another symptom of neglect in the Russian space program? Speaking with Pravda.ru, Russian spaceflight expert and journalist Vladimir Gubarev also blamed the lack of modernization for the growing number of failures in space, but levelled special criticism on sub-standard hardware, botched science reform and a lack of specialists in the space industry.

"The most recent explosion is very symbolic, because the technological level has been declining, and our parliamentarians and ministries are involved in nonsensical activities, such as the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences," said Gubarev.

"The infamous launch of Mars Grunt, an accident on board the Proton rocket, and then suddenly it turns out that it all happened because of a failure in the electronic computing unit, which was delivered from China, and the unit was not designed to operate in space. What kind of reform in science can we talk about?

That was from an Al-Jazeera article of 2013.  Link

And the problem is not restricted to their missile programmes.  It encompasses their aircraft production system.  You can find references to Yak trainers crashing because they were rushed into production, to the Russians inability to produce a functioning domestic UAV, to "new" aircraft using 30 year old components produced under Brezhnev.

The Russians don't have a modern defence industry.  That is why they were so eager to have French show them how to build ships, the Italians show them how to build helicopters and the Swedes show them how to build APCs.  None of which are happening now.

Their transport aircraft are built in Ukraine. Their electronics are made in China.

And the Kazakhs have forced them to open up a new launching site in Eastern Siberia because the threat of Russian rockets falling out of the sky at Baikonur has periodically encouraged Kazakhstan to ban launches (1999, 2007, 2011)

Baikonur is drying up. Link

I believe that Vladimir is using "little green men" because he has nothing else.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

The other way of looking at it is:

The Russians don't have confidence that their existing stock of SAM Systems will work in the "High Arctic".

And given their recent record in rocket and missile failures I don't blame them.

Failure Video 2015-1

Failure Video 2015-2

Failure Video 2010

Failure Video 2000

6 Proton Failures in 3.5 years

Bulava SLBM Failure Article



That was from an Al-Jazeera article of 2013.  Link

And the problem is not restricted to their missile programmes.  It encompasses their aircraft production system.  You can find references to Yak trainers crashing because they were rushed into production, to the Russians inability to produce a functioning domestic UAV, to "new" aircraft using 30 year old components produced under Brezhnev.

The Russians don't have a modern defence industry.  That is why they were so eager to have French show them how to build ships, the Italians show them how to build helicopters and the Swedes show them how to build APCs.  None of which are happening now.

Their transport aircraft are built in Ukraine. Their electronics are made in China.

And the Kazakhs have forced them to open up a new launching site in Eastern Siberia because the threat of Russian rockets falling out of the sky at Baikonur has periodically encouraged Kazakhstan to ban launches (1999, 2007, 2011)

Baikonur is drying up. Link

I believe that Vladimir is using "little green men" because he has nothing else.

Perhaps. The basis for the system is the Pantsyr, which is a highly effective anti air and counter ballistic missile system acting like both SHORAD and C-RAM. The system itself is "generally" truck mounted, and the article discusses the requirement to go to a more tracked approach (though there is a variant).

To fight in the arctic, speed/maneuverability, logistical sustainability, and survivability are a premium so I read this as a means of the Russians exploring their options for force generating an AD component in the high arctic vice not having reliance on their current systems. The S-200 to S-400 series aren't mobile so require a static deployment (with a range of 400km they're not particularly mobile anywhere to be fair) so the Pantsyr generally is used to protect these assets and provide SOME forward AD shield, with the S-300/S-400 designed to knock out high level aircraft or missiles at a great distance. Having S-400's able to be deployed in the Russian high artic to cover Russian aircraft to NATO bases in the high arctic (Alert, Thule, etc) provide a shield for those assets while essentially providing an extremely solid deterrent for NATO fighters in those climates. The Pantsyr, if deployed in the arctic, significantly reduces NATOs ability to do anything as they can destroy BMs, CMs, and PGMs while the Russian radar systems can detect ANY NATO aircraft that would deliver them (including the F-35 or F-22).

Food for thought.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Plus their venerable MTLB offers excellent mobility in a variety of terrain and could be the basis of a family of new arctic oriented armour.

 

[Kirkhill]

Perhaps indeed

Back in 2007 all the SAM brigades armed with the S-300V (SA-12) SAM
systems, and some brigades armed with the Buk (SA-11 and SA-17) SAM
were transferred from the Army to the Air Force. During the later rounds of
reform seven of those brigades became SAM regiments, and another two were
disbanded. Most of the Buk systems are still being operated by the Army. The
plan was that after the reform, the Russian Air Force should have 45 SAM
regiments (including the seven that used to be the Army’s SAM brigades). The
radar regiments and brigades, whose task it is to monitor the Russian airspace,
were reformatted to become 18 radar regiments, which are now part of the
aerospace defense brigades. In 2009 the MoD retired much of the old and
obsolete hardware that was operated by the SAM and radar regiments.75

After the transition of the Air Force and Air Defense SAM units to
permanent combat readiness status the MoD ramped up their combat training
programs. The regiments now conduct live firing exercises using a variety of
targets, and regularly redeploy over large distances for training purposes. The
Far Eastern SAM regiments probably hold the current training record, with 40-
50 live firing exercises each year,76 which is a lot even by Soviet standards.

Most of the Russian Air Force’s SAM units are armed with the S-300PS and
S-300PM (SA-10B) and S-300PM1/2 (SA-20) SAM systems. They also operate a
few S-300V and Buk systems transferred from the Army.

Some units have begun to take delivery of the latest S-400 (SA-21) SAM systems and Pantsir-S (SA-22)
gun-missiles systems.

The S-400, which is the successor of the S-300, entered
service with the Air Force and Air Defense units in 2007. But efforts to ramp
up mass production of these SAM systems have run into serious trouble.

As of early 2011, only four S-400 battalions, with eight launchers per battalion, had
been delivered to the Air Force.77 They have entered service with two regiments
covering the Moscow airspace: the 210th SAM Regiment in Dmitrov and the
606th SAM Regiment in Elektrostal.
[Interject - As of Nov 2014 that was up to eight regiments - 4 around Moscow, 1 in Kaliningrad - Baltic Fleet, 1 on the Kola peninsula - Northern Fleet, 1 in Novocherkassk - Donbas and Black Sea, and 1 in Nakhodka-Pacific Fleet ]


For now, these new battalions are armed with the same old missiles used for the S-300PM2 systems.
Development and testing of new missiles for the S-400, including the long-range (up to 400km)
40N6, is still under way. That new missile was supposed to complete the state
trials program by the end of 2010,78 but as of early 2011 the trials were still
ongoing. Once the new missiles enter service and mass production, the S-400
regiments, which are still using the old ones, will be rearmed.

Under the current S-400 rollout plan, by 2016 the new system will replace
the S-300 in four regiments around Moscow. The MoD has also announced
plans to station one of the first S-400 regiments in the Far East.

Under the 2020 state armament program, the MoD intends to procure 56
battalions (28 regiments) of the S-400 systems and 10 battalions (5 regiments)
of the new S-500 SAM/ABM systems. That would be enough for an almost
complete technology refresh in the Russian air defense service.

For now, the “space” part in the “Aerospace Defence Brigades” is a statement of
aspiration rather than fact. In truth, the S-300 and S-400 SAM systems currently in
service cannot intercept targets even in near space. Only the S-500, which is still in
development, has that capability. It will be a mobile strategic missile defense system
capable of intercepting short and medium range missiles, targets in near space79
and hypersonic targets. But first deliveries are not expected before 2016. Even by
the most optimistic forecasts, less than half of Russia’s aerospace defense brigades
will have a single S-500 battalion by 2020. They will still be armed predominantly
with the S-400, which is designed to defend against targets in the atmosphere.
Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that the S-400 systems will at some point be
rearmed with new missiles capable of intercepting targets in near space.

Russia’s long-range air defense systems, such as the S-400 and S-500, will be
a priority target for any adversary trying to achieve air superiority. And it would
be a waste to use their expensive missiles to defend those systems themselves
rather than to intercept the adversary’s aircraft. That is why the MoD is now
experimenting with the joint use of the long-range SAMs in tandem with
short-range systems – the latter are supposed to defend the former against the
adversary’s high-precision weapons and radar-seeking missiles.

The Air Force is now trying out the latest Pantsir-S system80 for the role
of the short-range component in that tandem. First deliveries of those systems
were made in 2010. They have been used on several occasions in combination
with the S-300 and S-400 regiments during exercises at the Ashuluk test and
training range.81 Starting from the spring of 2011 such mixed short and long
range battalions will be formed in both regiments armed with the S-400.82
At some point in the future the role of the short-range component can be
played by the specialized multi-channel short-range systems that are now being
developed. They will be a better match for the task of defending the long-range
SAMs against massive high-precision weapon strikes.

Apart from the new short and long range systems, the Russian defense
industry is also developing medium range SAMs. Such an earnest R&D and
procurement effort will enable the Russian SAM Troops to remain a formidable
component of national defenses for a long time to come.

Meanwhile, the radar units of the Russian Air Force and Air Defense have
been somewhat “forgotten”. The pace of technology refresh in this area has been
very sluggish; in the past five years only about 70 new or upgraded radar stations
have entered service, and 80 or so automation systems.83 But under the 2020
rearmament program procurement for the radar service should be stepped up.

For all the impressive capabilities of the Russian SAM troops, it is important
to realize that they can cover only a small part of Russia's vast territory. The SAM
regiments are concentrated mainly around Moscow, forming an unbroken ring
around the capital, and near some strategic facilities on the Russian borders, in
the south, northwest and the Far East of the country.

Meanwhile, huge swathes of Siberia and the North do not have any SAM defenses and are not even
covered by an unbroken radar field. Unfortunately, such a situation is unlikely
to change any time soon. In their current shape, the Russian SAM troops can be
an effective shield only when used in combination with the mobile air defense
component, i.e. fighter aviation.

Anton Lavrov, "Reform of the Russian Air Force" in Russia's New Army, published by the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, Moscow, Russia, 2011

You can find many other references to new "wunderwaffen" that are in development.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Perhaps indeed

Anton Lavrov, "Reform of the Russian Air Force" in Russia's New Army, published by the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, Moscow, Russia, 2011

You can find many other references to new "wunderwaffen" that are in development.

Interesting, but outdated piece. As an Air Defender I have some background in this area. The development of the S-300 to S-500 series is a key asset in the Russian arsenal. For sure, the capabilties of the system are very much exaggerated, but, fun fact, so are the capabilities of the Patriot missile and THAAD (actually Patriot is extremely exaggerated, particularly its accomplishments in the Gulf Wars). The fact is that the Russians have identified that it's easier and CHEAPER to simply counter US air power with Ground based systems than attempt to match them airframe for airframe. In reality, the F22 and F35 have significant limitations in the arctic that limit their ability to do much in the way of DCA and the Russians ability to force generate significant AD forces in the arctic (where I still attest would be their best and most likely course of action for economic or territorial expansion... why fiddle with eastern europe with it's poor economics and social issues when you can set yourself up in the arctic with a growing economy and an area poorly protected and generally uncared about) would have more strategic effect than anything in eastern europe? With the small numbers of F35/F22 that will be available for the north and the limited munitions stores the Russians simply have to knock out the munitions and wait for the aircraft to unmask from stealth by launching.

Further, the Russians and Chinese did their homework after the Gulf War of '91 and came to the conclusion that a C-PGM program was the best way to keep their higher level assets (AD, ISTAR, etc) protected due to the wests focus on precision and it's ability to knock out the Iraqi air defence system. That's where the Pantsyr program came from, so it's natural that they would want to see if it could be developed in the arctic (where, fun fact, NATO systems can't operate for the most part, including the ADATS when we still had it). As for radar, the Russians still maintain a relatively sophisticated radar system, though it is still largely emplaced in the west of the country facing NATO. If they were changing strategic vision from the west to the north than relocating assets wouldn't be a major issue, IMHO.

The real question than, to me, is does the interest in developing arctic AD capabilities signal the start in a shift in Russian strategic vision? Russian doctrine would indicate that they will use their AD assets to negate or reduce the impact of NATO aircraft. If they develop a northern strategy I would expect to see high level AD be the first assets emplaced along with a minor air element to set the stage for later development by setting the conditions for them to move into it. 

Further, to simply write the Russians and their systems off as "wunderwaffen" is ignorant, and I would suggest extremely hypocritical for a strong supporter of the NATO "wunderwaffen" known as the F-35, which is overly expensive and not proven in any way, shape, or form.  :2c: You mention the Russians lack of factories and actual production, which is a limitation to be sure, but you have to understand that they dont NEED a huge number of these systems to create an effect SEAD in the arctic to support any economic aspirations they may have in the arctic.
 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If Russian made AD systems are wunderwaffen, why aren't people just cruising thru Syria's airspace  ^-^

BG, do you mean IADS vice SEAD?

 

[Kirkhill]

Bird_Gunner45:

I have no doubt you have more knowledge on the issue than myself. 

My point with respect to posting that 4 year old article (which was written as a Kremlin-friendly piece) and the preceding videos was to point out that the New Russia is not the Old Soviet Union.  Its soldiers do not stand 10 feet tall.  And there are not many of them.

Russia still has strengths, and it is wise to take note of them, but equally there are many weaknesses.  And frankly its weaknesses frighten me more than its strengths because I fear that their weaknesses will make their leadership more afraid and thus more unpredictable and likely to lash out.  Honestly I think that is what is driving Putin.

With respect to the quality of the arguments that the article I cite puts forward - is it likely that the situation will have changed so much between 2011 and 2015 as to invalidate the 2011 article?  This Swedish review from 2013 didn't seem to suggest different conclusions.

http://www.foi.se/ReportFiles/foir_3734.pdf

Russia has been struggling for a while now - and Ukraine, sanctions and falling oil prices, to my mind are unlikely to have made their defence industry much improved over the last little while.

As to "wunderwaffen" and the F-35 - Am I a strong supporter of the F-35?  Honestly, I don't know.  I like what is being offered and I don't see better long term options.  Having said that, I'll be happier when I see more of them flying and doing what is being promised.

In my mind, the difference between the Russian situation and the US situation is that the US has been actively maintaining and upgrading capabilities since the Cold War.  By contrast the Russians had a real "decade of darkness" - actually more like a couple of them, after The Wall came down and lost a lot of plant, a lot of talent and a lot of hardware (over using and not maintaining the equipment they had left).

The F-35 can indeed be accused of being a Wunderwaffe at this time.  The difference for me is that the Americans have solid existing and supported hardware, in large quantities, that they can rely on in the meantime.  The Russians seem to be standing down Corps and replacing them with Brigades equipped with whatever gear they can find that still runs.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

If Russian made AD systems are wunderwaffen, why aren't people just cruising thru Syria's airspace  ^-^

BG, do you mean IADS vice SEAD?

Yes, IADS