S-300 System Export Form Russia

25/12/2011 15:47S-300 - Israel Military Forum

Page 1 of 26http://www.israelmilitary.net/showthread.php?t=12988

#1

#2

#3

Welcome to the Israel Military Forum. You are currently viewing our Israel Forum as a guest which gives you limited access to viewmost discussions, Image Forum and access our other features. By joining our Israel Military Forum you will have access to post topics,communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registrationis fast, simple and absolutely free so

Join Our Israel Community Today!If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Israel Military Forum > Israel National security > Nuclear And Strategic Missiles S-300

User Name User Name Remember Me?

Password Log in

Register FAQ Pictures Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search

Nuclear And Strategic Missiles Strategic Missiles And Nuclear Program Related Posts.

Thread Tools Display Modes

01-28-2010, 06:06 AM

hardov Newbie

Join Date: Jan 2010Posts: 14

S-300

If Iran have the S-300 interceptors, Israel cant strike Iran?

01-28-2010, 07:03 AM

joejd12 Dragon

Join Date: Mar 2008Posts: 741

Quote:

Originally Posted by hardov If Iran have the S-300 interceptors, Israel cant strike Iran?

no, there are ways around it, but it will make a strike much much more difficult...

greece has the s-300 and Israel reportedly conducted long range training flights which simulated attacks against targets targeted by thes-300...

01-28-2010, 11:03 AM

haamimhagolan Super Moderator

Join Date: Dec 2007Posts: 2,374



#4

#5

#6

#7

For the Israelis, the concern will be that any additional (or newer) SAM batteries deployed by the Iranians, will force the IDF to divertresources to eliminate the SAM threat - either electronically or by directly bombing them. That leaves fewer aircraft dedicated to bombingthe assigned targets.

01-28-2010, 09:14 PM

hardov Newbie


hey thank u so muchs!

01-29-2010, 06:37 PM

dannytoro Newbie

Join Date: Jun 2009Location: GeorgiaPosts: 74

........It's a pretty sure bet Russia has not yet sold S-300 to Iran......yet. They did get TOR though, but not many of them.....

01-30-2010, 11:38 PM

RS116 Newbie


Quote:

Originally Posted by hardov If Iran have the S-300 interceptors, Israel cant strike Iran?

1. If Iran will not have the S-300 interceptors, can Israel strike Iran?2. When Iran did not have the S-300 interceptors, could Israel strike Iran?2. If Iran expect to get the S-300 interceptors, why could not Israel strike Iran now?__________________Dixi

01-30-2010, 11:41 PM

joejd12 Dragon


Quote:

Originally Posted by RS116 1. If Iran will not have the S-300 interceptors, can Israel strike Iran?2. When Iran did not have the S-300 interceptors, could Israel strike Iran?2. If Iran expect to get the S-300 interceptors, why could not Israel strike Iran now?



#8

#9

#10

what were you trying to say with this post?

02-24-2010, 03:05 PM

Raytheon Member

Join Date: Feb 2010Posts: 128

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannytoro ........It's a pretty sure bet Russia has not yet sold S-300 to Iran......yet. They did get TOR though, but not many of them.....

They already have Tor... they are for defense of strategic target's and Russian sold them for 700 million$.

About S-300...also Iran already have chinese versions of it...but S-300 is a REAL threat not just to Israeli AIR FORCE...but for ANYairforce,thus...

http://www.israelmilitary.net/showpo...69&postcount=8

02-24-2010, 04:56 PM

betgilson Banned

Join Date: May 2008Posts: 191

Quote:Originally Posted by RS116 1. If Iran will not have the S-300 interceptors, can Israel strike Iran?2. When Iran did not have the S-300 interceptors, could Israel strike Iran?2. If Iran expect to get the S-300 interceptors, why could not Israel strike Iran now?

what were you trying to say with this post?

I think I understood it. He is trying to tell the whole story still remain based on suppositions.

(in my opinion the S-300 won´t avoid an Israeli attack)

Quote:

but S-300 is a REAL threat not just to Israeli AIR FORCE...but for ANY airforce,

or for any Air Force which dares to invade the Iranian air space, not in general "for any air force" since it is not an offensive weaponsystem.

02-24-2010, 10:07 PM

WABA Dragon

Join Date: Jan 2008Location: AustraliaPosts: 1,091

Russian S-300 sale off?

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia hardened its position on the stalled sale of the S-300 air defence system to Iran on Wednesday, saying itwould not sell weapons if it leads to destabilisation in any region.Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov did not say -- as other Kremlin officials have -- that technical reasons were to blame for notexporting the truck-mounted missile that can than hit aircraft up to 150 km (90 miles) away.Lavrov's comments follow a spate of earlier signals from Moscow that Russia is hardening its position towards Iran's nuclear programmeand preparing to back U.N. sanctions."There are questions that need to be settled before the contract can be executed," Lavrov said, when asked when Russia would sell theS-300 system."There are fundamental principles linked to the sale that we never, in accordance with our legislation, and according to our international



#11

#12

#13

#14

obligations, take any actions that will lead to the destabilisation of certain regions," he said.On February 19, a deputy Russian Foreign Minister said Russia intended fulfilling the contract."There is a contract to supply these systems to Iran, and we will fulfil it," Sergei Ryabkov told Interfax new agency in an interview."Delays (with deliveries) are linked to technical problems with adjusting these systems," he added.The possible sale of the S-300s, which could protect Iran's nuclear facilities against air strikes, is an extremely sensitive issue in Russia'srelations with Israel.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Moscow last week to press the Kremlin to back tougher sanctions against Iran.Lavrov said his comments did not refer only to the S-300 sale and hinted at the export by other countries of offensive weapons toGeorgia."I never mentioned any political issues in the Middle East. I said there are certain principles we need to abide by when selling armseverywhere -- Latin America, Middle East, the Caucasus region.""We cannot sell weapons if that can lead to the destabilisation of the regions in question," Lavrov said.(Reporting by Conor Sweeney; Editing by Michael Roddy)Sign in to RecommendMore Articles in World »

02-24-2010, 10:24 PM

joejd12 Dragon


Russia's been milking this whole s-300 sale for all its worth for quite some time now...

It has become my personal opinion that while Russia has no qualms about selling advanced military hardware to Iran or any othercountry, it isn't all that excited about having Iran, an islamic and belligerent state that borders russia, having a nuclear ****nal...

so while it does sell Iran both equipment and know-how for the money, it will often take its time and try not to do anything that wouldimpede a strike on Iran TOO much...

but then again one could argue the russians are simply trying to milk the iranians out of every dollar they can...

02-25-2010, 12:52 AM

WABA Dragon

Join Date: Jan 2008Location: AustraliaPosts: 1,091

but then again one could argue the russians are simply trying to milk the iranians out of every dollar they can...

I agree totally, the Russian's know that besides China, Russia is the only ( for Iran ) source of supply for advanced military waeponsystems.

But, I also believe that Russia ( and China ) miss use their seat on the Security council to inflate their own pathetic ego's with their selfinduced belief of superiority, in that they are major players on the world stage and MUST be listened too, when in fact they are both only2nd rate powers.

02-25-2010, 10:07 AM

betgilson Banned


The only reason China is a permanent member of the Council is that China has Nukes.An awful country considering the violations against human rights which in normal case shouldn´t belong to none prestige boardOn the other hand , with the biggest population in the world...

02-25-2010, 10:09 PM

Raytheon Member




Quote:

Originally Posted by betgilson The only reason China is a permanent member of the Council is that China has Nukes.An awful country considering the violations against human rights which in normal case shouldn´t belong to none prestige boardOn the other hand , with the biggest population in the world...

I agree...in china there are still SLAVES in smaller town's and village...there is net censure....

However keep in mind that Iran has C-300 from China and now using and studing it iran is developing it's own S-300..

I will give you example Iraq-was under sanction's for weapon's but russia sold to Iraq weapon's worth more than 10 billion dollars(iraqdid not pay now russia forgive the debt and made a deal with iraq government as a goodwill Iraq to let GAZPROM to get in Iraq...that'sBad...

Also Iraq in 1990 orderd mirage from france-and Pay from them but france respected the sanctions and Iraq never get the mirages worth600 hundred million dollars-now This Iraq government Want's the money back...France will more likely that will back money to Iraqbecause Iraq did not get thing's for what he paid(and also we know that the best part of Iraq aviation is in Iran(which said that theywon't give them back to owner Iraq because Iran want's 2 billion$ for war reparation from Iraq-but behind this is the fact that Iraq SU-25,also MIG's and mirage's in Iran are kept in order to defend him self-this is the reason why Iran hold's property of other country(thereare also claims that when Iraq before desert storm send the Aircraft's with nerve agent's For Iran-because Iran Ayatolah agreed andsigned that they will Keep Iraq Aircraft and bring them back after the war)...

Iran has several Special Iraq prototipe of SU-25T also of Mig's and Flanker which are good Planes(exept mig's that are not too goodaccording to statistic)Also Iraq was hiding his prototipe planes in sand but Coalition forces found them-they were better than originalrussian version.

Here are results from styding Iraq prototipe's

See the stealth element's like angle of tail.inlet's and relation between jet body and inlet's(almoust flat...)

This C-300 SAM shoot's 2 rockets on one target it uses good guidance system and PH is 95%...Russia signed to sell and they will do thator will lost a lot of money by international trade law-thus delays of delivery.

So only one thing can screw(not temporary) C-300-EW measures...Also it would be good for Israel to Buy some Silent Eagles (F-15) oneof the best fighters in the world-but difference between standard F-15 and SE is that SE incorporates special paint which radar wavetransform's into heat so that radar wave can not return,thus SE has RAM(Radar Absorbing materials) and angles are settled up,alsoengine inlet's two so it's i would say stealthy+ the new EW system...but the problem's are decoy's

Why i'm mad...

As i said Iran already has C-300Quote:

There were reports that Iran was considering purchases of the highly capable SA-10 (S-300) missile system. The SA-10 is ahighly capable long-range all-altitude SAM. As early as 1994 it was reported that Iran had six SA-10 batteries (with some 96missiles) on order from Russia. In February 1997 a $90 million sale of 36 missiles to Iran and three older SA-10 SAM systems,made up of components from Russia, Croatia, and Kazakhstan, fell through. On 30 December 2000 an announcement was madein Russia that Iran had informed Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev about Iran's desire to purchase the S-300 anti-missilesystem. In March 2001 there were reports tha the Russians are close to cutting a deal with Iran on advanced missiles. Itar-Tassreported that Iran would soon close the deal on the Russian Tor-M1, Tor-M1T, and the S-300 surface-to-air missiles. After thisreport, there were no subsequent reports of Iranian interest in the SA-10.

In December 2005 Iran entered into a contract to purchase 29 TOR-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) mobile surface-to-air missile defencesystems from Russia worth more than USD 700 million. The TOR-M1 is a mobile system designed for operation at medium- and



#15

#16

low-altitude levels against aircraft and guided missiles. Each unit consists of a vehicle armed with eight missiles and aQuote:

radar that can track 48 targets

and engage two simultaneously.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ir-defense.htm

Not to mention rapier(ok it's not jernas but still is danger,also and HAWK.

Last edited by Raytheon; 02-25-2010 at 10:12 PM..

02-25-2010, 10:26 PM

betgilson Banned


.

lot of interesting infos. I like your postings Raytheon

02-27-2010, 12:58 AM

Raytheon Member


We all know that VHF radar captured the US F-117 and the rocket that shoot him vas SA-3 modify with thermal guidance...

But as i said there is only one stealth aircraft left-other "puzzles" are all ready solved,and tested(that's why Russia was experimentingwith T-50,with many aircraft's and even with UAV such MIG-SKAT...but keep in mind that they have special radar which is interoperablewith C-300/400 and C-200(C-400 was first called C300-PMU3 but this would mean no new system but mod...

The Gorky Institute of Radio Engineering (GNIIRT) was tasked with developing the 1L13 under the leadership ofchief designer I.G.Krylov. A late model NNIIRT 1L13 Nebo SV VHF acquisition radar. This design replaced the P-18 Spoon Rest D/E in front line Soviet air V-PVO, PVO-SV and VVS defence units following its introduction to service in 1984. Note the sliding hood on the Ural 4320 flatbed truckcarrying the antenna system, and the aft facing sidelobe cancelling array. The IFF interrogator is not shown in this image (NNIIRT).

URAL TRUCK With Radar...but this radar is toooo heavy..



[IMG] [/IMG]

Technical data for the current export configuration of the 1L13-3 Nebo SV 2D radar

GENERAL DATA Transmit Power, pulse not less than 140 kWTotal Weight of Radar 48 Tons (without remote indicators)PERFORMANCE Elevation, deg 30, maxData Update Rate (Sweep Duration), sec 10/20SYSTEM CONFIGURATION Truck-Mounted Antenna Rotating Device: Antenna lifting device from horizontal to vertical position Phased array tilting device Semitrailer-Mounted IFF Antenna Equipment Cabin: Transmitter Device: Mounted in equipment cabin Two power output amplifiers based on high poweroutput devices - endotrones (main and back-up) Broad band power pre-amplifier Exciter Modulator Receiver Device, Data Processors and Displays: Mounted in equipment cabin Cabinets with receiver units, interferencerejection system, radar environmental simulator Displays Data processing equipment IFF transceiver Digital data processing units Coordinates Determination Error, not exceeding: Range, m not more than 400Azimuth, deg not more than 0.67Detection Range of an Air Target (Fighter Type): Operating at Altitudes: 500 m not less than 50 km10 000 m not less than 250 km27 000 m not less than 330 kmAltitude, max 40 kmInterference Rejection Factor, dB 45



Truck-Mounted Power Plant: Two diesel electrical generators with output power 30 kWeach and frequency converter Logistics and Support: Complete set of Operation Manuals (Technical Descriptions ofPCBs', units and systems, Maintenance and Repair Manuals,Circuit Diagrams) Training capabilities at the Manufacturer Site Spare parts (individual SPTA organic to the Radar, ZIP-0) suppliedwith Radar to support its operation and routine maintenance Spare parts (group SPTA or ZIP-GR) supporting three Radars are alsoavailable Customer-ordered spares Transmitter Characteristics Metric (VHF) band of radiated frequencies, Adaptive programmable and manual frequency agility, Sector radiation mode in azimuth, Shaping of RF pulse by a complex signal, Shaping of RF pulse by complex signal, Crystal stabilisation of RF oscillator, Output device of power amplifier : endotron (high poweroutput device)with liquid cooling. Environmental Performance: Temperature, ° C -50 ... +50Ambient humidity 98%Stability at wind loads, m/sec up to 45Crew, persons 2

The 1L13 was a large departure from the well trodden evolutionary path of the Knife and Spoon Rest series. Rather than an small arrayof high gain Yagis, the 1L13 adopted a much larger four row array of 72 lower gain reduced span Yagis, each with a 3/8 folded dipole,single director and looped dipole reflector. The mainlobe width is cited at 6°. Horizontal polarisation was retained. To improve antennaback and sidelobe rejection performance, a rearward facing auxiliary array with three elements was added. The primary array wassubdivided into six subarrays of 12 antenna elements each. A combiner network was used to sum the outputs from the six subarrayswith the out of phase sidelobe cancelling array output. Russian sources claim that three separate channels are used to provide automaticsidelobe noise jammer rejection but imagery shows only the aft facing array.

The antenna array is rotated in azimuth mechanically at 3 or 6 RPM, and also tiltedmechanically. Standard operation is at a tilt angle of9°, with a depressed beam mode at 0°for acquiring low level targets, and an elevated beam mode at 13° for high altitude targets.

The high power amplifier is a dual redundant broadband endotron tube, driven by an exciter stage. The backup transmitter can beengaged in eight minutes, or three minutes in an emergency. The peak power rating according to Russian sources is 120 to 140kiloWatts, with a total equipment power consumption of 29 kiloWatts.

The 1L13 has a Digital Moving Target Indicator (DMTI) system design. The coherent output waveform uses a fixed length Barker code. APRF of 300 Hz is employed. The 1L13 is equipped with a digital signal processor, with a conventional I/Q quadrature two channelarrangement. The radar processing is designed to reject chaff automatically and compensate for wind induced Doppler in chaff clouds,with 50 dB or better ground clutter rejection. The cited receiver sensitivity is -103 dBW. Counter-countermeasures capability is claimedto include pulse to pulse frequency agility.

Integration facilities include the capability to merge radar video from external sources, and an automated facility to link to S-band PRV-13 Odd Pair, PRV-16 Thin Skin B, PRV-17 Odd Group heightfinder radars.

The 1L13 Nebo SV was accepted into service in 1986, and widely deployed with Soviet PVO-SV, V-PVO and Frontal Aviation VVS units.The system can be deployed or stowed in 40 minutes. A separate IFF interrogator is carried by trailer, and linked to the 1L13 control van.A typical configuration includes a Ural 4320 truck carrying the radar antenna, a Ural 4320 truck with the processing systems andoperator consoles, usually towing the IFF interrogator trailer, and a third truck carries the ED2hZO-T230P ZRA diesel generator.

While two decades have elapsed since the introduction of the 1L13, it remains in production and offered for export. The current 1L13-3variant has incremental improvements over the baseline design, with more automation and a two person rather than 4-6 person crew[see table above].

Less known is the fact that the much larger 55Zh6UE Nebo U/UE 3D semi-mobile radar shares a large number of components with the1L13 series, as both were designed concurrently.

The Nebo SVU is a critically important technological development as it provides a mobile 3D VLO/LO target acquisition and midcoursetracking capability for modern air defence missile systems like this S-300PMU2 Favorit.

Deployed as a target acquisition radar for a modern SAM system like the S-300PMU1/2 / SA-20 Gargoyle or S-400 / SA-21 Growler it willsignificantly complicate engagement tactics for users of VLO/LO fighters, as it can not only deny surprise engagement of the missilebattery, but it is accurate enough to provide midcourse guidance data for both Surface Air Missile shots and Air Air Missile shots. Giventhe Russian predilection for the use of datalinks in networked air defence systems, it is only a matter of time before thiscapability finds its way into export systems.

Here is typical battery



[IMG] [/IMG]

The Nebo SVU is an important strategic development. It is a modern technology radar by global standards, and its two metre bandwavelength will provide it with a robust capability against fighter and cruise missile sized VLO/LO targets. The radar's combination offrequency agility, beamsteering agility, fully digital processing and very good mobility by VHF radar standards sets it apart from twogenerations of Soviet era VHF radars. If deployed in robust numbers, the Nebo SVU will be capable of frustrating offensive operations byany air force equipped with an F-22 or better capability.

The impetus for the design of the latter NNIIRT VHF radars, the 55Zh6 Nebo U and 1L119 Nebo SVU, was a measure of dissatisfactionwith the 2D only mobile 1L13 Nebo SV series, and earlier VHF radars. These lacked an integral heightfinding capability and relied whollyon integration with external, typically S-band, nodding heightfinders. Confronted with the shock of Saddam's air defence system beingutterly impotent against the F-117A, it was clear to Russian designers that a better long term solution in the VHF band had to be found,as the cumbersome two radar solution would be ineffective due to the severely degraded range of the S-band heightfinding component.

The design rationale for the Nebo U has been discussed in detail in Russian literature, but no such document exists for the Nebo SVU atthis time. Therefore we can at best infer the reasoning of Krylov's NNIIRT development team, based on the observable or publiclydocumented features of the radar.Commercial VHF band MOSFET transistors rated at 500W are now available in the global market at unit prices of around US$250.00, sobuilding a VHF band TR module rated at 2 kiloWatts with four ganged MOSFETs presents no great difficulty, the only issue being effectivecooling. With the low packaging density for a VHF AESA, it is clear that this did not present any obstacle for Krylov and his designers.Western designers have been building kiloWatt class L-band TR modules for well over a decade.

Low noise solid state receivers for the VHF band are also a non issue, and the low packaging density requirement for such an array wouldgive the designers considerable freedom in layout.The radiating antenna element design is a three element hybrid - a vertically polarised two wire 3/8 l folded dipole [Kraus 11-39, 11-61]with a single parasitic director, using additional support frame mounted reflector elements. The well documented dimensions of the Ural4320 truck and good close up imagery allows a fairly accurate estimation of the wavelength at ~2 metres with a symmetrical ~1 metrearray element spacing, ie a regular square lattice. The choice of a 3/8 l folded dipole was clearly driven by its compact size allowingtighter element spacing in the array. Gain is of the order of 3-4.5 dBi per element, but is likely to be reduced by array coupling effects.

The choice of vertical polarisation is unusual for a VHF design intended to track aerial targets, and is best explained by the dual role useof the radar for ballistic missile defence purposes, as the shape of ballistic missile targets presents a higher RCS in the vertical



polarisation. The 1L119 array design with a regular element spacing has the capacity for growth to a selectable polarisation, withembedded mechanical drives to rotate each antenna element through 90° to select optimal polarisation for a given target detectionregime. The principal penalty in the hardware is additional complexity per element, and the need for different processing optimisationsfor either polarisation. With an electrical motor drive in each element, the rotation and polarisation change could be effected in seconds.

The problem of element spacing versus grating lobe performance is interesting in this design. If we assume that the electronicbeamsteering capability is used primarily for precision angle tracking of targets near the antenna boresight, grating lobes do not imposequite the burden they do in fixed X-band AESAs, and there is some flexibility in operating frequencies. 64N Radar...

[IMG] [/IMG]

If the electronic beamsteering capability is used for sector searches, with significant deflection angles off boresight, then grating lobesbecome a potential problem in the design, and the <1/2 l element spacing rule limits the upper frequency of the design to around 150MHz, with degraded gain in the 3/8 l folded dipole imposing the lower limit on frequency agility. The range of measurement error in arraygeometry indicates that the design was sized for larger deflection angles, so ±45° to ±60° off boresight is achievable, subject toaperture foreshortening, sidelobe performance limits, and the shaping of the hybrid two wire 3/8 l folded dipole element mainlobe. Werethe design limited to small off boresight steering angles, the element spacing would be greater [1].

With only 84 elements, the 1L119 uses a sp**** array, in AESA terms, so highly accurate calibration of module phase/delay and gain areabsolutely critical to achieving the intended sidelobe control and beamsteering accuracy for repeatable target angle A curious statementin a number of Russian documents is that the radar employs "Complete space-time digital signal processing". This may well be anattempt to explain that the radar is fully digital throughout, or it may be a poor translation of Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP),only recently adopted in Western radar designs. Is STAP a feasible proposition for a Russian radar designed very recently?

[IMG] [/IMG]



Given this radar is a VHF design with a modest sampling rate, and Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) computing power is not a problemfor a design carried by ten tonne Ural 4320 trucks, then the only issue with STAP is the ability of the Russian designers to implementthe algorithms required, and whether it is useful enough to justify the effort.

[IMG] [/IMG]

Most Western research on STAP is focussed on airborne radars using STAP to adaptively reject ground clutter. For a VHF DMTI the issueis rejection of ground clutter, but also other unwanted effects such as Doppler shifted chaff and weather. At this stage the issue of STAPcapability in the 1L119 remains unresolved, but it is a likely capability in this family of radars longer term. There are no fundamentalproblems with dividing this array into multiple receive path phase centres, since cables are already routed from the TRmodules to the central phase control, amplitude control and summing modules.



[IMG] [/IMG]Engineering a STAP capability for a fixed ground based DMTI will be easier than doing it for an airborne X-band radar. The display systemsoftware for the operator consoles and interfacing to the array management processor (array control) was developed initially in the 2000to 2002 timeframe, using COTS software and hardware, specifically Intel architecture, Linux and !/!++ high level languages, and Xlib,Xt, Xaw, Qt libraries/toolkits. This is the same basic technology used in state of the art US military equipment for this purpose. This alsosupports NNIIRT claims that the 1L119 is a fully digital system.



[IMG] [/IMG]

S-300PMU-2 Favorit / SA-20 Gargoyle 5P85TE TEL in deployed configuration, with the telescoping network antenna retracted. The PLAremains the largest export customer for S-300PMU variants (Xinhua).Whether the Nebo SVU is used as a cheaper substitute for an SA-10/20/21 S-band 64N6E/91N6E radar or paired with a64N6E/91N6E, the radar has the required performance cue an X-band 30N6E series engagement radar. If these systemsare all networked following current Russian practice, the battery's 54K6E series command post can launch the missilesremotely and datalink them to the aimpoint through most of the flight trajectory. When near enough, the missile switchesto its own terminal homing seeker to complete the engagement.View C-300 screen....

What the Russians have not disclosed, but is clearly obvious, is that pairing the Nebo SVU and 64N6E/91N6E allows the operators todiscriminate between a low observable and conventional radar target and adjust tactics (on picture you willsee)accordingly. If the target is invisible on the decimetric band 64N6E but visible on the VHF band Nebo SVU, then clearly it islow observable, and a missile trajectory flown under datalink control using updates generated by the VHF radar is needed, rather than aconventional engagement sequence where the 30N6E/92N2E locks up the target and completes the engagement autonomously.Missile range performance permitting, this opens up other options such as flying a 'dogleg' curved missile trajectory to effect a beamattack terminal phase, so the missile's seeker is illuminating the less stealthy beam aspect of the aircraft ratherthan its most stealthy front aspect.[IMG]



[/IMG]The claims of a viable capability against conventional VLO/LO designs should be taken seriously. The 1L119 Nebo SVU and RLM-M NeboM will provide a credible capability for a range of roles, including their use as battery target acquisition radars for the S-300PMU-1/2 /SA-20 Gargoyle and S-400/S-400M / SA-21 Surface to Air Missile systems. As the design has considerable growth potential, it mayremain in ongoing development and production……n for decades.The replacement for the 1L13 series is the 1"119 Nebo SVU active phased array, first disclosed in 2001. The intent of this new radar wasto extend the experience gained with the Nebo SV, and produce a design capable of detecting and tracking Very Low Observable (VLO)and Low Observable (LO) aircraft designs. Like the Nebo SV, this development project was led by Igor Krylov at NNIIRT. He wasinterviewed by Russian television in 2002, cite: "We can see the Stealth [F-117A] as clearly as any other plane".



Or...[IMG] [/IMG]

Quote:

The Nebo SVU departs from the Nebo SV in many respects. It is a solid state phased array with electronic beamsteering inazimuth and elevation, it is considerably more accurate, it has much better mobility, and incorporates a wide range ofimprovements. It retains the VHF element design, but uses vertical polarisation.

The radar completed its operational certification trials in 2004, clearing the way for Low Rate Initial Production. At least one Russianreport claims the Nebo SVU has been exported, but the client has not been disclosed. The radar is being actively marketedfor export and has been displayed at a number of Russian and international arms shows. At the Minsk 2007 arms expo, ViktorOzherelev, head of NNIIRT's department of scientific and technical information, stated:

Quote:

"Now even the Americans have begun to make such [VHF] radars as well, as they understand that their 'stealth' program hasfailed. These radars can detect aircraft constructed using 'stealth' technology. We have a number of prospects who want toprocure a metric band radar."; "The Nebo SVU is the first radar with a solid state active phased array antenna operating in themetric wavelength [VHF] band. Here, each radiating antenna element has its own transceiver [i.e.transmit-receive] module. Thismakes it possible to achieve very high performance."

ESA Analytic Symulation,which shows that this thread is taken seriously.



[IMG] [/IMG]

let us consider the F-35 JSF in the 2 metre band favoured by Russian VHF radar designers. From a planform shaping perspective, it isimmediately apparent that the nose, inlets, nozzle and junctions between fuselage, wing and stabs will present as Raleighregime scattering centres, since the shaping features are smaller than a wavelength. Most of the straight edges are 1.5 to twowavelengths in size, putting them firmly in the resonance regime of scattering. Size simply precludes the possibility that thisairframe can neatly reflect impinging 2 metre band radiation away in a well controlled fashion.



[IMG] [/IMG]

.. The only viable mechanism for reducing the VHF band signature is therefore in materials, especially materials which can stronglyattenuate the induced electrical currents in the skins and leading edges. The physics of the skin effect show that the skin depth isminimised by materials which have strong magnetic properties. The unclassified literature is replete with magnetic absorber materialswhich have reasonable attenuation performance at VHF band, but are very dense, and materials which require significant depth to beeffective if lightweight. The problem the JSF has is that it cannot easily carry many hundreds of pounds of low band absorber materials inan airframe with borderline aerodynamic performance. Some technologies, such as laminated photonic surface structures might be viablefor skins, but the experimental work shows best effect in the decimetric and centimetric bands. Thickness again becomes an issue.

The reality is that in conventional decimetric to centimetric radar band low observable design, shaping acounts for the first 10 to 100 foldreduction in signature, and materials are used to gain the remainder of the signature reduction effect. In the VHF band shaping in fightersized aircraft is largely ineffective, requiring absorbent materials with 10 to 100 fold better performance than materials currently in use.In the world of materials, getting twice the performance out of a new material is considered good, getting fivefold performanceexceptional, and getting maybe....100 fold better performance requires some fundamental breakthrough in physics.

Another consideration, peripheral to the design of the radar itself, is its influence on other nations developing products in this area.It is already evident that China's CETC has been heavily influenced by the 1L13/1L119 in the development of its JY-27 VHFband radar equipment.chinese version...of PMU2



#17

[IMG] [/IMG].

I just simply don't know which country buy this radar....from the China research maybe we can conclude4 that china is not the client,soquestion is WHO IS??

Maybe it's Belarus(partner with Russia...but maybe Iran??

I don't know so i won't speculate,but i also know that and Ukraine has a radar that "sees" VLO aircraft's...

Also this is russan replica of shooting down nighthawk according to info from examined plane...and the radar that captured F-117 wasVHF Band.

03-02-2010, 10:20 PM

Raytheon Member




Well i will write something about origins of the S-300P series lie in the mid 1960s, when the Soviet Voyska PVO and Ministry of MilitaryProduction initiated its development(in the communist block they had a Ministry for Mil Production) . The aim was to produce an area defenceSAM system capable of replacing the largely ineffective S-75/SA-2 Guideline where neither of these in practise showed well against low flyingWild Weasels, low RCS targets or US support jamming aircraft. The original intent was to design a common SAM system for the Voyska-PVO(PVO is #$%&'( (%)*+,-. %*/$.-.=Air Defence Forces), Voenno-Morskiy Flot (Navy) and the PVO-SV (Air Defence Corps of the Red Army)but divergent service needs across these three users soon saw commonality drop well below 50%. Ultimately the V-PVO's S-300P series andPVO-SV's S-300V series diverged so completely to become largelly unique systems.

The design aims of the original S-300P were to produce a strategic area defence SAM system, intended to protect fixed targets such asgovernment precincts, industrial facilities, command posts and headquarters, military bases, strategic and tactical airfields and nuclear sites.This weapon system was to initially defeat SAC's SRAM firing FB-111As, B-52Hs thus predicted B-1As, and later the Boeing AGM-86B AirLaunched Cruise Missile. The deployment model of the first generation systems was based on the existing S-75/SA-2, S-125/SA-3 and S-200/SA-5 systems, with a semi-mobile package of towed trailer mounted radars and missile Transporter Erector Launchers (TEL).

5N63 Flap Lid A Engagement Radar ($.*'%0%1.&%$ 2%*3(4&. ' -.(4*4-'5)

The first generation of the S-300P's 5N63 (later 30N6) Flap Lid A engagement/fire control radar was also innovative, and clearly influenced bythe Raytheon MPQ-53 engagement radar for the MIM-104 Patriot. The Flap Lid, like the MPQ-53, uses a transmissive passive shiftertechnology phased array, with a space (a.k.a. Optical) feed into the rear plane of the antenna, using a microwave lens rather than a hornfeed. The Flap Lid's antenna stows flat on the roof of the radar cabin, which was initially deployed on a trailer towed by a Ural-357, KrAZ-255or KrAZ-260 6x6 tractor. The whole radar cabin is mounted on a turntable and used to slew the phased array to cover a 60 degree sector ofinterest.

I just wounder....what if Instead PAC-2...S-300 was intended to defend Israel from the Sadam Psycho...Because many SCUD's hit in Civilian"targets"(meaning war crime)...

MPQ-53 Patriot

The 5N63 was a huge generational leap in technology from the famous Fan Song, Low Blow and Square Pair mechanically steered and scannedengagement radars on preceding V-PVO SAMs. With electronic beam steering, very low sidelobes and a narrow pencil beammainlobe,while30N6 phased array is more difficult to detect and track by an aircraft's warning receiver when not directly painted by the radar,and vastly more difficult to jam. While it may have detectable backlobes, these are likely to be hard to detect from the forward sector of theradar. As most anti-radiation missiles rely on sidelobes to home in, the choice of engagement geometry is critical in attempting to kill a FlapLid.

Unlike the Patriot's MPQ-53 engagement radar which has substantial autonomous search capability, the 5N63 is primarily an engagementradar designed to track targets and guide missiles to impact using a command link. The absence of dedicated directional antennas onthis system indicates that the commands are transmitted via a specialised waveform emitted by the main array. The first generation of the5V55K missile was command link guided, following the design philosophy of the S-75/SA-2 and S-125/SA-3, with a cited range of 25 nauticalmiles and altitude limits between 80 ft and 80,000 ft.

S-300PT 5P85-1 TELThis variant was designated the S-300PT (P - PVO, T -Transportiruyemiy) and incrementally upgraded models the S-300PT-1, it enteredservice in 1978. NATO labelled it the SA-10A Grumble.

36D6/ST-68UM/5N59 Tin Shield (6789:":;7<9:==7> !?7=<9>)

Two search and acquisition radars were introduced to support the S-300PT, both with 360 degree coverage. The 3D 36D6/ST-68UM/5N59 TinShield was used for high and medium altitude targets, and the 2D 76N6 Clam Shell for low altitude low RCS targets.

36D6 Tin Shield

The 36D6 Tin Shield is semimobile and towed by a KrAZ-255 or -260 tractor, it can be deployed or stowed in one hour, or two with the mast.The design uses a large paraboloid cylindrical section primary reflector and a linear ellement array deployyed on a pair of booms to provideelectronic beam steering in elevation from -20 to +30 degrees, the antenna can perform a full 360 degree sweep in 5 to 10 seconds. With atransmitter peak power rating cited between 1.23 MegaWatts and 350 kiloWatts, the manufacturer claims the ability to detect a 0.1 squaremetre RCS target at 300 ft AGL out to 24.8 nautical miles, and at medium to high altitudes to 94.5 nautical miles. Clutter rejection is claimedto exceed 48 dB, and the system can track 100 targets. An IFF system is integrated in the radar.

LEMZ 5N66/5N66M/76N6 Clam Shell



Its sibling, the 5N66/5N66M/76N6 Clam Shell low level early warning radar, is an unconventional frequency modulated continuous wavedesign, using a split antenna arrangement with a large beak to prevent spillover from the transmitter. Quoted performance figures include thedetection of targets with an RCS as low as 0.02 square metres, at speeds of up to 1,400 kt, with a bearing resolution of 1 degree, velocityresolution of 9.3 kt and range resolution of 2.15 NM. Quoted RMS tracking errors are 0.3 degree in bearing, 4.7 kt in velocity and 1 NM inrange. Chaff rejection performance is quoted at better than 100 dB, detection range is stated to be 50 NM for targets at 1,500 ft altitude, and65 NM for 3,000 ft altitude. The transmitter delivers 1.4 kW of CW power at an unspecified carrier frequency, system MTBF is quoted at 100 hrwith an MTTR of 0.5 hr.

5N66M / 76N6 / 40V6MD - this is the extended height mast variant.An important feature of the S-300PT was the introduction of the semi-mobile 40V6, 40V6M and 40V6MD masts, towed by a MAZ-543 derivedtractor, in turn based on the 1966 Scud launcher vehicle. The 23.8 metre tall 40V6, 40V6M could be used to elevate the Clam Shell, Tin Shieldand Flap Lid radars to extend their radar horizon and improve clearance in uneven terrain. The double height 37.8 metre tall 40V6MD hasbeen used with the Flap Lid, Clam Shell, and its recent 96L6 replacement. The masts take 1 to 2 hours to erect. The unique 40V6 series mastspermit static or semimobile S-300P series SAM systems extended low level coverage not available in any competing Western designs, andwere clearly introduced to defeat SAC's low level FB-111A, B-52G/H and B-1B force - and the AGM-86B cruise missile. These masts continueto be marketed as an accessory for the latest production variants of S-300P radars.

The Tin Shield / Clam Shell / Flap Lid combo provided the V-PVO with the first all altitude acquisition and engagement package on a semi-mobile SAM system and was a key factor driving the development of the F-117A and B-2A bombers. Had the balloon gone up in 1984, the F-117A would have tasked first and foremost with obliterating the V-PVO's S-300P radar systems.

54K6 Mobile Command Post

The two radars were integrated with a 5N63S mobile command post, carried on an 8x8 MAZ-7910 chassis.

54K6E Command Post

[IMG] [/IMG]

wanna take a look inside....OK.



[IMG] [/IMG]

Almaz S-300PS/PM / SA-10B Grumble B

!.@%A%*-BC D4-'&-BC 6.14&-BC ;%@20413 !-300#!/#M

Growing US electronic combat and SEAD capabilities, in the EF-111A Raven and F-4G Weasel forces were clearly considered a serious threatand this spurred the further evolution of the S-300PT. In 1982 the V-PVO introduced a fully mobile variant of the system, designated the S-300PS Meaning this was response to US..EW...(Samochodnyy=Self-propelled), labelled by NATO the SA-10B.

Here is old S-300PT

5P85S TEL(on the picture is deployed...it's "working" about PMU2 favorit version)

[IMG] [/IMG]

The S-300PS saw the 5N63 Flap Lid engagement radar and 5P85 TEL transplanted on to the high mobility 8x8 MAZ-7910 vehicle derived fromthe MAZ-543. The rehosted radar became the 5N63S Flap Lid B (Samochodnyy=Self-propelled). This permitted the engagement radar andTELs to set up for firing in 5 minutes, and rapidly scoot away after a missile shot to evade US Air Force Weasels. Two improved variants of the5V55 missile were introduced. The 50 nautical mile extended range 5V55KD was supplemented with the 5V55R, the latter using a Track ViaMissile (TVM) semi-active seeker similar in concept to the MIM-104 Patriot seeker. The TVM system relays to the ground station radar dataproduced by the missile seeker, and offers better jam resistance and accuracy against a pure command link guidance package, especially asthe missile nears the target. Later variants of the Flap Lid are designated as Radiolokator Podsvieta i Navedeniya (RPN - Illumination andGuidance Radar)



!.@%A%*-BC D4-'&-BC 6.14&-BC ;%@20413 !-400 '?$'+@E'S-400 Triumf or SA-21(Note that SA... is NATO designation)system is the subsequent evolution of the S-300PMU2, trialled in 1999. The labelS-400 is essentially marketing, since the system was previously reported under the speculative label of S-300PMU3. At least one report claimsthat funding for the development of the Triumf was provided in part by the PLA. The principal distinctions between the S-400 and its predecessor lie in further refinements to the radar and software, and the addition of fournew missile types in addition to the legacy 48N6E/48N6E2 used in the S-300PMU2 Favorit. As a result an S-400 battery could be armed witharbitrary mixes of these weapons to optimise its capability for a specific threat environment. The 30N6E2 further evolved into the morecapable 92N2E Grave Stone, carried by a new 8 x 8 MZKT-7930 vehicle. The additional range required a significantly uprated transmitter tubeto provide the higher power-aperture performance needed, in additional to an improved exciter and automatic frequency hopping capability.The 96L6 Cheese Board is offered as an 'all altitude' battery acquisition radar, also carried by a 8 x 8 MZKT-7930 vehicle. A new 3D phasedarray acquisition radar is employed, the 91N6E derived from the 64N6E2, and the 40V6M/MD mast is an available option. The 55K6Ecommand post is employed, carried by an 8 x 8 Ural 532301 truck.

A 2008 diagram published by Almaz-Antey showing the composition of an S-400 battery. Notable points include the integration of external lowband NNIIRT(posted above) Protivnik GE and VNIIRT Gamma DE L-band radars, and a range of passive emitter locating systems. All havethe angular accuracy to provide midcourse guidance updates for missile shots.Here is Gamma DE..

[IMG] [/IMG]

55K6E CP carried by an 8 x 8 Ural 532301 truck, and operator consoles in van.

And something rare....S-400 console



[IMG] [/IMG]

LEMZ 96L6 Cheese Board acquisition radar carried by an MZKT-7930 vehicle just to upload..moment

[IMG] [/IMG]

This is the vehicle...

Quote:

The 92N2E Grave Stone is an evolution of the 30N6 Tomb Stone / Flap Lid series, and is carried by an 8 x 8 MZKT-7930 vehicle(Almaz-Antey/Vestnik PVO).

The new 91N6E is a derivative of the 64N6E Big Bird series. It is readily identified against the 64N6E by the use of the new build MZKT-7930tractor. It retains the general configuration of its predecessors.

92N2E Grave Stone and 5P85TE2 TEL



[IMG] [/IMG]

Quote:

The 5P85TE2 TEL towed by a 6 x 6 BAZ-64022 tractor is a distinctive feature of the S-400, making it readily identifiable in comparisonwith the KrAZ-260 towed 5P85TE variants used with the SA-20 Gargoyle (Almaz-Antey/Vestnik PVO).

48N6E3 SAM Cutaway. Note the TVC vanes in the exhaust nozzle. The seeker is labelled as 'semi-active radar.

S-400 48N6E2/E3 SAM

TEL options include the 5P85TE2 semitrailer, towed by a 6 x 6 BAZ-64022 and improved 5P85SE2 as it is used for two of the new radars.Demonstrators used the baseline 5P85SE on a MAZ-7910.

48N6E3 and 40N6 Surface to Air Missiles

The first missile added to the system is the 48N6E3/48N6DM an incrementally improved 48N6E2 variant with a range of 200 km

[IMG] [/IMG]



#18

seccond missile added to the S-400 is the new 40N6, a long range weapon with a cited range of 300-400 km, intended to kill AWACS,JSTARS and other high value assets, such as EA-6B/EA-18G support jammers. Further details of this weapon remain to bedisclosed. The range improvement to around twice that of the 48N6E2 suggests a two stage weapon, or a much larger motor casing with alarger propellant load.

Extended range missile shots typically involve ballistic flight profiles with apogees in excess of 40 km. The protracted development of the 40N6suggests that directional control through the upper portions of the flight profile may have presented difficulties advantage of such flightprofiles is that the missile converts potential energy into kinetic energy during the terminal phase of its flight, accelerating as it dives on itstarget. This provides higher endgame G capability in comparison with flatter cruise profiles used in legacy designs.

9M96E and 9M96E2 SAM

The third and fourth missiles are in effect equivalents to the ERINT/PAC-3 interceptor missile recently introduced to supplement the MIM-104in Patriot batteries. These are the 9M96E and 9M96E2, largely identical with the latter version fitted with a larger booster. Fakel claim the96M6E has a range of 21.6 nautical miles, and the 9M96E2 64.8 nautical miles, with altitude capabilities from 15 ft AGL up to 66 kft and 100kft respectively.

The 9M96 missiles are hittiles designed for direct impact, and use canards and thrust vectoring to achieve extremely high G and angular ratecapability - they are not unlike a scaled up R-73/AA-11 Archer dogfight missile in concept. An inertial package is used with a datalink from the30N6E radar for guidance, with a radar homing seeker undisclosed type.53 lb (24 kg) blast fragmentation warhead is designed to produce ancontrolled fragment pattern, using multiple initiators to shape the detonation wave through the explosive. A smart radio fuse is used to controlthe warhead timing thus pattern.Actually it's steerable shaped charge. The smaller size of these weapons permits four to be loaded into the volume of a single 48N6E/5V55K/R launch tube container - a form fit fourtube launcher container is used. A single 5P85S/T TEL can thus deploy up to 16 of these missiles, or mixes of 3 x 48N6 / 4 x 9M96E/E2, 2 x48N6 / 8 x 9M96E/E2 or 1 x 48N6 / 12 x 9M96E/E2. The stated aim of this approach was to permit repeated launches against saturationattacks with precision guided munitions - in effect trading 9M96 rounds for incoming guided weapons. Fakel claim a single shot kill probabilityof 70% against a Harpoon class missile, and 90% against a manned planes.

The addition of the 9M96E/E2 missiles, which amount to a combined ABM and point defence weapon designs.....is part of Russian strategy ofdeploying air defence weapons capable of defeating PGM attacks, including the AGM-88 HARM family, and follow-on defence suppressionweapons, the latter types intended to disable the S-400 battery acquisition and engagement radars. The advantage in using the 9M96E/E2 forthis purpose is that it avoids the additional technical and operational complexity of directing other "counter-PGM" point defence weapons.

Anyway...operators of S-300 areLatvia: Inactive (2)Nagorno-Karabakh: Inactive (1)Poland: Inactive (1)Slovakia: S-300PMU (1)Ukraine: S-300PT (14), S-300PS (11), 64N6 (9), Inactive (18)Russia: S-300PT (6), S-300PS (26), S-300PM (20), 64N6 (22), Inactive (41)Belarus: S-300PT (3), S-300PS (5), 64N6 (2)Bulgaria: S-300PMU (1)(in sofia)China: S-300PMU (4), S-300PMU-1 (8), 64N6 (3), Inactive (7)Cyprus: 64N6 (1, inactive), Inactive (2)Greece: S-300PMU-1 (1)(Athen's)Kazakhstan: S-300PMU (3), 64N6 (2)

And Iran....who managed to get the system quietly but Fact's come's out only time is a factor http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020101thus it has Chinese mod's derived from the Original Russian S-300.Anyway i don't expect export of S-400 to any country since it has ABM capability and long range.

Turkey has announced also buying two or more systems S-300.

P.S sorry about spelling...

04-05-2010, 01:19 AM

dannytoro Newbie

Join Date: Jun 2009Location: GeorgiaPosts: 74

...The only SAM system Iran has from China is the SM-2. Iran has no version of S-300, and little prospects of ever seeing them. Iran's airdefence system is quite old, and well known. Especially the huge gaps in the Westinghouse ADS-4 Long Range Radars. Including a hugegap between Karadj and Bushehr. And a smaller one between Bushehr and Kish Island. Including underneath leaks up to 15,000 feet insome mountainous areas. Which is precisely why the USA approved the sale of the F-14A to Iran.......Iran's prime SAM's are the SM-2,Hawk, the indigenous improved hawk and Tor.....Perhaps the Israeli Air Force already knows, but carry "L"-band jammers, and theWestinghouse units had the Coded pulse tracking deleted before supplying it to them. It's basically the old standard FAA radar withbetter range and no homing beacon......

Last edited by dannytoro; 04-05-2010 at 01:23 AM.. Reason: update



Israel Forum

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Rules

You may not post new threadsYou may not post repliesYou may not post attachmentsYou may not edit your posts

BB code is OnSmilies are On[IMG] code is OnHTML code is Off

Forum RulesForum Jump

Nuclear And Strategic Missiles Go

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:42 PM.

Israeli Military Forum - Archive - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0Copyright ©2000 - 2011, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Israel Military Forum

S-300 System Export Form Russia

Documents

israel military

israeli air

israel strike

folded dipole

air force

nebo svu

vhf band

complex signal