F-35A at Red Flag 19-1

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 430
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post20 Apr 2019, 22:04

hythelday wrote:
Dang, you made me look. Thanks - I am now a little more knowledgeable myself. I never really dug into the precise differences of the systems, always regarding them as upgrades.



You are welcome. :wink:

Awesome work indeed. :thumb: I really appreciate it.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 551
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post20 Apr 2019, 22:34

Here's a nice video showcasing how S-400 is supposed to work. S-300 systems work pretty much the same way:


By the way, it seems that the original S-300P did not have the TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD early warning radar; it was later added for the PM/PMU-1 and later models. That would be the biggest difference amongst the systems. The FLAP LID could control 4 TELs

With the PM/PMU-1 upgrade they have increased the number of TELs controllable by a single FLAP LID up to 12, with the capability to engage 6 targets at once, guiding a maximum of two missiles per target. They have also added the aformentioned TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD, which could control control up to 6 FLAP LID/GRAVE STONE radar. This entire contraption could be plugged into a larger IADS using "Baikal" or "Senezh" family of automated C&С systems.

Maximum effect is achieved by that whole system. It is true that early warning TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD along with the 5N63S (older) and 55K6 (newer) C&С system is the critical link, however FLAP LID/GRAVE STONE is capable of independent search, track and fire control, with diminished effectiveness of course.

It is also important to note that that even the modern S-400 can engage a limited number of targets, 6 per every GRAVE STONE:
Image

I guess this is the reason why Pantsir exists, to protect S-400 from massed attacks. BTW Pantsir is only operated by the Russian VKS, they army threw their lot behind Tor/Tunguska combo.

The S-350 Vityaz is a short-to-medium system, that is planned to employ only aformentioned 9M96 family of missiles as well as short range 9M100. 9M100 is INS+datalink+ IR terminal phase seeker missile, range up to 15 km. S-350 also employs 50N6 radar, which according to the paper specs can engage more targets at once. I guess this is an indication that Russians realized that massed attacks by small munitions a la SDB is a big threat.
Offline

falcon.16

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
  • Location: Spain

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 01:30

hythelday wrote:Here's a nice video showcasing how S-400 is supposed to work. S-300 systems work pretty much the same way:


By the way, it seems that the original S-300P did not have the TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD early warning radar; it was later added for the PM/PMU-1 and later models. That would be the biggest difference amongst the systems. The FLAP LID could control 4 TELs

With the PM/PMU-1 upgrade they have increased the number of TELs controllable by a single FLAP LID up to 12, with the capability to engage 6 targets at once, guiding a maximum of two missiles per target. They have also added the aformentioned TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD, which could control control up to 6 FLAP LID/GRAVE STONE radar. This entire contraption could be plugged into a larger IADS using "Baikal" or "Senezh" family of automated C&С systems.

Maximum effect is achieved by that whole system. It is true that early warning TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD along with the 5N63S (older) and 55K6 (newer) C&С system is the critical link, however FLAP LID/GRAVE STONE is capable of independent search, track and fire control, with diminished effectiveness of course.
(...)



How can do it? automatically? because if Comand and control asset is destroyed, i thought all system will be off at least other comand and control asset get the works if it works inside a network as an IADS.

But if a S400 system works alone, really is it possible Grave stone can work automatically without intervention of the comand and control asset?
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3437
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 12:44

How on earth did we fall so far behind in Surface to AIr Missiles?

Does the US not prioritize SAM defense, or is it something else? We have... the Patriot. Far inferior at least on paper, and not many of them compared to the Russians/Chinese.

I would have thought after DS1 and all the hoopla around the Patriot, we would have taken that ball and ran with it. Yes, yes I understand most Patriots missed. But still... one well placed SCUD warhead was enough to decimate our troops toward the end of the war.

How did we abdicate our responsibility for building a world class air defense network???
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 551
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 12:48

I am sorry for repeated off-topic, but it seems that nobody minds reading about Grumbles, so here I go again.

falcon.16 wrote:How can do it? automatically? because if Comand and control asset is destroyed, i thought all system will be off at least other comand and control asset get the works if it works inside a network as an IADS.

But if a S400 system works alone, really is it possible Grave stone can work automatically without intervention of the comand and control asset?



I will use older S-300P as an example, but I think S-400 operates in the similar fashion.

S-300/400 are meant to be used as a system, with entire "anti-air missile division/brigade" working together, but individual missile batteries can work independently too. The basic "cell" - дивизион (I guess battery in english) of the S-300 system is "Command Post" 5N63S with launchers:

Image

The F2K Battle Control Cockpit (КБУ - кабина боевого управления) is local C&C that links the FLAP LID and launchers. Through this unit additional radars and other technical means can be plugged into the system. The radio link connects the higher level C&C assets, the 5K56, which is missile brigade(division?) level asset:

Image

Here's this C&C along with TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD:

Image

According to the sources, the higher level C&C could be positioned up to 20 km away from the battery. If positioned further, special radio link vehicles are supplied to the battery.

Before the PM (PMU-1) upgrade the inside of the 5N63S looked like this inside:

Image

PM1 supposedly automated a lot of tasks done by the human operators.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2168
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 15:10

Are those huge, hulking ground machines stealth? Are their radio emissions / comms stealth / LPI?

If they are not, then they would seem to be the 21st century equivalent to fixed fortifications such as the Maginot Line in the early 20th century.

As such, all I see is a bunch of targets.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 551
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 17:41

mixelflick wrote:How on earth did we fall so far behind in Surface to AIr Missiles?

Does the US not prioritize SAM defense, or is it something else? We have... the Patriot. Far inferior at least on paper, and not many of them compared to the Russians/Chinese.

I would have thought after DS1 and all the hoopla around the Patriot, we would have taken that ball and ran with it. Yes, yes I understand most Patriots missed. But still... one well placed SCUD warhead was enough to decimate our troops toward the end of the war.

How did we abdicate our responsibility for building a world class air defense network???



US has Air Force. Russian SAM craze is driven by the requirement to be able to counter that.
Offline

falcon.16

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
  • Location: Spain

Unread post21 Apr 2019, 22:32

hythelday wrote:I am sorry for repeated off-topic, but it seems that nobody minds reading about Grumbles, so here I go again.

falcon.16 wrote:How can do it? automatically? because if Comand and control asset is destroyed, i thought all system will be off at least other comand and control asset get the works if it works inside a network as an IADS.

But if a S400 system works alone, really is it possible Grave stone can work automatically without intervention of the comand and control asset?



I will use older S-300P as an example, but I think S-400 operates in the similar fashion.

S-300/400 are meant to be used as a system, with entire "anti-air missile division/brigade" working together, but individual missile batteries can work independently too. The basic "cell" - дивизион (I guess battery in english) of the S-300 system is "Command Post" 5N63S with launchers:

Image

The F2K Battle Control Cockpit (КБУ - кабина боевого управления) is local C&C that links the FLAP LID and launchers. Through this unit additional radars and other technical means can be plugged into the system. The radio link connects the higher level C&C assets, the 5K56, which is missile brigade(division?) level asset:

Image

Here's this C&C along with TOMBSTONE/BIG BIRD:

Image

According to the sources, the higher level C&C could be positioned up to 20 km away from the battery. If positioned further, special radio link vehicles are supplied to the battery.

Before the PM (PMU-1) upgrade the inside of the 5N63S looked like this inside:

Image

PM1 supposedly automated a lot of tasks done by the human operators.


Ok thanks, in this picture i can see too.

Image

Each radar have some inependent room, and i guess for its independent control..
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3282
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 00:51

hythelday wrote:
mixelflick wrote:How on earth did we fall so far behind in Surface to AIr Missiles?

Does the US not prioritize SAM defense, or is it something else? We have... the Patriot. Far inferior at least on paper, and not many of them compared to the Russians/Chinese.

I would have thought after DS1 and all the hoopla around the Patriot, we would have taken that ball and ran with it. Yes, yes I understand most Patriots missed. But still... one well placed SCUD warhead was enough to decimate our troops toward the end of the war.

How did we abdicate our responsibility for building a world class air defense network???



US has Air Force. Russian SAM craze is driven by the requirement to be able to counter that.

For the US, SAMs have a high endurance air-breathing first stage.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 246
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 02:20

sferrin wrote:
knowan wrote:Interesting thing about the S-300P and S-400 missiles is their high velocities compared to similar sized Western missiles like the SM-2ER and SM-6.

5V55 missiles are around 1500 kg with a 75-90 km range and Mach 4.96 speed
48N6 missiles are around 1800 kg with a 150-250 km range and Mach 5.83 speed
40N6 missile is supposed to be around 1900 kg with a 380 range and Mach 12 speed


What's your source for these speeds and ranges?


I just looked at Wikipedia, but the figures appear to be roughly consistent with other sources.

Eg, Deagle says Mach 5.5 / 90km, Mach 6 / 150km and Mach 12 / 400km:
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 74002.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 94001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 90001.aspx

This document says Mach 5.83 / 47-75km for 5V55 and Mach 6.12 / 150-250 km for 48N6 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a625224.pdf


count_to_10 wrote:For the US, SAMs have a high endurance air-breathing first stage.


To the best of my knowledge, all current US built SAMs are entirely rocket propelled. The only US built air breathing SAMs I'm aware of are the CIM-10 Bomarc (retired 1972) and RIM-8 Talos (retired 1980).
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1349
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 06:54

knowan wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:For the US, SAMs have a high endurance air-breathing first stage.

To the best of my knowledge, all current US built SAMs are entirely rocket propelled. The only US built air breathing SAMs I'm aware of are the CIM-10 Bomarc (retired 1972) and RIM-8 Talos (retired 1980).

He's talking about air-to-air missiles mounted on fighter aircraft; which do technically take off from the surface. The US also has maritime systems like the SM-6, SM-3, etc directed via AEGIS, SPY-_ radars, CEC airborne assets, etc which in some cases outrange and outclass Russian's best SAMs (eg: the SM-3 Block IIA for ballistic missile threats).
Offline

skyward

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:33

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 08:13

knowan wrote:
sferrin wrote:
knowan wrote:Interesting thing about the S-300P and S-400 missiles is their high velocities compared to similar sized Western missiles like the SM-2ER and SM-6.

5V55 missiles are around 1500 kg with a 75-90 km range and Mach 4.96 speed
48N6 missiles are around 1800 kg with a 150-250 km range and Mach 5.83 speed
40N6 missile is supposed to be around 1900 kg with a 380 range and Mach 12 speed


What's your source for these speeds and ranges?


I just looked at Wikipedia, but the figures appear to be roughly consistent with other sources.

Eg, Deagle says Mach 5.5 / 90km, Mach 6 / 150km and Mach 12 / 400km:
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 74002.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 94001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons ... 90001.aspx

This document says Mach 5.83 / 47-75km for 5V55 and Mach 6.12 / 150-250 km for 48N6 https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a625224.pdf


The Western missiles are not similar sized to the Russian. They are smaller for the same range.
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 246
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 11:50

skyward wrote:The Western missiles are not similar sized to the Russian. They are smaller for the same range.


The SM-2ER/SM-6 is similar in size to the 5V55 missiles with considerably greater range, despite substantially lower velocity.

The SM-6 Block IB is in development; it will use a 21" inch motor to replace the old 13.5" diameter Mk 104 motor.
The 21" motor is likely the same as that used by the SM-3 Block IIA, and it will give a large increase to effective range; such a missile will likely out-range the 40N6.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5400
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 14:41

knowan wrote:
skyward wrote:The Western missiles are not similar sized to the Russian. They are smaller for the same range.


The SM-2ER/SM-6 is similar in size to the 5V55 missiles with considerably greater range, despite substantially lower velocity.

The SM-6 Block IB is in development; it will use a 21" inch motor to replace the old 13.5" diameter Mk 104 motor.
The 21" motor is likely the same as that used by the SM-3 Block IIA, and it will give a large increase to effective range; such a missile will likely out-range the 40N6.


SM-6 itself probably out ranges 40N6.
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2149
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post22 Apr 2019, 15:34

mixelflick wrote:How on earth did we fall so far behind in Surface to AIr Missiles?

Does the US not prioritize SAM defense, or is it something else? We have... the Patriot. Far inferior at least on paper, and not many of them compared to the Russians/Chinese.


I believe that you basically answered your first question with your second question.

Yes, I would say that the fact that the US doesn't seem to invest so much on (land-based) SAM systems is because they have priorities in somewhere else, namely is having a superior and bigger fleet of fighter and other combat aircraft.
And we all know that for example the USAF alone would "smack" all the Russian Air Arms combined (and I'm not even mentioned the USN and USMC here). Despite the US being the world's richest and lead superpower having such extremely and very capable air forces extreme amounts of money and if the US decided to develop a similarly vast array of land based air defense systems this would likely come at the cost of combat aircraft namely I would say, for the USAF.

Moreover and independently of how impressive Air Defense Systems such as the S-400 are the fact is that Land Based Air Defense Systems will never be as effective an fighter/interceptor aircraft, and history as proven this time after time.
Since the Russians aren't able to develop fighter/combat aircraft as advanced as their US counterparts (and they really know it) they must compensate with that they are really good at which is Air Defense Systems and Rocketry.

So I would also say that the Patriots will be more than good enough or more precisely excellent at their intended roles which are to intercept incoming enemy ballistic missiles and intercept any enemy odd aircraft that was "lucky enough" to penetrate a "wall" composed by the most advanced fighter aircraft in the world.

Moreover, another proof that the US doesn't seem to invest much on land based air defense systems being because of priorities is like Dragon mentioned: The US has the world's top Naval Air Defense Systems (AEGIS coupled with SM-2/3/6). So it's definitely not a matter of being capable of developing such systems or not.


mixelflick wrote:How did we abdicate our responsibility for building a world class air defense network???


No, you didn't.
Advanced fighter aircraft (such as the F-35 and F-22) are also part of an air defense network. Actually I cannot conceive "a world class air defense network" without having advanced fighter aircraft (again such as the F-35 or F-22).
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], wizz33 and 20 guests