Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Bronezhilet

Anti-air thread: Everything that goes up must come down, and we'll help you go down

Recommended Posts

What seems to be a Fateh 110 or M600 (a derivative of Fateh) was fired at targets close to the border with Israel, supposedly initially with a trajectory that put Israeli cities up to 40km away from the border in danger.

 

In response Stunner missiles were fired from central Israel to intercept, later realizing it was a false alarm with the SRBMs landing in Syria.

 

This is the first operational launch of the Stunner.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/rocket-sirens-blare-across-golan-northern-israel-idf-investigating/

 

 

Correction: Those were two Tochka missiles, one of whom was intercepted. The 2nd interceptor missile self-destructed mid-air and the 2nd Tochka reached its target as it was realized it would fall in Syria and not Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the price composition of a PAC-3MSE missile? I have a trouble understanding how come it can cost close to $6 million when competing missiles are just so much cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Does anyone know the price composition of a PAC-3MSE missile? I have a trouble understanding how come it can cost close to $6 million when competing missiles are just so much cheaper.

 

Poland's buy? Their price estimates are strange, and a PAC-3MSE costs ~$4.7 mil each.

 

As for the price of competing missiles, are you taking into account the labor/material costs, exchange rates and what the various missiles capabilities are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

Poland's buy? Their price estimates are strange, and a PAC-3MSE costs ~$4.7 mil each.

 

As for the price of competing missiles, are you taking into account the labor/material costs, exchange rates and what the various missiles capabilities are?

 

4.7? Sorry I can't access the link you sent, and I can't post mine but defensenews.com reported a while ago that Poland was spooked by the 5.7 mil price tag, that would grow to 8 under special terms Poland requested.

 

I ask this because recently there were some news about the Stunner missile, with everyone claiming about 1 mil USD per missile, and one claiming a more exact figure of 700K USD. 

 

The deal with Poland involves 1,000 Stunner missiles for only 1 billion USD, and Poland wants to produce many of them as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

4.7? Sorry I can't access the link you sent, and I can't post mine but defensenews.com reported a while ago that Poland was spooked by the 5.7 mil price tag, that would grow to 8 under special terms Poland requested.

 

I ask this because recently there were some news about the Stunner missile, with everyone claiming about 1 mil USD per missile, and one claiming a more exact figure of 700K USD. 

 

The deal with Poland involves 1,000 Stunner missiles for only 1 billion USD, and Poland wants to produce many of them as well.

 

My understanding is that Poland is buying both SkyCeptors and PAC-3MSE missiles for its Patriot batteries. It might be worth figuring out whats different between the Stunner and SkyCeptor missile since they are not the same thing.

 

On the link I posted, there is ~$4.26 mil per missile which raises to ~$4.7 mil when you include other hardware like the kits that modify launchers to use any type of Patriot missile.

 

5HsTTAd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

My understanding is that Poland is buying both SkyCeptors and PAC-3MSE missiles for its Patriot batteries. It might be worth figuring out whats different between the Stunner and SkyCeptor missile since they are not the same thing.

 

On the link I posted, there is ~$4.26 mil per missile which raises to ~$4.7 mil when you include other hardware like the kits that modify launchers to use any type of Patriot missile.

 

 

Okay, well, the parameters are not fully known but it is said the Stunner is quite substantially faster, capable of intercepting missiles traveling at mach 7.5 (hypersonic), has a good range of 160km, although some cite 300km, perhaps incorrectly. 

But the main cost determining parameters are the seekers. First, though, both missiles have no warhead.

Seekers are the Stunner's main selling point. It has one passive seeker (radar) just like many other long range missiles, but it has two active ones (radar, claimed by some to be AESA, and some EO seeker) unlike most others using only one active seeker. CM is also abundant, as it needs both ECCM and IRCCM.

 

Technically the Stunner should be more expensive because of its additional electronics and newer more complex engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the advantages of 57mm AA guns like the S-60 over their ww2 counterparts, it seems like it was designed to be sort of an "ultimate" "ww2" AA gun, but as it really has no equivalents it is really hard to compare it to other AA guns like 40/70 Bofors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Toimisto said:

What are the advantages of 57mm AA guns like the S-60 over their ww2 counterparts, it seems like it was designed to be sort of an "ultimate" "ww2" AA gun, but as it really has no equivalents it is really hard to compare it to other AA guns like 40/70 Bofors.

IIRC range and effect on target if hit. Modern 57 mm SPAAG like Derivatsia are interesting because of programmable HE-frag vs drones, ATGMs, missiles/rockets, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buk-M2, a whole system.

9S510 Command vehicle

4rOloOjaGmg.jpg

 

9S18M1-3 radar

Spoiler

xAAcdKbwsGI.jpg

 

1alHdXh6MHI.jpg

 

rztnxZCkMkk.jpg

 

9S36 target illumination and missile guidance vehicle

Spoiler

5wYMEZiEiIU.jpg

 

Ll9YBLOJiT0.jpg

 

9A317 TEL

Spoiler

2OnoRRiLKaQ.jpg

 

5vUkHrn_v0k.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Maven the US Army is remaking M6 Bradleys.

 

I would assume they are using the leftover equipment from when they were converted back to regular Bradleys.

 

Quote

“As directed by the Chief of Staff of the Army, the Army is conducting a proof of principle to incorporate Man Portable Air Defense Systems back into the Armored Brigade Combat Teams by modifying two dozen Bradleys to carry Stinger Missiles in lieu of TOW Missiles,” Ashley Givens, spokeswoman for Program Executive Officer, Ground Combat Systems, told Warrior Maven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where to put that, but this is thread closer to expected role of Peresvet system.

 

 

More from him:

http://militaryrussia.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1211&t=3463&sid=0b420174565c164f1de482ff9107802d&start=200

 

Second position of Peresvet:

Unexpected use for me, i thought it was some sort of tech demonstrator. 

Quote

The purpose seems to blind satellites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×