Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#3610773 - 07/21/12 01:18 AM Why no SARH S-75, I wonder?  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
I wonder why Soviet designers did not modified the S-75 with semi-active radar homing by replacing the command guidance antenna with illuminator antenna, or simply by using the SNR's own signal from PODSVET mode? The SARH homing head became available, on Kub and S-200, by around 1967. They could also use the more "user-friendly" missile, without those volatile and toxic fuel components. There were two missiles developed, both with ramjet motor, one is 17D:
Click to reveal..


And another is 22D:
Click to reveal..


However, none of these made it into series production. However, there was a 3M8 missile available, used with the Krug SAM, equipped with a ramjet, with comparable range and launch weight to the S-75's own missiles. They could modify it with SARH homing head from Kub missile (actually done for trials) and use it with modified S-75. These upgrades would dramatically improve its efficiency, and would allow to modify the existing systems. Even the "toxic" V-755 with SARH homing head would greatly increase Volhov's efficiency without sacrificing any of its advantages.

Last edited by Cat; 08/18/12 02:01 AM.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3611074 - 07/21/12 04:21 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
I wonder why Soviet designers did not modified the S-75 with semi-active radar homing by replacing the command guidance antenna with illuminator antenna, or simply by using the SNR's own signal from PODSVET mode? The SARH homing head became available, on Kub and S-200, by around 1967.


There were wars, where command guided SAM's achieve several kills, while SARH guided SAM's achieved only punishment...
During OAF Serbian Air Defense OOB looked like:

S-125M Neva (SA-3B)
alltogether 12 systems
250.rbr PVO; 8 system around Belgrade
450.rp PVO; 4 system around Kraljevo

2K12 KUB (SA-6A)
alltogether 20 systems
60.srp PVO; 4 system around Podgorica
230.srp PVO; 4 system around Nis
240.srp PVO; 4 system around Novi Sad
310.srp PVO; 4 system around Kraguljevac
311.srp PVO; 4 system around Pristina

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
They could also use the more "user-friendly" missile, without those volatile and toxic fuel components. There were two missiles developed, both with ramjet motor, one is 17D:


Right after the end of the Vietnam War (during 1973), the first new V-500 "more user friendly" missile arrived to Shary Sagan for testing, and five years later it was fielded around Moscow, swapping S-25 Berkut (SA-1) systems.
There was no point of investing in old systems anymore...
... just remember the fate of the S-75M4 Volhov, or the S-125M2 Neva.




Last edited by Hpasp; 07/21/12 04:26 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3611092 - 07/21/12 05:06 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

There were wars, where command guided SAM's achieve several kills, while SARH guided SAM's achieved only punishment...

I wonder if this is due to SARH own shortcomings, or due to unsophisticated target tracking radars... In 1973 Arab-Israeli war, it was quite the opposite - semi-active Kub achieved impressive success, while both S-75 and S-125 did not.

Quote:

There was no point of investing in old systems anymore...
... just remember the fate of the S-75M4 Volhov, or the S-125M2 Neva.


Both the S-75M4 and S-125M2 have appeared too late, new-generation systems were already in full-scale development, or even production. But decade earlier, in late 1960es, it could have sense - hundreds of Volhov batteries were in service, and would be for another 10-20 years. I just love the S-75's ability to provide that amazing situational awareness in wide-beam mode...

#3611114 - 07/21/12 05:50 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
I just love the S-75's ability to provide that amazing situational awareness in wide-beam mode...


That is just an unnecessary HARM magnet.

Soviet designers made completely different conclusions from Linebacker-II raid, and built it into the S-300P (SA-10) SAM.

- you need to have multiple parallel target channels. SA-10 has 6!
- two missile is enough for a kill.
- missiles should reach target faster. SA-10 missile flies Mach6!
- you need lots of ready to launch missiles. SA-10 has 48!
- you need narrow beams, with small emitted power, to make wandering weasels job impossible. SA-10 use 1 degree pencil beam, instead of the 20degree area sweep of the Dvina.
- system should automatically lock on incoming ARM missiles, to be able to engage those.
- you need missile radio proxy fuse, to be unaffected by chaff cloud. SA-10 has semi active proxy fuse.
- SAGG guidance make noise jamming meaningless.
- system should be capable of move or shoot within 5 minutes.



*corrected TWM to SAGG

Last edited by Hpasp; 07/22/12 04:04 AM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3611117 - 07/21/12 05:55 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

I wonder if this is due to SARH own shortcomings, or due to unsophisticated target tracking radars... In 1973 Arab-Israeli war, it was quite the opposite - semi-active Kub achieved impressive success, while both S-75 and S-125 did not.


During the Arab-Israeli Wars, the targets arrived low, and not jammed the SURN.
Israelis were simply afraid to use the VGPO deception mode of the ALQ pod. (if not set correctly, it would simply act as a SAM magnet)

During OAF, no planes were supposed to fly below 10kft, and most had the AN/ALE-50 that made the KUB missile completely ineffective, while put its crew in HARM's way.

Last edited by Hpasp; 07/21/12 06:07 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3611122 - 07/21/12 06:06 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
I just love the S-75's ability to provide that amazing situational awareness in wide-beam mode...


That is just an unnecessary HARM magnet.

Soviet designers made completely different conclusions from Linebacker-II raid, and built it into the S-300P (SA-10) SAM.

- you need to have multiple target channels. SA-10 has 6!
- two missile is enough for a kill.
- you need lots of ready to launch missiles. SA-10 has 48!
- you need narrow beams, with small emitted power, to make wandering weasels job impossible. SA-10 use 1 degree pencil beam, instead of the 20degree area sweep of the Dvina.
- system should automatically lock on incoming ARM missiles, to be able to engage those.
- you need missile radio proxy fuse, to be unaffected by chaff cloud. SA-10 has semi active proxy fuse.
- TWM guidance make noise jamming meaningless.
- system should be capable of move or shoot within 5 minutes.



So the SA-10 tracks its targets with individual pencil beams. But how the 30N6 receives information on where those targets are so it can acquire them? Exclusively from its 76N6/36D6 radars and IADS? Isn't it has an independent scanning capability? And how can it lock on incoming ARM's if it doesn't constantly scans the scene? Again, from 76N6/36D6?
By the way, AFAIK, since the U. S. Patriot lacks a specialized traget acquisition radar, it actually scans the sky with its MPQ-53 to acquire its targets. A sort of hi-tech "ultra wide-beam mode", isn't it?
I wish we could get that mysterious S-300 in SAM Simulator at one day... A remarkably interesting system.

P. S.: And by the way, will the AN/ALQ-50 be effective against S-300? By masking the aircraft with noise jamming and forcing the missile to engage the towed decoy itself?

Last edited by Lonewolf357; 07/21/12 06:18 PM.
#3611133 - 07/21/12 06:23 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

I wish we could get that mysterious S-300 in SAM Simulator at one day... A remarkably interesting system.


It is quite interesting, that most soviet experience from Linebacker-II is reinvented by SAMSIM users.

- do not launch more than 2 missile against a target
- we would achieve more, if we would have more missiles
- more firing channel would be nice
- engaging the incoming Shrike missile

Great experience for me!

thumbsup

PS: The 9K33 OSA (SA-8) was designed by the lessons learned from the War of Attrition, and the Pantsir-S1 (SA-22) from the lessons of OAF.

Last edited by Hpasp; 07/21/12 06:31 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3611156 - 07/21/12 06:59 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

So the SA-10 tracks its targets with individual pencil beams.

Most Phase modulated sets does it.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

But how the 30N6 receives information on where those targets are so it can acquire them? Exclusively from its 76N6/36D6 radars and IADS?


Correct.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

Isn't it has an independent scanning capability?


It has extremely limited independent scanning capability.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

And how can it lock on incoming ARM's if it doesn't constantly scans the scene? Again, from 76N6/36D6?


It can lock it up, if launched from a target, already tracked.
In theory no other target could sense the RPN emission.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

By the way, AFAIK, since the U. S. Patriot lacks a specialized traget acquisition radar, it actually scans the sky with its MPQ-53 to acquire its targets. A sort of hi-tech "ultra wide-beam mode", isn't it?


Patriot is more different compared to the S-300, than most would recognize.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

I wish we could get that mysterious S-300 in SAM Simulator at one day... A remarkably interesting system.


I hope so also, for the future.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

P. S.: And by the way, will the AN/ALQ-50 be effective against S-300? By masking the aircraft with noise jamming and forcing the missile to engage the towed decoy itself?


Never tried in reality, but "masking the aircraft with noise jamming" is suicidal against any Track Via Missile SAM.

Last edited by Hpasp; 07/22/12 01:00 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3615446 - 07/28/12 04:21 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

P. S.: And by the way, will the AN/ALQ-50 be effective against S-300? By masking the aircraft with noise jamming and forcing the missile to engage the towed decoy itself?


Never tried in reality, but "masking the aircraft with noise jamming" is suicidal against any Track Via Missile SAM.


Thanks for all the info that you share but why is this so? The AN/ALE-50 (BTW, not ALQ-50) signal source is outside the carrying aircraft (afterall it's towed) so if this jammer is used as a tracking point for the missile (like happens with other modern anti-air missiles) wouldn't the missile follow the towed decoy instead the actual aircraft?

#3615498 - 07/28/12 05:51 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357

P. S.: And by the way, will the AN/ALQ-50 be effective against S-300? By masking the aircraft with noise jamming and forcing the missile to engage the towed decoy itself?


Never tried in reality, but "masking the aircraft with noise jamming" is suicidal against any Track Via Missile SAM.


Thanks for all the info that you share but why is this so? The AN/ALE-50 (BTW, not ALQ-50) signal source is outside the carrying aircraft (afterall it's towed) so if this jammer is used as a tracking point for the missile (like happens with other modern anti-air missiles) wouldn't the missile follow the towed decoy instead the actual aircraft?


Please do not mix the passive towed decoy Raytheon AN/ALE-50 with the active towed deception jammer BAE Systems AN/ALE-55!

During OAF, the AN/ALE-50 faced the Serbian SAM threats on-board of B-1B, and F-16C planes.

Last edited by Hpasp; 07/28/12 06:00 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3615629 - 07/28/12 11:35 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
I don't think the -50 is a passive system, Hpasp, but I could be mistaken - it is linked to the aircraft with a data cable/fiberoptic, depending on version, which suggests that the ECM generator is onboard the plane, and the emitter(s) on the decoy.

Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Please do not mix the passive towed decoy Raytheon AN/ALE-50 with the active towed deception jammer BAE Systems AN/ALE-55!

During OAF, the AN/ALE-50 faced the Serbian SAM threats on-board of B-1B, and F-16C planes.


--
44th VFW
#3616809 - 07/30/12 08:47 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
I don't think the -50 is a passive system, Hpasp, but I could be mistaken - it is linked to the aircraft with a data cable/fiberoptic, depending on version, which suggests that the ECM generator is onboard the plane, and the emitter(s) on the decoy.

Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Please do not mix the passive towed decoy Raytheon AN/ALE-50 with the active towed deception jammer BAE Systems AN/ALE-55!

During OAF, the AN/ALE-50 faced the Serbian SAM threats on-board of B-1B, and F-16C planes.



Yes, I think that GrayGhost is correct! From what I gather the major diference between both systems (AN/ALE-50 and AN/ALE-55) is that the AN/ALE-50 is connected to the aircraft via a "data cable" while the AN/ALE-55 is connected to the aircraft via a fiberoptic cable.

According to this website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALE-50_Towed_Decoy_System

The AN/ALE-50 is integrated with onboard active ECM systems such as the ALQ-184.

The AN/ALE-55 seems to be an upgraded AN/ALE-50 which is connected to the aircraft via fiberoptics (and with all advantages that this brings).


This website (from Jane's) seems to indicate that the AN/ALE-50 has both a passive and active countermeasure system:
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes...ted-States.html


Finally I do remember that in Jane's F/A-18 which is still IMO one of the most realistic modern combat sims ever made specially regarding avionics that the AN/ALE-50 works as an ACTIVE countermeasure system.

#3617225 - 07/31/12 12:46 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
I don't think the -50 is a passive system, Hpasp, but I could be mistaken - it is linked to the aircraft with a data cable/fiberoptic, depending on version, which suggests that the ECM generator is onboard the plane, and the emitter(s) on the decoy.

Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Please do not mix the passive towed decoy Raytheon AN/ALE-50 with the active towed deception jammer BAE Systems AN/ALE-55!

During OAF, the AN/ALE-50 faced the Serbian SAM threats on-board of B-1B, and F-16C planes.



Yes, I think that GrayGhost is correct! From what I gather the major diference between both systems (AN/ALE-50 and AN/ALE-55) is that the AN/ALE-50 is connected to the aircraft via a "data cable" while the AN/ALE-55 is connected to the aircraft via a fiberoptic cable.

According to this website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALE-50_Towed_Decoy_System

The AN/ALE-50 is integrated with onboard active ECM systems such as the ALQ-184.

The AN/ALE-55 seems to be an upgraded AN/ALE-50 which is connected to the aircraft via fiberoptics (and with all advantages that this brings).


This website (from Jane's) seems to indicate that the AN/ALE-50 has both a passive and active countermeasure system:
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes...ted-States.html


Finally I do remember that in Jane's F/A-18 which is still IMO one of the most realistic modern combat sims ever made specially regarding avionics that the AN/ALE-50 works as an ACTIVE countermeasure system.


If you excuse me, I used to handle Wikipedia as a source, with a grain of salt...
biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin

(Just read what Wiki say about the SAM systems, depicted in the sim.)



From the AN/ALE-50 (Raytheon) sales material:
The ALE-50 towed decoy acts as a preferential target that lures enemy missiles away by providing a much larger radar
cross section than the aircraft. The protection it provides to aircraft and aircrews makes the ALE-50 one of the most
important end-game electronic countermeasures available today.




From the AN/ALE-55 (BAE Systems) sales material:

Today’s RF threat is growing, not only in numbers, but also in capability. For mission success across a range of hostile
environments, self-protection is essential for all aircraft, from fighters to bombers to transports. Robust RF
self-protection is available from BAE Systems’ AN/ALE-55 fiber-optic towed decoy (FOTD).
Unlike traditional decoys, such as straight-through repeaters, the fiber-optic towed decoy is coherent and
works synergistically with an aircraft’s onboard electronic warfare (EW) equipment to defeat RF threats. It protects
aircraft throughout the threat envelope, delivering three layers of defense.

1. Suppression.
During the tracking radar’s acquisition phase, the aircraft’s EW system uses the FOTD to emit
jamming techniques that suppress the radar’s ability to acquire and track the target.

2. Deception.
If the target tracking radar achieves successful target track in spite of suppression
techniques, deception is the next layer of response. Once the radar emissions are analyzed, the system
determines optimum jamming techniques to break aircraft track. If more than one radar threat is
detected, the system can respond with simultaneous transmission of multiple jamming techniques.

3. Seduction is the third layer of protection.
If an RF missile is launched, the FOTD can break the missile’s
track of the aircraft or lure the missile away from the target aircraft by itself becoming the target.


Last edited by Hpasp; 07/31/12 02:41 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3618250 - 08/01/12 06:36 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

If you excuse me, I used to handle Wikipedia as a source, with a grain of salt...
biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin


Err, I also and usually take the Wikipedia info with a "grain of salt" BUT please note that one of my sources is Jane's. wink

#3618260 - 08/01/12 06:48 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

If you excuse me, I used to handle Wikipedia as a source, with a grain of salt...
biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin


Err, I also and usually take the Wikipedia info with a "grain of salt" BUT please note that one of my sources is Jane's. wink


Please note, that Jane's regularly use Mr Carlo Kopp as a source...
... my sources are actual SAM operation & technical manuals, and the Officers who were there and done that...
thumbsup

Last edited by Hpasp; 08/01/12 07:01 PM.

Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3618343 - 08/01/12 08:49 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

If you excuse me, I used to handle Wikipedia as a source, with a grain of salt...
biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin


Err, I also and usually take the Wikipedia info with a "grain of salt" BUT please note that one of my sources is Jane's. wink


are u serious? winkngrin im dying again from repeatly laughing rofl

im not sure hpasp use (only) jane and carlo kopp sources!!!

so i think some guy's need to see this picture again popcorn



col. dani zoltan is left side at picture
but who is right side at picture also holding a piece of the downed F-117A. thumbsup

Last edited by milang; 08/01/12 08:56 PM.
#3618382 - 08/01/12 09:36 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: farokh]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: milang
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

If you excuse me, I used to handle Wikipedia as a source, with a grain of salt...
biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin biggrin


Err, I also and usually take the Wikipedia info with a "grain of salt" BUT please note that one of my sources is Jane's. wink


are u serious? winkngrin im dying again from repeatly laughing rofl



And you must be drunk, right? rolleyes

#3618689 - 08/02/12 11:02 AM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 916
I-RAN
Originally Posted By: ricnunes

And you must be drunk, right? rolleyes



no blush im fine....tnQ thumbsup

Last edited by milang; 08/02/12 11:06 AM.
#3619699 - 08/03/12 07:27 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: GrayGhost]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
Hpasp seems to be right on this one, the -50 seems to be some sort of lens or other type of reflector, creating a larger RCS than the aircraft and thus seducing the missile away, or at least moving the reflection centroid behind the aircraft.


Thanks!

thumbsup



Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
#3619992 - 08/04/12 07:46 AM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: Hpasp
Originally Posted By: GrayGhost
Hpasp seems to be right on this one, the -50 seems to be some sort of lens or other type of reflector, creating a larger RCS than the aircraft and thus seducing the missile away, or at least moving the reflection centroid behind the aircraft.


Thanks!

thumbsup




Then why is all that fuss about the system? Towed Luneburg lens is known since 1960es...

Last edited by Lonewolf357; 08/04/12 07:47 AM.
#3620074 - 08/04/12 01:56 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
GrayGhost Offline
Hotshot
GrayGhost  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,892
Could be a matter of mounting on a maneuverable aircraft.

Originally Posted By: Lonewolf357
Then why is all that fuss about the system? Towed Luneburg lens is known since 1960es...


--
44th VFW
#3629228 - 08/19/12 04:46 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,010
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,010

#3631382 - 08/23/12 01:10 PM Re: Why no SARH S-75, I wonder? [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Senior Member
Hpasp  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe


Great find!

It compares the V-759 (Guideline Mod.5) missile with the 5V55RD (Grumble Mod.2).


Hpasp
Free SAM Simulator, "Realistic to the Switch"

(U-2 over Sverdlovsk, B-52's over Hanoi, F-4 Phantoms over the Sinai, F-16's and the F-117A Stealth bomber over the Balkans.)
http://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

Book from the author - Soviet Nuclear Weapons in Hungary 1961-1991
https://sites.google.com/view/nuclear-weapons-in-hungary/

thumbsup
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0