Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 15 1 2 3 4 5 14 15
#3707093 - 12/27/12 12:21 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) ***** [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: piston79
Click to reveal..



Here on polish:
http://infowsparcie.net/wria/o_autorze/elab_rakiet.html

Here some memories about using the nuke-tipped missiles:
http://www.kap-yar.ru/index.php?pg=443

Quote:
Operation "SAM-215"
As noted, during the second half of the 50's, in connection with the development of air defense with nuclear warheads are interested for the nuclear explosion at an altitude of alleged use of missiles of these complexes (10 km ≤ N ≤ 40 km).
First in a series of explosions had a blast, conducted "Operation SAM-215."
It was produced on 1/19/57 at noon on rocket range MO Kapustin Yar.
Was selected for the explosion charge with energy 10 kt successfully tested earlier.
The charge was set to anti-aircraft guided missile SAM-215, on behalf of which the operation is called. Automatic docking was done to undermine the charge and missile control systems, as well as a series of pre-launch of a missile with the models of the charge.
The point of impact was a transponder beacon, thrown off before putting on a parachute airplane security.
Undermining the nuclear missiles was planned to make a charge at a time when the transponder beacon parachuted into a height of 10.4 km. To obtain direct information on the effectiveness of the harmful effect of a nuclear explosion in the area of ​​the aiming point before the start of combat missiles aimed two radio-controlled target aircraft in such a way that at the time of the explosion, they were away at a distance of about 500 m and 1000 m as aircraft targets were equipped with radio control system and means of recording combat aircraft IL-28.
For registration of parameters affecting the effects of nuclear explosions at close range was created so-called TARGET 16 special conditions of cylindrical containers, equipped with measuring devices. Containers were dropped by parachute advance support aircraft so that the explosion of which 12 were at approximately the height of the explosion at various distances. The remaining 4 konteynepa housed at other altitudes.
The containers were installed devices that record the pressure in the passing shock wave (pressure recorders), penetrating radiation (gamma-ray detectors and neutron flux), the pulse light (calorimetry).
The actual position of containers at the time of the explosion of the nuclear charge and the position of the point of explosion was determined by the results of a ground-based photography in several ways, namely by direct resection. Aerial cameras used for photography. There was also a set of ground stations deployed to measure the shock wave light (spectrum, integrated fluxes, timing), and penetrating radiation. Near ground zero and several other points were constructed of wooden models of buildings.
To measure the power of the explosion using the same set of procedures as for conventional air explosions. Overall, the experience was a success: its main tasks to execute.
Energy charge in the experiment was 10 kilotons. Height of the explosion point, determined by a straight serifs, to 10.37 km.
"Target" of the situation in the most appropriate to a calculation: both aircraft "IL-28" and most of the containers at the time of the explosion were at given points to 0.1 km, and only the first row of containers was located twice as far from the point of explosion than planned. This situation prevented the measurement of effects of explosion, where they would be the most powerful.

The explosion of both aircraft were shot down by the target: one of them, who walked away from the center of the explosion, burst into flames, the second, who was walking towards virtually shock wave broke off the wing.Measuring equipment on each of the planes worked fine, and the results of measurements by telemetry failed to transmit to the ground. These results are further used to determine the criteria and the affected areas of aircraft in nuclear explosions.
Ground-based observatories is not a single case of a significant effect of an explosion on the wooden structures and glazing.


Tough one.
Thanks for the find and translation.

Last edited by Hpasp; 12/27/12 12:22 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
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3722310 - 01/21/13 08:44 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
A remark about S-75M3...

The "Podgotovka" switch (3-6-n missiles) shouldn't lit off when missiles are overheating. The switch only alerts the missile preparation officer for how many of them should be wormed-up and it is his choice which of them he must turn on preparation mode...

#3724566 - 01/25/13 08:42 AM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: piston79
A remark about S-75M3...

The "Podgotovka" switch (3-6-n missiles) shouldn't lit off when missiles are overheating. The switch only alerts the missile preparation officer for how many of them should be wormed-up and it is his choice which of them he must turn on preparation mode...



Correct, it is just a shortcut in the simulator, as we do not have the OP instrument implemented.
I consider adding one other officer's job would make the SAMSim user hopelessly overload.



Last edited by Hpasp; 01/25/13 08:47 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
#3725972 - 01/27/13 05:14 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
Hi guys... I need some reliable info about when China starts to build their own SA-2 (HQ-2?)?

#3726469 - 01/28/13 06:24 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Lonewolf357 Offline
Member
Lonewolf357  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 203
Originally Posted By: piston79
Hi guys... I need some reliable info about when China starts to build their own SA-2 (HQ-2?)?


That's what Jane's says:

"The China National Precision Machinery Import and Export Corporation (CPMIEC) Hongqi-2 (HQ-2, Red Flag-2) was the
result of a redesign of the HQ-1 system. The basic HQ-1 system was purchased from the then Soviet Union in the late
1950s, and was known as the System-75 Dvina.
On arrival in Chinathe system was renamed HQ-1. Shortly after arrival of the system and system components, China
and the USSR diplomatically fell out. Chinawas therefore forced to reproduce spare parts for its operational systems.
Furthermore, copying and reverse engineering resulted in a modified HQ-1 incorporating anti-jamming techniques this
system became known as the HQ-2.
In April 1965, co-ordination of the system development was assigned to the No 2 RA of the 7th Ministry of Machine
Building. An accelerated development programme then followed which resulted in the weapon passing its type
certification by the end of 1966. In July 1967, the complete system received its design certificate approval for
production. It was then used operationally to shoot down a Lockheed U-2 in September 1967.
The HQ-2 saw combat service with the People's Liberation Army Air Force in the late 1960s against Taiwanese-flown
U-2s; the missiles claimed five U-2s, one in each of the years 1967, 1968 and 1970 and two in 1969."

#3726485 - 01/28/13 06:51 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Lonewolf357]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
Thanks Lonewolf!!!

I was wondering why China didn't supply NVA with those...?

#3727088 - 01/29/13 04:53 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: piston79
Thanks Lonewolf!!!

I was wondering why China didn't supply NVA with those...?


China received SA-75 Dvina five van (SA-2A) with V-750 1D (Guideline mod.0)
in 1958-3+1*, and 1959-2 pieces (* means training system) only.

The Chinese 1D missile had severe limitations compared to the 11D supplied to Vietnam by the Soviets.


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
#3727170 - 01/29/13 06:29 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

China received SA-75 Dvina five van (SA-2A) with V-750 1D (Guideline mod.0)
in 1958-3+1*, and 1959-2 pieces (* means training system) only.
The Chinese 1D missile had severe limitations compared to the 11D supplied to Vietnam by the Soviets.


From 1958 to 1973 is a quite long time.... rolleyes

#3727207 - 01/29/13 07:06 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: piston79
Originally Posted By: Hpasp

China received SA-75 Dvina five van (SA-2A) with V-750 1D (Guideline mod.0)
in 1958-3+1*, and 1959-2 pieces (* means training system) only.
The Chinese 1D missile had severe limitations compared to the 11D supplied to Vietnam by the Soviets.


From 1958 to 1973 is a quite long time.... rolleyes


I know SAM systems that was developed by technically advanced nations on the same time-frame...

The US MIM-46 Mauler was developed between 1956-1965, used up 200 million US, and failed.


In 1960, the third PVO-SV SAM system development "Ellipse" started (after the KRUG - circle, KUB - square).


It took more than 11 years for the Soviet Union, to create a real system from this plan...

Last edited by Hpasp; 01/29/13 07:08 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
#3727212 - 01/29/13 07:14 PM China developed? [Re: Hpasp]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
You believe that chinese didn't evolve stepping on the already developed system? rolleyes

#3728089 - 01/31/13 08:07 AM Re: China developed? [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Alien_MasterMynd Offline
Member
Alien_MasterMynd  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 614
Czech Republic
Ukrainian upgrade S-75M3A

Click here

#3765190 - 04/09/13 05:42 PM Re: China developed? [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 914
farokh Offline
farokh
farokh  Offline
farokh
Member

Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 914
I-RAN
here is the question

i cant fire on 90 degrres on samsim with sa-2 !
this video is really for sa-2 ?

Last edited by farokh; 04/09/13 05:42 PM.
#3765492 - 04/10/13 04:18 AM Re: China developed? [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 245
Mdore Offline
Member
Mdore  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 245
The camera is behind the missile, not to the side. It makes the angle look steeper than it really is.

#3766041 - 04/11/13 11:08 AM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: piston79
Originally Posted By: milo11
Yes, indeed the "flashing car index" stuff after launch is something that appears in the s-75 advanced manual. If you look at the aar, youll notice that i launch with snr turned off. Ill activate it during the missiles last seconds of flight. This aproach of course has its disadvantages, you can read about them in the manual. This is imo, the main advantage that the s-75 has over the s-125, being able to launch with having snr on (i dont know much about neva, maybe you can do that with it aswell).


I am a bit confused about this tactic and particulary the ANT/EKV switch.... As on "EKV" mode the transmitter is sending the energy not true antena, but to a "absorbing device", thus allows "going in air" to be achieved in just seconds (which is the mainstay in this tactic). Otherwise, switching "Peredatchik" ON is a proccess which takes a bit longer, especially for the first time (because electric lamps are taking some time to warm-up), and that\s why I am confused, as ANT/EKV seems better accomodated to such actions. In other way ANT/EKV is cutting the receiver (in Sam Simulator), which is not logical to me...(I believe it should cut only the transmition, not receiver)... Also, when going to EKV, the missile is lost immideatly (still in some modes RPK is transmitting, so no reason for selfdestruction... Of course, this is strictly my opinion (I am not a profecional), and it is about SA-2...

Originally Posted By: milo11

I think that a thread about SAM tactics would be great, what do you guys think?


It was discussed before, but as all we are non-military, it would be though one...

P.S. I believe this post could be moved to a relevant topic if found neccesary....


The ANT/EKV switch is routing all microwave energy (inbound and outbound) to the EKV antenna (mounted above the cabin doors) instead of the P11V/P12V wide-beam antenna.
As you always receive your missile (beacon) positions by the P11V/P12V antennas, switching EKV means loosing all missiles in flight.

Switching high voltage off, means no transmission, but the missile beacon signals still received on the P11V/P12V.
Other disadvantage of switching high voltage too often, is that the PV technician will eventually kill you.
(the high voltage switches will burn in, and their swap was a hellish work)

biggrin

At the Neva, it is more straight forward...
... during target tracking the UV10 antenna is illuminating the target, and the UV11 pair (F1/F2) is receiving both missile and target signals.
You always receive you missile (beacon) positions by the UV11 antenna pair.
If you go back to target acquisition, than only the UV10 is used for transmit and receive, so missiles in flight are lost, as UV11 is switched off.




Last edited by Hpasp; 04/11/13 11:19 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
#3766086 - 04/11/13 12:30 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
milo11 Offline
Junior Member
milo11  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Lol. pls can u add on next SAMSIM version the following sentence for AARs, after extensive High voltage switch abuse?

Sam Operator knocked out by PV technician.

How much switching is considered "too often"?. Using the "flashing" tactic, you only have to switch it number of planes engaged + 1 times adn with some spacing between switching.

Last edited by milo11; 04/11/13 12:32 PM.
#3766241 - 04/11/13 05:05 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: milo11]  
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hpasp Offline
Hpasp  Offline

Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,665
Hungary, Europe
Originally Posted By: milo11
Lol. pls can u add on next SAMSIM version the following sentence for AARs, after extensive High voltage switch abuse?

Sam Operator knocked out by PV technician.

How much switching is considered "too often"?. Using the "flashing" tactic, you only have to switch it number of planes engaged + 1 times adn with some spacing between switching.


In peacetime, it was the reality...
... in wartime, the situation changed dramatically.

You, the Fire Control Officer, sitting in the relative safety of the UV cabin (2) had to shout "JUMP" to the PV technician sitting inside of the PV cabin (7), in case you expected a HARM hit...
grunt



Last edited by Hpasp; 04/11/13 05:09 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
#3775312 - 04/30/13 12:04 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
milo11 Offline
Junior Member
milo11  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Does any of you have more info about this incident?

"The Su-27 has seen limited action since it first entered service. These aircraft were used by the Russian Air Force during the 19921993 war in Abkhazia against Georgian forces. One fighter was reported shot down by an S-75 Dvina on 19 March 1993."

Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Su-27_Flanker

#3775887 - 05/01/13 06:33 AM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: milo11]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
Originally Posted By: milo11

"The Su-27 has seen limited action since it first entered service. These aircraft were used by the Russian Air Force during the 19921993 war in Abkhazia against Georgian forces. One fighter was reported shot down by an S-75 Dvina on 19 March 1993."


All I could find was that this is not 100% SA-2 work, but maybe a IR missile. SU-27 was intercepting a pair of SU-25, last report from the pilot is that he cannot find the target and start gaining altitude (last reported one - 800 meters).

Su-27 was shot down near Suhumi(about 8 km from it - vilage Odishi/Shroma?). If we found some info about SA-2 positions in this area, we could found is it true or not... Also, pictures from the wreckage...

And "Dvina" was out of service at this time, should be "Volkhov"

Last edited by piston79; 05/01/13 06:35 AM.
#3778101 - 05/06/13 10:54 AM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: piston79]  
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
piston79 Offline
Member
piston79  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,831
OFFTOPIC:

Originally Posted By: milo11

"The Su-27 has seen limited action since it first entered service. These aircraft were used by the Russian Air Force during the 19921993 war in Abkhazia against Georgian forces. One fighter was reported shot down by an S-75 Dvina on 19 March 1993."


pictures from the wreckage...:



It became highly unlikely this one to be a victim of SA-2 (E/F)..

1. No reports from the pilot for any illuminations from SNR...
2. In georgian forum found info that at this moment no SA-2 where available (all withdrawn by russians), also no case of using it against other targets...

Anyway, the wreckage was found at this area: ( 43.076999/ 41.019375)

The highest ground is at ~570 meters, while the pilot reports 800 meters and gaining altitude... If he didn't mistaken the altitude, he could be shot down by IR- missile.

#3778256 - 05/06/13 05:03 PM Re: S-75M3 Volhov (SA-2E Guideline) [Re: Cat]  
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
milo11 Offline
Junior Member
milo11  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 28
Thx a lot for the info , piston79 thumbsup

Page 3 of 15 1 2 3 4 5 14 15

Moderated by  Cat, Hpasp, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

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


Recent Topics
The pancake chef...
by Mr_Blastman. 05/31/20 06:33 PM
DOSBox/MS-DOS6
by MarkG. 05/31/20 02:14 PM
Question for gun lovers
by Blade_RJ. 05/30/20 02:54 PM
The Last British Destroyer Commander of WWII
by F4UDash4. 05/30/20 12:43 PM
I'm down to one game.....
by PanzerMeyer. 05/29/20 02:19 PM
Would you purchase a flight sim...
by MarkG. 05/28/20 04:33 PM
GAO and the F-35
by Nixer. 05/28/20 02:32 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0