Pantsir Updates

panzerfeist1

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
6 October 2019
Messages
206
Reaction score
96
Website
www.quora.com
https://vpk.name/news/369980_konstr...abotali_dlya_borby_s_mini-bespilotnikami.html Starting a thread for pantsir systems.

Valery Slugin - on the effectiveness of the use of the "Shell" in real combat operations, new hypersonic missiles for him and variants of military vehicles with increased ammunition

Anti-aircraft missile and cannon system (ZRPK) "Shell", created in the Design Bureau of Instrumentation named. Shipunova (part of the holdings of the High-Precision Complexes holding of the Rostec state corporation), defends the Russian air base Khmeimim and the port of Tartus in Syria, fights with American drones in Libya, ensures the safety of international forums and sports. TASS talked with the chief designer of the complex Valery Slugin about the effectiveness of the use of the "Shell" in real combat operations, new hypersonic missiles for him, as well as new versions of combat vehicles with increased ammunition.

- Recently, a new air threat has appeared in the form of small-speed small-sized drones. Can the "Shell" fight them?

- Unmanned aerial vehicles were originally one of the types of targets that the Carapace must fight against. At the time of the creation of the complex, these were quite large and high-speed targets of an airplane type. Then the drones became small-sized, with a small effective scattering area, flying at low speeds. The vulnerability of all radar systems is just work on such small low-speed targets. When they go at low speeds and heights against the background of strong reflections from the earth's surface, the target detection station becomes clogged. This is a very difficult problem, but the "Shell" copes with it.

I don’t see that other systems could fight such drones as, for example, a phantom type quadrocopter. This drone can be used as an information tool, however, on such a drone there is an opportunity to place a combat charge, and it will carry out a terrorist task. A recent example was in Saudi Arabia when a flock of small drones flew in. They caused such damage that immediately dipped the volume of oil production.

- What changes have been made to the "Shell" to deal with similar goals?

- We adapted location tools for the detection and accurate tracking of stealth targets. Our new missile does not have a homing head, only the striking part. If we already see the target of the radar station of the combat vehicle, we are guaranteed to undermine the warhead along the drone's path, and the field of fragments will cover it reliably.

I want to note that drones for the "Shell" - not the main goal. The "shell" is designed in such a way that it fights against MLRS missiles, mines, cruise missiles, tactical ballistic and hypersonic missiles.

- What missiles are currently in the arsenal of the complex?

- There are two missiles, they are fighting with a whole range of targets. One standard, another recently developed, it is hypersonic - its speed is 5 Machs and more. Speed is needed to quickly fly up to the target - this increases the rate of fire of the complex, because the firing channel is freed faster. In addition, you don’t need to put a lot of explosives into the warhead to disperse the fragments - the faster the speed of impact, the higher the efficiency of the fragments.

- Does a hypersonic missile have a homing head?

- Firstly, missiles with heads have a minus - they are, by definition, less speed. Secondly, missile heads are needed at long ranges, but absolutely not needed at the turn of the “Shell”, all the tasks here can be solved by the remote control system of the missile from the fighting vehicle.

- It was reported on the development of small-sized missiles for the "Shell". What is the status of these works now?

- So far, this is a research work that does not carry fundamental questions, unlike a hypersonic rocket, where you need to pierce a dense atmosphere in hypersound, where the steering wheels are lit. A small-sized missile does not require high speed, its main task is to be cheap. The Pantsir’s combat vehicle has a large ammunition load - 12 missiles and 1400 rounds to the cannon, so it can easily destroy about 20 targets or even more, but in the current state of air attack this may not be enough. Current missiles "Shell" hit 20-30 km, but a small-sized low-speed drone does not need to be shot down at such a range. Now we are striking such targets at a distance of 5-7 km, in the so-called near zone. Why then put so much gunpowder in a rocket, to put such powerful engines? It is economically feasible to make a small rocket.

In addition, we can supply four times more such missiles to the Shell. This will increase combat performance by increasing the number of targets that can be hit with a single ammunition
“Are these small-sized missiles installed in the standard shells of the Shell?”

- It is planned to do so and use the same management system. Small-sized missiles will have the same length as standard ones, but they are smaller in diameter - instead of one standard missile, a cartridge containing four ammunition will be inserted. On the machine itself, only intelligence will change.

- When can such missiles appear in the ammunition complex?

“I cannot answer this question yet, but the development, production and testing of new missiles will take, I think, more than three to four years.”

- Do you plan to create new cars based on the Pantsir complex?

- We plan to develop a support tool that will have even more ammunition. We have a combat vehicle, it has 12 missiles. But there is also a transport-loading vehicle, it also has ammunition, however, in order for it to become a combat vehicle, it is necessary to put it on a combat vehicle. On the other hand, it is possible to make a transport-loading vehicle transport-combat: put it in a simplified control system, target designation from the main vehicle, but enable this transport-combat vehicle to fire itself.

On such a machine, you can install twice as much ammunition - not 12, but, say, 24 missiles. If another half of the ammunition will be small-sized missiles, then there will already be 48 missiles on one side of such a launcher.

- What are the results of the use of the complex "Shell" in Syria?

- The specialists of the Aerospace Forces of the Russian Federation have an unequivocal opinion that the "Shell" has shown itself well in combat. This is actually the only complex in Russia that now has such experience of participating in hostilities.

- How many so far have drones shot down ZRPK "Shell"?

“About a hundred, maybe more.” This is taking into account Syria and other regions. In Syria itself there are two armor groups: the Russian one at the Khmeimim airbase and the group that is operated by the Syrian army.

- How difficult is it to hit artisanal drones of militants in Syria?

“I held these drones in my hands.” At first, the terrorists hung up to ten bombs on them, due to this the drones on the radar could be seen very well. Then they reduced the amount of ammunition to two and greatly reduced their speed. To learn how to beat such goals, I had to make some efforts. As I said above, the radar station of the complex was finalized, certain improvements were made to the rocket.

- The Israeli Ministry of Defense published a video of the defeat of the Syrian Shell. You studied this episode, why did they manage to destroy it?

- This "Shell" of the Syrian armed forces managed to hit eight targets, and it just did not have any rockets left. The combat crew left the car and stood nearby - waiting for a transport-loading car with new ammunition. One person from the combat crew, as seen in the video, ran - he apparently had a phone in the car. It was impossible to do so - it was necessary to immediately withdraw the fighting vehicle from the position after the ammunition was shot, immediately, then everything would be fine.

- "Shell" in the course of hostilities more often hits targets with a gun or rockets?

- Of course, more missiles. We try not to allow targets to the cannon firing zone. The nearest missile zone is about 1.5 km. If something slipped closer, then these goals are destroyed by cannons.

The gun is primarily a weapon of self-defense, for example, to protect the complex itself from the same drones. Also, a gun is a weapon of self-defense from a ground enemy. The "shell" can protect itself, for example, from an infantry fighting vehicle or a jihad mobile, and such use of guns was in Syria, it turned out to be effective

- Can rockets land targets "Shell" can hit?

- It’s written in our terms of reference, we hit the ground without question. It is difficult to bring down targets flying low above the surface of the earth in radar mode. But the “Shell” also implements a full-fledged optical guidance mode, which is insensitive to all these reflections from the surface - it doesn’t matter whether the target flies above the ground or, say, travels along the ground. Optics with a thermal imager clearly see the target on the ground. The “Shell” missile’s operating regime on ground targets is full.

- On tests, the "Shell" hit ground equipment with missiles?

- Amazed and amazes. And on the surface target, I think, the "Shell" will be able to shoot. If you put it on the shore, and even higher, then you can shoot ten kilometers on surface ships.

- At what stage of work on the next generation of the complex - “Shell-S1M”?

- Successfully tested, he confirmed all the main technical specifications. We have already proposed this project to a number of foreign customers, several potential buyers have already watched the complex.

- The Arctic "Shell" on a two-link tractor has more launchers, nine on each side, and is not armed with guns. Why?

- So ordered the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. It would be much easier for us to put a standard module.

- Now many companies are moving towards increasing the caliber of automatic guns. For example, anti-aircraft self-propelled gun "Derivation" from the Central Research Institute "Petrel" uses a 57-mm gun. Is it planned to replace the 30-mm guns with the 57-mm ones on the Shell?

- An increase in caliber is necessary first of all to increase the range of destruction, but it is not necessary for the ZRPK "Shell". Its unique high-precision guns are effective in the "dead zone" of missiles, even for small targets. As a result, we have a continuous lesion zone from the maximum on the missile to zero. Thus, the replacement of the caliber of guns on the "Shell" is not planned.
 
And if the Pantsyr do shoot at the drone and the explosion from the warhead hit buildings. I guess it's counted as friendly fire too.

But i guess it doesnt matter what Russians do i think.
 
A Ka-29 was defending against naval drones near Crimea when Russian air defence made another unfortunate mistake.


One influential Russian source claims the Helix was taken out by friendly fire, during a search for Ukrainian uncrewed surface vessels (USVs). Another said it came during a massive aerial and USV attack that killed nearly 30 Russian troops in occupied Crimea and Krasnodar.
“In Anapa, our own air defense shot down our own helicopter,” the Thirteenth Telegram channel, run by Russian soldier and milblogger Egor Guzenko, wrote.
During its sweep for Ukrainian drone boats in the Black Sea, “one of our [Pantsir air defense systems] hit the helicopter,” the Thirteenth wrote, adding that four Russian troops were killed in the incident.
Preliminary information indicated it was “due to a malfunction of the ‘friend or foe’ system,” he suggested. “I will not voice any versions, let counterintelligence and the investigation sort it out. Eternal memory to our soldiers.”

View: https://x.com/RALee85/status/1804068094182150270
 
View: https://x.com/MuxelAero/status/1803435587690430934


The TKB-1055 appears to be roughly the same diameter of the upper stage of the existing 57E6-E? I do have to wonder about the relative merits and costs of this new missile in comparison to a 70mm rocket with semi-active laser guidance?
 
The TKB-1055 appears to be roughly the same diameter of the upper stage of the existing 57E6-E? I do have to wonder about the relative merits and costs of this new missile in comparison to a 70mm rocket with semi-active laser guidance?

Command guidance will give you the cheapest available missile. All Russians needs to do is to make them plenty.

The bigger issue for Pantsyr is tbh the availability of target channels. How many it can engage simultaneously, the more the better. Command guidance give the low cost, but it depends on the sensor platform.
 
But also the least accurate.

It is accurate enough. at least until 40-60 km where radar beam pointing error start become unbearable. It's no longer the old Sa-2 where the accuracy was relatively poor due to use of conscan which vulnerable to target glint. Monopulse largely mitigated the problem.
 
It depend only on how good are your sensors in tracking both missile and target. Did you forgot, that your PATRIOT is also command-guided in all models up to PAC-3 MSE? It uses track-via-missile, yes, but the guidance is command datalink from surface.
SARH terminal though. The problem is drone targets are very small and RFCLOS doesn't always get the missile close enough to trigger the proximity fuse, as many videos have shown recently.
 
I've heard the primary issue is with the radar proximity sensors having issues with stealthy targets in particular. I am assuming no matter the issue that Russia is going to expedite the process of updating the radar (and laser for that matter) proximity fusing of their missiles. I know on some of the newest missiles they are pretty much using both laser and radar proximity fusing as well as the contact fusing.
 
I've heard the primary issue is with the radar proximity sensors having issues with stealthy targets in particular.

I've seen several videos on YouTube in the past few months taken from Ukrainian FPV drones that have been attacked by Russian SA-15 missiles where the missile has passed within a few feet of the drone and its' proximity-fuse has failed to detonate the missile's warhead.
 
Last edited:
What exactly is the point of that video? Booster sections always fall to earth, which is very serious over inhabited areas, and goes a long way towards explaining why so many SHORAD and C-RAM missile systems only use single stage missiles. Iron Dome's Tamir interceptor is a notable example. Panstir was meant for low angle, low level engagements over Cold War battlefields, not defending civilian infrastructure. Booster stages are dangerous to civilians in much the same way that AAA shells were in WWII.
 
Command guidance will give you the cheapest available missile. All Russians needs to do is to make them plenty.

The bigger issue for Pantsyr is tbh the availability of target channels. How many it can engage simultaneously, the more the better. Command guidance give the low cost, but it depends on the sensor platform.

Yeah, three target channels isn't nearly enough, especially for short range systems, & the same can be said for The Tor that only has four target channels. They need to adopt the same approach that was used in development of The Irbis-E & add a second twt in order to double the capabilities of each platform. 3 & 4 simultaneous targets? No. 6 & 8? Hell yes.

Otherwise, they might as well just buy India's 180 Kub Scouts (bad joke) & turn them over to Tetraedr in Belarus, which, for some reason, offers the best upgrades for Soviet air defense equipment at bargain basement prices, & as long as The 2K12 had/has 3 missile channels (I can't seem to find a consensus on this. Some sources say two, others say three, & then there's the cryptic "2-3"), then you've just effectively created 180 Pantsirs for practically nothing. Simply outfit the "new" Kub with Pantsir missiles & four M1910 Maxim machine guns (to deal with quadcopters) & we're good to go. I realize that this probably sounds absurd, but if you look at the capabilities of these retooled Soviet systems, you'll find that the radars on The S-125 & Osa can now prosecute targets with an rcs as low as 0.02 m2, thereby allowing them to combat most high precision weapons, & the ranges of the radars have been increased, as well. The only part that I don't understand concerns as to why The S-125 can now engage two simultaneous targets while The Osa, with the same original target-to-missile-channel ratio (1/2), hasn't been upgraded to the same standard. Tetraedr even offered a revamped version of The S-75 with three target channels, as can be seen in the attachment, below, in the early 2000s that enables the prosecution of three simultaneous targets, & there's a company in Lithuania that currently markets a similar version (& a virtually identical antenna design, which is interesting) that has a target rcs limit of 0.1 m2, or the return of a modern HARM. Absolutely hilarious.


*Trump voice* A great deal! :rolleyes:

Oops, almost forgot - would anyone happen to have an estimate/idea as to how many targets could be tracked by this revamped Shilka via the link, underneath, that apparently makes use of a 3 mm radar? I realize that this was not the original purpose of said, well, radar, but other Soviet systems from that time could actually track 6 targets, & if you look on this company's YouTube channel, there's an upgrade for The Osa that extends its radar range to 52.5 km while now also having the ability to track 32 targets with a minimum rcs of 0.02 m2, which is outstanding. Now if only it had that second target channel...

 

Attachments

  • Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade.jpg
    Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade.jpg
    95.9 KB · Views: 18
  • Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade II.jpg
    Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade II.jpg
    165.4 KB · Views: 21
  • Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade III.jpg
    Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade III.jpg
    125 KB · Views: 19
  • Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade IV.jpg
    Tetraedr offers 'Guideline' Upgrade IV.jpg
    44.4 KB · Views: 19
View: https://x.com/MuxelAero/status/1803435587690430934


The TKB-1055 appears to be roughly the same diameter of the upper stage of the existing 57E6-E? I do have to wonder about the relative merits and costs of this new missile in comparison to a 70mm rocket with semi-active laser guidance?
My question about these mini-missiles is if Russia can actually make a proximity fuze that small, then why not just put it in 57 mm shells, instead, & try it out on their 2S38 platform that is supposed to make use of programmable ammunition, but I digress.

As for missiles with semi-active laser guidance, they've been advertising this system for seemingly ever -


Perhaps think of it as Russia's version of ADATS?
 
My question about these mini-missiles is if Russia can actually make a proximity fuze that small, then why not just put it in 57 mm shells, instead, & try it out on their 2S38 platform that is supposed to make use of programmable ammunition, but I digress.
As far as I know, the 2S38 is supposed to use "smart" munitions, which I assume means proximity fuzed among others. 2S38 uses the BMP-3 hull as platform, which is in excessive demand. I don't see how Russia can produce these when everything with wheels and tracks is being pulled into APC role.

The alternative is to put the 2S38's turret on a truck, but then it makes little sense when the Pantsir is already in service.
 
As far as I know, the 2S38 is supposed to use "smart" munitions, which I assume means proximity fuzed among others. 2S38 uses the BMP-3 hull as platform, which is in excessive demand. I don't see how Russia can produce these when everything with wheels and tracks is being pulled into APC role.

The alternative is to put the 2S38's turret on a truck, but then it makes little sense when the Pantsir is already in service.
If it only made use of proximity fuzed 57 mm shells, I would think that The 2S38 would have been in service long ago. The issue is the "smart munition" that is supposed to be programmable/timed that supposedly makes use of a system that is activated via a laser, iirc, which is especially bizarre when you consider that Russia has long had an airburst system in their T-90 tanks for decades, now, that works by swapping out the standard fuze for an electronic one that is then programmed to explode at a certain distance that is obtained by a laser rangefinder, except that all of that happens prior to the shell being fired as opposed to Rheinmetall's approach that, well, programs the round via induction just before the shell leaves the barrel. Shouldn't a modern computer system be able to factor in all of that data even if the round had to be programmed via Russia's method? It just doesn't make sense to me.

As for The Pantsir, I found this chart/table for The 2A42 on tankograd & was wondering if anyone had/has the numbers for The 2A38(M), 2A7 (Shilka), & The ZSU-23-2.

1741033179161.png
 
My question about these mini-missiles is if Russia can actually make a proximity fuze that small, then why not just put it in 57 mm shells, instead, & try it out on their 2S38 platform that is supposed to make use of programmable ammunition, but I digress.
26-9747577-uas-57-mm.jpg

Left one - guided, 3rd one - multifunctional (programmable).
As of 2025, neither gun nor the shells reached production.
 
26-9747577-uas-57-mm.jpg

Left one - guided, 3rd one - multifunctional (programmable).
As of 2025, neither gun nor the shells reached production.
Yeah, I've seen plenty of the typical stories about The 2S38 "almost being ready" for years, now, so while your post isn't at all surprising, does anyone happen to know as to why these shells, etc., were never introduced? Could they simply not make them work, or was there a severe lack of money/interest in ultimately procuring the system?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom