• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Air defense systems and methods booklets by Molnibalage

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Molnibalage make several really good booklets about the air defense systems, here I try to cover them all:

S-25
S-75 family
S-200 family
S-300 family
IADS / GCI systems of the Cold War
Nike family and BOMARC
HAWK
Patriot
Air defense at the XXI. century
S-125 vs. F-117
2K11 Krug
2K12 Kub
9K33 Osa
9K331 Tor
9K37M1 Buk
9K81 / 9K81M alias S-300V/VM
9K35 Strela-10
2K22M Tunguska
ZU-23-4 Shilka
MANPADS

New booklets:

IADS Equipment of Army Air Defense

Download directory:

Download Directory @ Mediafire
Army Air Defense sub-directory


This is the translation of the long Hungarian book what Molnibalage made in cooperation with other guys for ex. with Hpaps, he is well known for the SamSim.
This is the whole, in Hungarian:
click here

Because these chapters (booklets) just a part of a big book are some parts in the document which refer to content of the book in other chapters. Slowly the whole book will be translated, but it could take years to finish it.

Have a good reading! ;)
 
Last edited:

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,444
Reaction score
767
Re: S-300 family

Interesting read, thanks :)
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
261
Reaction score
5
Re: S-300 family

Looking forward for complete translations.

excellent work.
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Re: Soviet SAM system booklets

Because now three family booklet is finished I rather change the topic to cover the booklets in one place, rather than create separate topics. :)
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Re: Soviet SAM system booklets

Molnibalage make a new booklet about the Ground controlled interception & Integrated air defense systems (GCI / IADS) systems of the Cold war. Check the first post! ;)
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Three US system on the scope now: Nike family, BOMARC and HAWK.

Have a good reading! ;D
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
845
Reaction score
61
Thank you, Sir. Much appreciated.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,947
Reaction score
285
"The last version of the Hercules had anti-ballistic missile capability (ABM) but only against “Scud A” type or similar ballistic missiles for this ABM role got the HIPAR radar (with 10 MW peak impulse power). The “Scud” rocket had about M3 speed which meant against ICBMs the Hercules did not have any used but M3 speed ballistic missiles has only about 150 km range. In Europe also was questionable this level ABM of capability because if the troops of WPACT were so close to any of Hercules site it would meant very likely the NATO already has lost the war."

Not sure how the ability to shoot down nuclear-armed missiles is useless. Better than getting nuked.

"The BOMARC similar to Nike Ajax and Hercules never was used in real combat but it has very bad reputation because of the legends and myths which built around the Canadian developed CF-105 Arrow interceptor fighter."

That doesn't make BOMARC a bad missile.

"The ARH guidance was so inaccurate in that time missiles used the conventional warhead only for tests in war only nuclear warhead would be the only real option. (10 kiloton W-40 nuclear fission warhead)"


0:36
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvEnFyQCuz8

So inaccurate. ::) I appreciate your effort but a little more objectivity, and attention to fact, would be appreciated.

The reason for the nuclear warheads was to increase the possibility of knocking down more than one enemy bomber and because both Hercules and Bomarc were designed to hit targets at very high altitude (150k feet with Hercules and up to 100k with Bomarc B). In the thin air blast warheads are much less effective than at low altitude, which is why Hercules had a 1,100lb warhead.
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
"The last version of the Hercules had anti-ballistic missile capability (ABM) but only against “Scud A” type or similar ballistic missiles for this ABM role got the HIPAR radar (with 10 MW peak impulse power). The “Scud” rocket had about M3 speed which meant against ICBMs the Hercules did not have any used but M3 speed ballistic missiles has only about 150 km range. In Europe also was questionable this level ABM of capability because if the troops of WPACT were so close to any of Hercules site it would meant very likely the NATO already has lost the war."

Not sure how the ability to shoot down nuclear-armed missiles is useless. Better than getting nuked.
The doctrine of WPACT was relase as soon as possible all TBM what they had against potential targets. So if any case any WPAC troop would be 150 km close to any NH battery it is 99,9% sure none of WPACT unit would had any BM....
...because they have used them long time ago.

In case of nuclear war nukes very likely would be used long much earlies and not against NH batteries but rather on airbases, very division or army HQs, HV assets of divisions, etc.

Also is other problem the ABM capability means always much smaller eng. zone tham against airplanes. So the NH batterly it could defend only itself or maybe around troops at 20 km but that is all. When you will see the eng. zones of Buk-M1-2, S-300VM, S-400 you will see this. They are in other chapers and only the S-400 has been translated. (75-250 km range SAMs has ATBM eng. zones only up to about 40 km.)

(This is just a part of the book this is why do not see all the links between chapters.)

That doesn't make BOMARC a bad missile.
I worte the same...


0:36
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvEnFyQCuz8
I wrote it used only for test with conventional warhead then you post a video - do you think I do not know it ? - about a test. Well done.... :)

Never heard about the accident with the nuke warhead? In the middile of peacetime even at that readiness state nuclear warheads were stored at site. Can you guess why? In a full scale war nuke warhead would be the real option.

So inaccurate. ::) I appreciate your effort but a little more objectivity, and attention to fact, would be appreciated.
The book was reviewed by many poeple - using their sources and contacts and knowledge either - writing the book was not a one man show and it took ~3 years. It is written in the foreword which also has not been translated yet...

The reason for the nuclear warheads was to increase the possibility of knocking down more than one enemy bomber and because both Hercules and Bomarc were designed to hit targets at very high altitude (150k feet with Hercules and up to 100k with Bomarc B). In the thin air blast warheads are much less effective than at low altitude, which is why Hercules had a 1,100lb warhead.
In that time control systems were quite primitive as well the active radar on BOMARC. (We are in the '50s...) The only way to ensure the very high Pk was unsing nuke. In case Soviet bombers reach cities with Mt yield bombs it meant much worse scenario. This is why got AIR-2 Genine the F-106 besides the (junk) Falcon AAM...
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
Thank you for the response. :)
I'm personally a little more than a "read-it-over" lector for this booklets, but I can point out several things for you. ;)

sferrin said:
Not sure how the ability to shoot down nuclear-armed missiles is useless. Better than getting nuked.
That sentences about the a potential nuclear war. Hardly means anything if you can shoot down several SCUD-A (R-11)...

sferrin said:
That doesn't make BOMARC a bad missile.
It's about the given reputation, not the exact capabilites.

sferrin said:
"The ARH guidance was so inaccurate in that time missiles used the conventional warhead only for tests in war only nuclear warhead would be the only real option. (10 kiloton W-40 nuclear fission warhead)"
...
So inaccurate. ::) I appreciate your effort but a little more objectivity, and attention to fact, would be appreciated.
Because one test gone well means the whole system is gone well too? ;)
Nota bene: the BOMARC is innacurate, and this is the reason why they gave nuclear warhead to the missile (like they to in the case of the Genie or the Talos).

sferrin said:
The reason for the nuclear warheads was to increase the possibility of knocking down more than one enemy bomber and because both Hercules and Bomarc were designed to hit targets at very high altitude (150k feet with Hercules and up to 100k with Bomarc B). In the thin air blast warheads are much less effective than at low altitude, which is why Hercules had a 1,100lb warhead.
Correct me, if I'm wrong, but those missiles not use air blast warheads but fragmentation warheads.
And the soviet bombers won't supposed to fly in tight formations, nuclear bombers never do such things, so knocking out more than one bomber is hardly the reason why they choose nuclear warheads.
 

CJGibson

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,206
Reaction score
88
Wasn't a nuclear warhead the solution to fuzing at high closing speeds?

Chris
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
CJGibson said:
Wasn't a nuclear warhead the solution to fuzing at high closing speeds?

Chris
Even the Ajax could reach such high relative velocity as well as any Soviet SAM which for the nuclear warhead was not obligatory. Volkhov and S-200 had nuclear warhead even the early S-300 even from PS had SAGG guidance which guidance acc. is not distane dependent as SARH (S-200.)
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
The Patriot is finished and uploaded, ou can find it on the first post! ;)
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
New booklet: the XXI. century in the air defense. ;)
 

stealthflanker

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
261
Reaction score
5
I'm rather disagree tho with the advent of phased array seeker against towed decoy.

Despite possible increase in average emitted power and allowance of electronic beamsteering for tarcking wild maneuvering target and (maybe) more resistance to interference (jamming) plus the main advantage of AESA which is reliability. It has nothing to do with resolution. Why resolution ? This is because the towed decoy will be at some distance from the aircraft. In order to separate both target, resolution is necessary. What kind of resolution ? Range and angular.

These two dictates the following :
1.Pulse compression waveform
2.Small beamwidth

These two requires no AESA or even phased array employment. Small beamwidth is achievable by working on high frequency. But high frequency implies more cost for the seeker due to requirements for tighter tolerance in manufacturing the transmitter and antenna, Phased array make it worse by the fact thousands of elements are required if high working frequency is desired

while the pulse compression might be limited by the what is achievable for missile's limited space in processing.

The only remedy currently available today are working in both IR-ARH like Stunner or large warhead. With the latter one can argue that "classical" SAM system may work better against towed decoy by the fact it has just enough amount of warhead to still do damage.

Anyway Nice work :D looking forward for future materials on air defense.
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
I had updated the first post, there is a new booklet about the F-117 shootdown over Serbia, and a complete download directory for the files.
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
The Army air defense chapter is about 100 pages long therefore I translate step by steps. I decided I start with equipment then will come the structure and organizational and other related topics. So far the listed have been translated. You can find here the translated parts of army air defense.

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/ibpuhagkr7a8w/ENG_-_HT_Osszefoglalo

The listed equipment are done:

2K12 Kub (SA-6) family
9K33 Osa (SA-8) family
9K331/32 Tor (SA-15) family
2K12 Krug (SA-4) family
9K37M1, 9K317 (SA-11, SA-17) Buk family

Is under translation
9K81-1 Sz-300V1, 9K81 Sz-300V, (SA-12A/B Gladiator) 9K81M Sz-300VM SA-23 Giant) family

When will be finished the whole chapter will be packed into a single pdf.
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
9K81/9K81M S-300V/VM (SA-12/23) is added.
New folder is created for army air defense.
http://www.mediafire.com/folder/74s425m2dboy5/Army_air_defense

Some attachments were added concerning to Buk, S-300V and 2K12 Krug.
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
First post is updated with three new equipment.
 

Cifu

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Feb 21, 2008
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
MANPADS are added in the first post! ;)
 

molnibalage

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 8, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I forgot to add as link the History of EO missiles into the doc. (Will be added later in another chpater).
http://www.mediafire.com/file/nq6i1ja0ds9gqi4/Histoy_of_the_Electro-Optical_Guided_Missiles.pdf

I also uploaded as attachment into my MF directory.
 
Top