Patriot SAM Developments

Josh_TN said:
If MSE is less expensive, it is marginally so. A quick google search displays $4 million, which is about the SM-6 cost. Even the PAC3 CRI I think is two million. IMO the reasoning would be for increased divert - the MSE has maneuver thrusters and a dual pulse motor; I suspect it can turn on a dime compared to SM-6 inside certain range/altitude bands. Having an alternate hot production line also might be attractive.
Click to expand...
Ah, had missed the increased divert detail.

And yes, having an alternate hot production line will make a big difference if some fools start shooting.
 
I suspect the U.S. is going to have a glut of older -53 and -65 radars soon with the production of LTSMDS, and it would be logical to use the older radars and extra launchers to build new batteries for foreign or domestic use.
 
MihoshiK said:
Regarding the recent shootdowns in Russian controlled airspace...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1750176805678440545
View: https://twitter.com/secretsqrl123/status/1750176805678440545
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree that it was necessarily a Patriot. It could be Patriot but it also be one of Ukraine's own S-300VM systems, or a SAMP/T system (both self-propelled). Theoretocally, it could even have been an SA-5 (S-200) but that it less likely due to size an mobility. Where the aircraft was shot down was extremely close to the border, ~45-50km from nearest border point heading NE, so it may even have been reachable by shorter range systems.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeB8x9ljGwE&t=110s


1706211376613.png

1706211445180.png

Whatever was in it set off car alarms from ~2 miles (10s) away.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22CAK3MKk1U
 
Forest Green said:
Not sure I agree that it was necessarily a Patriot. It could be Patriot but it also be one of Ukraine's own S-300VM systems, or a SAMP/T system (both self-propelled). Theoretocally, it could even have been an SA-5 (S-200) but that it less likely due to size an mobility. Where the aircraft was shot down was extremely close to the border, ~45-50km from nearest border point heading NE, so it may even have been reachable by shorter range systems.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeB8x9ljGwE&t=110s
Click to expand...
While not really relevant to the missile used, I notice the analysis tries to make a thing of the aircraft apparently heading away from Belgorod, but that could just mean it was in a circuit for landing. If the flight did originate in Iran that would be rather more significant.
 
Agreed Forest Green, the most recent shoot downs would not have necessitated MIM-104. It is claimed to be the system that was used in the 4-5 aircraft engagements in May, and as such it does seem like Patriot is the preferred ambush/SAM trap weapon. But especially in the case of the A50 and Il20, it might just be that a local S300 was moved forward to take advantage of a particularly forward and risky A50 deployment.

On the other hand, apparently an attack the previous day disabled a volume air search radar, and this caused the more forward deployment of the AEW. If that behavior was something the VKS had done previously after attacks against ground radars in Crimea, then this was perhaps a series of moves thought out in advance by the PSU to create a favorable engagement geometry. In that case, their premier Patriot ambush unit is more like to have been utilized. They likely have a very choreographed deployment method involving the bare minimum of equipment (1-2 launchers, radar, command vehicle) that do shoot and scoot operations.
 
DWG said:
While not really relevant to the missile used, I notice the analysis tries to make a thing of the aircraft apparently heading away from Belgorod, but that could just mean it was in a circuit for landing. If the flight did originate in Iran that would be rather more significant.
Click to expand...
If you watch the whole video, the plane had already landed in Belgorod after coming from Iran. It had then taken off heading NE.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeB8x9ljGwE&t=200s


1706214489692.png
 
Navy Patriot, Lockheed claiming "selling point for the Navy is that PAC-3 MSE overlaps with several missions that currently use the Raytheon-made Standard Missile-6. By supplementing the Navy’s inventory with PAC-3, that frees up the SM-6 inventory for “offensive measures” that PAC-3 can’t accomplish"

Could you interpretate this to mean that the PAC-3 MSE could act as short range backstop to the SM-6 to take out any hypersonic glide DF-17 missile leakers targeting a carrier that SM-6 had failed shoot down and the SM-2 has not that capability?

breakingdefense.com

Navy to join, analyze upcoming Lockheed Martin demo of Patriot missile, Aegis integration - Breaking Defense

A Navy spokesperson told Breaking Defense adding PAC-3 to the surface force's arsenal would not fill a capability gap, but supplement the current inventory of surface-to-air interceptors.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
Cordy said:
Navy Patriot, Lockheed claiming "selling point for the Navy is that PAC-3 MSE overlaps with several missions that currently use the Raytheon-made Standard Missile-6. By supplementing the Navy’s inventory with PAC-3, that frees up the SM-6 inventory for “offensive measures” that PAC-3 can’t accomplish"

Could you interpretate this to mean that the PAC-3 MSE could act as short range backstop to the SM-6 to take out any hypersonic glide DF-17 missile leakers targeting a carrier that SM-6 had failed shoot down and the SM-2 has not that capability?

breakingdefense.com

Navy to join, analyze upcoming Lockheed Martin demo of Patriot missile, Aegis integration - Breaking Defense

A Navy spokesperson told Breaking Defense adding PAC-3 to the surface force's arsenal would not fill a capability gap, but supplement the current inventory of surface-to-air interceptors.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...

Certainly part of it. I think there's also an interesting bit of subtext that is basically "SM-6 may not be available for TBMD/hypersonic defense because they will all be used up offensively in anti-ship strikes. PAC-3 will still be in the magazines because it can't be used offensively." So basically, magazine diversity forces a commander to hold a reserve of defensive missiles.
 
Last edited:
Cordy said:
Navy Patriot, Lockheed claiming "selling point for the Navy is that PAC-3 MSE overlaps with several missions that currently use the Raytheon-made Standard Missile-6. By supplementing the Navy’s inventory with PAC-3, that frees up the SM-6 inventory for “offensive measures” that PAC-3 can’t accomplish"

Could you interpretate this to mean that the PAC-3 MSE could act as short range backstop to the SM-6 to take out any hypersonic glide DF-17 missile leakers targeting a carrier that SM-6 had failed shoot down and the SM-2 has not that capability?
Click to expand...

I assume by "offensive measures" they mean employment as an anti shipping weapon vice being used as a SAM/ABM. IMO the USN does not really intend to use them that way in most scenarios; the whole "distributed lethality" thing seems to hinge on the long range and loiter time of Tomahawk allowing ships spread out over a thousand miles to combine fires on a central target, which excludes the much less flexible and shorter ranged SM-6. While MSE would have a shorter slant range than SM-6, as a terminal point defense system with thrusters and dual pulse it probably has superior high altitude performance in thin air compared to the SM series that relies on control surfaces. But it would be very limited in defensive footprint comparatively - defense of the firing ship or vessels immediately adjacent to it.
 
The Navy and Raytheon cannot ramp SM-6 production to numbers needed in a reasonable timeframe. The current plan is to get to 300 a year by 2028. Some of those would be the $7+ MM SM-6 1B and a fraction of the 300 would be for the Army and export. The MSE would be at nearly 2.5 times that rate by the same time. This should also bring its cost down. It is getting clear that a naval MSE presents a really good and viable path for the Navy to build up its terminal BMD capability. If you begin rolling that in, you can then also transition to the Army's Lower Tier Future Interceptor in the early 2030s. SM-6 remains as a dual purpose weapon that even the Army buys for Guam etc. Guam should actually allow both services to begin thinking about combined multi-year buys and shared inventories. That's how you solve this as long as the Navy is comfortable putting missiles into its VLS cells that aren't made by Raytheon.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't the MSE be in a much different envelope than SM-6? I do not deny the utility of having them available as an option and I hope the USN takes up the option, but they are no where near each other in terms of kinetics. The MSE is a much shorter ranged instrument, even if it has the same target set in mind.
 
aonestudio said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1754481247823253742
View: https://twitter.com/AviationWeek/status/1754481247823253742
Click to expand...
More on that:

www.twz.com

Saudi's 'Mad Minute' Of Patriot Intercepts Shines Light On Growing Challenges

Saudi Patriots downing six Houthi ballistic missiles in 48 seconds is impressive, but underscores broader air and missile defense concerns.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

Kill markings on the side of an element of a Ukrainian Patriot surface-to-air missile system. Silhouettes of two combat jets and three helicopters that were downed in a single day are highlighted, but ones reflecting ballistic and cruise missile and drone shootdowns are also plainly visible.
1707248806154.png
 
kaiserbill said:
Apart from not-so-stealthily bringing the Ukraine war into almost every thread you post in via unverified tweets, what exactly is the value of these posts?
It's looking like pure antagonism.
Click to expand...
Combat performance of SAM system, and also indirectly relevant to the glidey bombs thread too. Russia does seem to be sticking to the friendly fire story though, but 2 losses confirmed, so 2 down by friendly fire:

EDIT: These are actually new losses, so 5 in last 48 hours.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1759528172658348373
View: https://twitter.com/UKikaski/status/1759528172658348373?s=20

1708356623683.png

paralay said:
You will learn this from your own experience, after the outbreak of the war. Everything that happened before was just child's play
Click to expand...
Not being funny, but does it really sound like a friendly fire incident to you? Does that really sound like the truth?
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
Well, the airliner was supposedly shot down due to misidentification/operator error, so...
Click to expand...
That was a one-off incident with a SAM manned by under-trained separatists, which Russia denied. Russia has claimed friendly fire events for an A-50, an Il-22 and several Su-34s/35s this year and more last year. It's getting ridiculous. We should start compiling a list of these friendly fire claims, because I'm sure we're well into double digits now.

Anyway, back on topic:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1759795818247147776
View: https://twitter.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/1759795818247147776?s=20
 
Last edited:
Should I start posting ruskie sources of successful zircon strikes? See the problem here? These are twitter sources. It feels more like overt propaganda.
 
Do you see any actual problem with the claim or the pictures shown? Instead of just giving one-liner complaints on two separate threads that its "propaganda", give a reasoned explanation why the rest of the board should discount these pictures and claims. I'm sure the forum will appreciate an in-depth discussion of the matter, that's why it exists after all.

Its a debris of some kind of rocket/missile weapon, definitely. Could well be successful kills for UA Patriot, but is it Tsirkon as opposed to some other weapon that got shot down?
 
6 Tsirkons were again fired last night and I don't see any strikes on liveuamap.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1772376951845466362
View: https://x.com/UKikaski/status/1772376951845466362?s=20


liveuamap.com

4 person wounded as result of attack in Derhachi Kharkiv, Kharkiv Oblast - Ukraine Interactive map - Ukraine Latest news on live map - liveuamap.com

4 person wounded as result of attack in Derhachi. Live Universal Awareness Map Liveuamap is a leading independent global news and information site dedicated to factual reporting of a variety of important topics including conflicts, human rights issues, protests, terrorism, weapons deployment...
liveuamap.com liveuamap.com
1711451922841.png
 
CommanderRenHoek said:
Do you see any actual problem with the claim or the pictures shown? Instead of just giving one-liner complaints on two separate threads that its "propaganda", give a reasoned explanation why the rest of the board should discount these pictures and claims. I'm sure the forum will appreciate an in-depth discussion of the matter, that's why it exists after all.

Its a debris of some kind of rocket/missile weapon, definitely. Could well be successful kills for UA Patriot, but is it Tsirkon as opposed to some other weapon that got shot down?
Click to expand...
Of course I have a problem with i6. Give a detailed and reasoned reply to why twitter osint account posting might be propaganda? Come on. I make these comments because too many people here want to hear and believe everything Ukraine tells them. The burden of proof is on these twitter accounts to give enough provable data and not just a picture and statement.

We do not even know what zirkon looks like. Even Ukrainian osint accounts were using images from paralay's site and overlaid debris onto one of the images earlier. The twitter posts above essentially tell us to go on blind faith that they are right. Seems that some here are blinded by their geopolitical ideologies.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom