New version of BUK

Pilot answered my question on his blog:

Поляна-Д4М1, Оса-АКМ, Бук-М1-2, Тор-М1

So it was not Buk-M2 😉

What an amount of slang there! 😮

Are you sure they’re talking about Buk-M2 or Buk-M1/Buk-M1-2

Those tests seems to be the same as for this footage:

http://pilot.strizhi.info/2007/09/24/4729

You see Buk-M1 (no way to say M1-2) and Tor-M1 supported by upgraded Polyana-4DM.

Pilot said this (this was the clearest post of such ”chat”)

Iglas shot precisely on the Falanga, on them also shot Strela-10 and Tunguska by guns. Targets flew to the right and to the left at the angles of 90-110 degrees. Saman launched for the Buk and Tor, flew towards them, from 10-20 degrees to the left even 30-35. For the Buk also were another drone (Peine a convered Kub) approximately on the course. Buk anywhere did not fall the characteristics of targets they must be….

Well that’s sort of translation.

It seems like they used different kinds of drones:

Falanga for Igla, Strela-10 and Tunguska (no version of such systems was mentioned). They performed OK

Saman and Peine for Buk and Tor. Buk performed very badly.

What is the source of this info Pesho?, I would like to track it down and research more on this topic, thanks!

Well i used to visit forum for russian army personal but right now it is closed. I found almost the same info here: http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=48621&page=2
It’s in Russian and there is lot of slang words. Look for Pilot’s posts. Sorry for the late response, but i was on a long trip.

The seld-defence EW equipment of the TU cannot compare with what was used in the excercises. Mi-8SMV, Mi-8MTPI, Mi-8PPA, An-12PP and Su-24MP were all deployed at around 30 km from the missile batteries. And the targets were not easy either. Slow “SAMAN-M1” with 250m/s speed, RCS of 0.08m2 and fast RM 5V27 target with speed ~800m/s and RCS of 0.3m2. Now that is tough challenge for any SAM.

What is the source of this info Pesho?, I would like to track it down and research more on this topic, thanks!

An RCS of 0.008m2 is much lower then a cruise missile which are rated at 0.1m2.

But if these varied and powerful jammers can jam a BUK-M2 then how will BUK-M3 resolve this ?

Doesnt BUK have a reputation of operating in jamming environment where in georgia BUK-M1 shot a Tu-22M3 Reco aircraft which even had jammers deployed ?

The seld-defence EW equipment of the TU cannot compare with what was used in the excercises. Mi-8SMV, Mi-8MTPI, Mi-8PPA, An-12PP and Su-24MP were all deployed at around 30 km from the missile batteries. And the targets were not easy either. Slow “SAMAN-M1” with 250m/s speed, RCS of 0.08m2 and fast RM 5V27 target with speed ~800m/s and RCS of 0.3m2. Now that is tough challenge for any SAM.

I’m sure the russian army want badly this upgrade as in 2007 the Buk-M2 performed rather poorly in excercises. The system was “blinded” from EW aircraft and when was able to fire missed all it’s targets.

Which means the EW aircraft did its job 😀

Doesnt BUK have a reputation of operating in jamming environment where in georgia BUK-M1 shot a Tu-22M3 Reco aircraft which even had jammers deployed ?

I’m sure the russian army want badly this upgrade as in 2007 the Buk-M2 performed rather poorly in excercises. The system was “blinded” from EW aircraft and when was able to fire missed all it’s targets.

http://www.pvo.su/book/cast/k_pvo_annual2008_en.htm

Almaz-Antey has also been working to modernize its Buk (SA-11/SA-17) series of its air defense systems. The introduction to the report by the group’s director-general, Vladislav Menshikov, mentions R&D work on the project to modernize the Buk-M2E system (for a foreign customer) and to upgrade the Buk-M2 (SA-17) systems to the Buk-M3 level (for Russia’s own armed forces). The report also mentions that the company has completed the installation and tuning of the 9S18M1-3 radar for Buk-M3. It has also completed comprehensive preliminary trials of the Buk-M1-2A system equipped with the 9M317A active radar homing seeker . That latter system is now awaiting state trials. The commander of the Army Air Defense, Nikolay Frolov, said in September 2007 that first deliveries of Buk-M3 to the Russian Armed Forces will be made in 2009. In addition, the 2006 annual report of the NPP Dolgoprodnenskiy company (which is part of the Almaz-Antey group) mentioned plans to complete the development of three new versions of missiles for the Buk SAM systems – 9M317A, 9M317M, and 9M317ME – by 2009. It also said the company had begun developing the 9M317MAE missile for export markets.

Those figures would mean a 30% increase in kinetic performance. I say it could be possible if they reduced the volume of the electronics (which should be within the Russian capabilities by now) and enlarge the motor, maybe also reduce the size of the warhead (although that wouldn’t be Russian), and/or optimize the launch profile.

yes a combination of new High Energy Solid Fuel , Reduction of Weight/Volume on electronics and/or addition of extra 1st stage solid fuel booster should make that possible , although an extra booster would come with some penalty on higher minimum altitude of engagement ( which looking at ~ 15 m figure makes me feel there is no 1st stage solid fuel booster )

But the most interesting figures are its claim of its ability to intercept target corresponding to~ 3km per sec or ~ M 9 which should make it capable of intercepting ~ 1000 – 1500 km range IRBM.

Those figures would mean a 30% increase in kinetic performance. I say it could be possible if they reduced the volume of the electronics (which should be within the Russian capabilities by now) and enlarge the motor, maybe also reduce the size of the warhead (although that wouldn’t be Russian), and/or optimize the launch profile.

Distiller , there are some stastics of BUK-M3 floating

http://www.arms-expo.ru/site.xp/055057052124057052049.html

range 2.5-70 km
target velocity up to 3000 m/sec
alt 0.015 – 35 km
simmult attack 36 targets

http://www.kommersant.com/p-11411/r_500/missile_defense/

“The RF Armed Forces will get first Buk-M3s in 2009. It was designed by using the present-day element base and could be regarded a totally new system, Frolov said”

So are those figures correct , as they seem just too radical

Old story. The Russians have designed their latest toy in a way that they are platform independant. Doesn’t matter if you mount it on a Peterbuilt, a MAN, a Kamaz, a railroad car, or – as in these pictures – a MZKT truck.

@ Austin: The Russians wanted to introduce it late this year, basically right now. No confirmation that it actually happened, though, and Almaz-Antey seems to concentrate on point-defence for the export market currently.

Any update on BUK-M3 ? Have these been inducted in service and any performance figures to go by ?

The wheeled version is still considered to be a Buk-M2E, but given the drastic degree of the system modernisation, I’d expect to see the production model getting its own designation. For the moment, system mockup vehicles are being built for trials early next year. They will then be rebuilt as functioning prototypes. The design team are retaining major hardware items such as the phased-array antennas, but most of the electronic subsystems are being replaced with more modern hardware.

The current issue of Jane’s Missiles & Rockets (from which the photographs that started this thread seem to have been taken) contains some performance figures for the revised system, but I haven’t had the time to check these against the equivalent values for the original.

So what version is this technically? The M-3?

Buk-M2E, improvements relate to elctronic sub-systems.

I have seen no reference to a tracked version, only the wheeled version that will apparently include a number of improvements.

So what version is this technically? The M-3?

I think they will be interested in a tracked version too? Or is this simply a wheeled version of the latest Russian one? Buk-M1-2 or Buk-M3?

I have seen no reference to a tracked version, only the wheeled version that will apparently include a number of improvements.

Why no comment? It is a wheeled and generally improved version of the Buk system. It is a very long way from not being just CG but apparently there is a timeline for mock-ups and then prototypes.

I think they will be interested in a tracked version too? Or is this simply a wheeled version of the latest Russian one? Buk-M1-2 or Buk-M3?

Why no comment? It is a wheeled and generally improved version of the Buk system. It is a very long way from not being just CG but apparently there is a timeline for mock-ups and then prototypes.