S-400 Battery Components

youtube videos on the s-300:

s-300 pmu1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0etQsAA1Gak&feature=related

s-300V
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJD6Ieil0M&feature=related

source: rusarmy.com

It is the 96L6 for shure. 91N6 is the equivalent of the BIG BIRD of the S-300PXX. I haven’t seen any pics of 91N6 but it should look just like a BIG BIRD.

I took some images from the video for look on the surveillance radar:

It seems different from the 96L6 and from the 96N6 Gamma-S1E. So, may be it is the so called “91N6E long-range surveillance radar”.

Some more pics from the inauguration of S-400 in Elektrostal in August. The pics shows both the 96L6 and the 96N6 radars.

http://www.vko.ru/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?tabID=320&ItemID=125&mid=3087&wversion=Staging

Unfortunately no links, no data available, yet. Nevertheless, I assume that it works, at regiment level, as the BIG BIRD follow on.

http://pvo.guns.ru/rtv/gammas1e.htm

http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/maks07/said/pvo/rtv/P1020107_DCE.JPG
http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/maks07/said/pvo/rtv/P1020093_DCE.JPG
http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/maks07/said/pvo/rtv/P1020105_DCE.JPG
http://pvo.guns.ru/images/expo/maks07/said/pvo/rtv/P1020091_DCE.JPG

The Radar on the 2nd Pic looks like a Gamma-S1E Radar :confused:

So,… no doubts anymore. :p

96L6 is different from the 96N6 and the one showed in recent videos is the 96N6. Gentlemen, take a look at these small but clear pics:

96L6 radar:

Link: http://legion.wplus.net/guide/army/rl/96l6.shtml

96N6 radar:

Unfortunately no links, no data available, yet. Nevertheless, I assume that it works, at regiment level, as the BIG BIRD follow on.

Look at this paragraph taken that was from http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070927/81336710.html

A regular S-400 battalion comprises at least eight launchers and 32 missiles and a mobile command post, according to various sources.

So, as 32/8 = 4 this seems to indicate that the small 9M96 missiles have still not been deployed. So what happened with these missiles?

Lemansky died

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070927/81336710.html

I trust that the defence press will record his passing. At least he lived to see his creation entering service. The great space writer Willy Ley, whose books many of my generation so enjoyed, died a month before Apollo 11.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

I want this computer for my Kalman filtres. :confused: 😀

Why be underpowered? While browsing for information on Russian processors, I found a reference to a US product that claims 80 gigaflops…

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

Lemansky died

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070927/81336710.html

I want this computer for my Kalman filtres. :confused: 😀

(Mercurius returns from the library carrying a handful of Russian documents, brushes the dust from his academic gown, picks up his pen, and writes…)

Thanks for that information, Rodolfo.

The posting you referred us to was a news story written by Miroslav Gyurosi (the publication in which it appeared was not stated). He writes for various East European defence and aviation magazines and for several Western specialist defence magazines. To judge by the amount of detail in the 96L6 story, he’d been talking to engineers, not reading information from a press release.

Gyurosi is not directly claiming that the 96L6 radar is rated at 10,000 MOPS. What he wrote was: “As a result of theoretical and experimental research, a database of difficult signals was developed, along with signal processing hardware with a speed of 10 billion operations per second, plus other components.”

This development work led to the construction of a prototype radar.

Given the reference to “a database of difficult signals” it is possible that the “signal processing hardware” was a laboratory facility or a development rig that formed part of the prototype 96L6 radar rather than the prototype of a 96L6 subsystem. During development trials, engineers would be trying to extract as much information as possible from all radar returns received and from the signal-processing algorithms.

Gyurosi speaks only of “10 billion operations per second” which would imply MOPS (integer operations). But I’m fairly confident that radar signal processing needs floating-point operations, as would a radar seeker. (Russian terminology in unclassified literature may not be as precise as we’d like.)

Is 10,000 MOPS (millions of operations per second) easier to achieve than 10,000 MFLOPS (millions of floating-point operations per second)? – I leave that question to much younger brains than mine.

So how realistic is a figure of 10,000 MOPS or MFLOPS given the current level of Russian technology?

I didn’t have a lot of success in tracking down typical Russian processing rates, but managed to find a few examples.

One of the Agat active homing radar seekers is rated at 50 million ‘op/sec’ (I suspect they mean MFLOPS).

The Moskit radar offered for MiG-21/23 retrofits is rated at 280 MFLOPS, while the Kopyo-F offered for retrofit applications and as a Su-27/35 tail-warning radar is 900 MFLOPS. Neither of these radars is likely to be pushing the state of the art. The latest nose-mounted radars in the MiG-29 and Su-27 family could well be more processor-intensive.

And perhaps most relevant to this discussion – around 2002, Leninetz began marketing a signal processor “designed for real-time processing of radar information from the latest generation multifunction airborne radars”. This was rated at 3,200 MFLOPS.

If 3,200 MFLOPS was available on a processor cleared for export, we must assume that more powerful contemporary processors remained classified – Russian law is very strict on what military technologies can be exported. For example, the seeker of the Warsaw Pact version of the R-73 (AA-12 Archer) was much simpler than that of the Soviet AF version.

So it is not impossible that 10,000 MFLOPS of processing power might have been made available 15 years ago for an R&D programme, perhaps by splitting the task among several processors.

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis

Mercurius, I just posted some old material recycled from this forum. I.e. radar data comes from here:

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=46555

I am not sure, but I think this come from the Roy’s aviation page that translates news from the Russian media to English. In the end nothing really new.

Respect to “10 billion operations per second”, may be he refers to a flow of 10.000 million bits per second. Not to an aritmetic operation. Surely much lower than 10 billon flops.

What the 😮 …

Signal processing?, complex operations?…10.000 MFLOPS?…

Really?, No kidding?

At first I shared Pit’s scepticism, but after some thought I’m not so sure.

Rodolfo gave us a string of quotes, but only identified the source of one. So we don’t know how reliable that “10 billion operations per second” figure is likely to be.

It’s tempting to wonder if this is a misprint in the original text in which ‘million’ became ‘billion’, or a text-recognition error (if Rodolfo was scanning a paper document) that produced the same effect. But 10 million operations per second seems too low to be likely.

Perhaps Rodolfo can help us by identifying the source of the 96L6 material. In the meantime, I’ll see what info I can dig up on current Russian processor speeds.

Alan Turing was a Cambridge man – Kings College in the early 1930s and later a fellow.

I wonder what his reaction would have been to today’s processing power…

Mercurius Cantabrigiensis
(who replaced his typewriter with a computer more than quarter of a century ago)

As a result of theoretical and experimental research, a database of difficult signals was developed, along with signal processing hardware with a speed of 10 billion operations per second, plus other components.

What the 😮 …

Signal processing?, complex operations?…10.000 MFLOPS?…

Really?, No kidding?

On the S-400 limited anti-ICBM potential:

The existing S-400s are currently undergoing capability enhancements for interoperability with the space forces assets.

The Russian armed forces say that the S-400 can potentially be used against strategic ballistic missiles after separation of warheads. In that role the S-400s will be co-operating with the A-135 anti-missile system in service with the Russian Space Forces. Provision is made for the S-400s to receive targeting information on approaching space threats from the Russian Space Forces in an automatic mode.

The S-400/A-135 will be the first block of the Air and Space Defence (ASD) system, a future structure concept recently formulated by the Russian defence ministry. The latter sa

So the key arises from the targeting data provided by the A-135 system. Without the Don-2Np radar its chances against a ICBM warhead are near zero. Can the hypothetical S-500 system do something independently? I very doubt although it can have potential against MRBM.

On the new mystery-missiles

MOSCOW. April 6 (Interfax-AVN) – The Fakel Design Bureau has developed a new missile, capable of engaging any attack means, which will take the Russian air defense system to a qualitatively new level, Fakel Designer General Vladimir Svetlov said.

“Several of our missiles, being tested, will considerably boost combat capabilities of famous Russian air defense missile systems. The design bureau has also developed a missile for the new air defense missile system. We believe that it will become the leader among air defense missiles. Its capabilities and even designation are classified. I believe that the missile will remain the leader for decades to come. The missile will be capable of killing any attack means,” Svetlov said in an interview with the Nedelya supplement to the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper.

So, may be, there is something undeclared and unspecified that will fit in the so-called S-500.

On the 96L6 radar

Work on the 96L6 began in the second half of the 1980s, when Boris Vasilyevics Bunkin, the general designer of CKB Almaz defined the requirements for a surveillance radar to form part of the new S-400 missile system. The design of the new radar was assigned to the Lira design bureau, which is a part of LEMZ – the Lianozovskiz Elektromekhanicseskij Zavod (Lianozovo Elektromechanical Factory). Lira and LEMZ are part of the financial-industrial group Oboronitelniye Sistemi (Defence Systems).

During the development and trials stage OKR (Opitno-Konstruktorskaya Rabota) of the programme, the new radar was designated VVO (Vsevisotniy Obnaruzhitel = detector for all altitudes).

The requirements for the VVO were very rigorous. The team headed by the late main designer Yuriy Fyodorovics Lisin based its design on research by Professor VI Vinokurov into the detection of difficult signals.

Another organisation involved with the development programme was the scientific research experimental establishment (Naucsno-Issledovatelskaya Eksperimentalnaya Rabota) Slozhnost (Complexity), whose general designers are BV Bunkin and Yuriy Aleksandrovics Kuznecov.

An experimental radar was built and tested in a series of trials against Yak-52 training aircraft. Specialists from other Russian radar establishments such as LETI, NII-2 MO, NII-3 MO, UPI, CNIIRES and VNIIRT participated in the trials, and the resulting data influenced the future development of radar technology in what was then the Soviet Union.

In 1988, representatives of the main developing organisation and the customer signed agreement giving the go-ahead for wideband radar technology, based on this earlier research to be used in the VVO programme. As a result of theoretical and experimental research, a database of difficult signals was developed, along with signal processing hardware with a speed of 10 billion operations per second, plus other components.

In 1991, the Lira design bureau built a prototype of the VVO radar. This started operation in early 1992, and in April of that year was demonstrated against low-altitude targets. Later that year systems were delivered for trials at the training centre of NII-2, the scientific research institute of the Russian air-defence forces. The system was displayed in model form at the MAKS 97 defence exhibition.

When the system enters service it will replace the 5N66M and 76N6 (NVO/NVO-M) radars currently used for the detection of low-flying targets. (The 76N6 is known to NATO as ‘Clam Shell’.) Both had been developed in the early 1970s by the design bureau of the LEMZ factory. Later the 96L6 will replace the 19Zh6/35D6/36D6 family (ST-68U/-68UM) of all-round surveillance radars, which were developed and produced in Ukraine by NPO Iskra.

The role of the 96L6 is the detection of air targets and measuring of their azimuth, elevation and range. It can be used with the S-300PMU surface-to-air (SAM) system, can autonomously assign targets for the 90Zh6E, 90Zh6E1 and 90Zh6E2 (S-300PMU-1 and later) air-defence missile complexes, and can be connected with the Baykal-1E and Senezh-M1E automated command and control systems or the radiotechnical forces’ Osnova-1E and Polye-E command posts.

It can pass information about a wide spectrum of the aerial targets, including aircraft, helicopters, UAVs and missiles, to the 30N6E, 30N6E1, 30N6E2 (‘Flap Lid’) series of tracking and missile guidance radars.

The 96L6 is very effective against low flying targets and against targets in the medium and high altitudes. It maintains its performance in the presence of heavy jamming, and has a very low false-alarm rate.

Targets can be tracked at elevations from 60º down to 0º, but a minimum of -3º is available as an option. The antenna uses several beams when scanning in elevation. For detection of very low flying targets, or if the radar is deployed in a wooded area, the antenna can be mounted on a 966AA14 elevated tower. The latter consists of a 40V6M tower mounted on a MAZ-537G (74106) truck.

There are two versions of the 96L6 – one which is installed on a single vehicle, and another which uses two vehicles.

The single-vehicle variant consists of:

• a 966AA01 antenna array;

• a 966FF03 shelter which houses the receiving, transmitting and information-processing subsystems, an operator console, communication and IFF systems and a ZIP-O repair set;

• a TM966 vehicle based on a Type 7930 Astrolog wheeled chassis with a SEP-2L generator and power-distribution system; and

• a set of cables.

The two-vehicle version consists of:

• a truck and trailer-mounted 966AA00 antenna set incorporating the 966AA01 antenna, an SES-75, SES-75M or equivalent model of electrical generator and power-distribution system, plus cables; and

• a truck and trailer-mounted 966FF00 installation incorporating the 966FF03 shelter and SES-75/-75M electrical system.

The two vehicles can be deployed up to 100m apart.

Unfortunately all this information is known and rather old. We are always iterating over and over with just the same info. Nothing really new except a few bits per year.

My understanding is that the S-500 is a new system, that has been in development since the 1980’s (halted for a bit due to funding issues). The S-400 should represent the penultimate iteration of the S-300P family I think, with the S-500 being something new, possibly using one of the new MARS modular radar systems to provide long-range acquisition.

Also, regarding limited ABM capability, there should not be anything preventing the systems from accepting EW or preliminary targeting data from the LPAR or BMEW radar systems in Russia (Dnepr, Daryal, Voronezh, etc).

Austin, to have anti-ICBM capability it will need basically a large and powerful engagement radar. I don’t know if this is feasible for a mobile system. Vectors seems fine in terms of acceleration and engagement ceiling but high energy illumination of the target seems to be the crucial issue. Respect to “repel strikes from space”, well this seems to be an usual colorful Russian assertion. After all , while downing a warhead at 100 km altitude, you re repelling a strike from space.

Rodolfo , it seems like so , The S-500 would be significant enhancement of s-400 systems with the addition of few new components.

Since it has been explicitly mentioned that S-500 would have capability to repel strikes from space , A US style ABM missile could be one of the new components.

They prolly be working on such system so that Russia also manages to have minimum anti-ICBM capability