SP, MLRS and SPAA Developments

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

IF YOU READ THIS IN THE "PROBLEMS WITH THE CURRENT RUSSIAN OOB (#11)" THREAD-THIS IS COPIED OVER FROM IT.

This is everything I've been tracking for Russian SPAA/AA equipment in some cases for almost 2 years now.

Pantsir-S2... Issues improved radar and detection augmented by a new missile allowing extended range and altitude.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/febru..._12502152.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._12205164.html

ZSU-23-4 & Tungunska replacement?... Issues they're just old and outdated.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem..._12812151.html

The next is specifically for the dedicated Arctic Defense Force (ADF) they already had the SPAA version mounting the Pantsir-S1 modified system the news here is they are also equipping the ADF with the new longer range TOR-M2 system
with both mounted on the Vityaz DT-30-series all-terrain tracked carriers (ATTCs) optimized for Arctic operations.
http://www.janes.com/article/69523/r...efence-systems

Buk-M3... Issues pretty much the same as the above improved radar and new missile, however, the main difference here is that this is considered a completely new system vice an improved one. That's the big news here. I believe I might've posted this already in the SPA/SPAA Thread at least the second ref.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/decem..._11212153.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._11312154.html

Finally because it's time for lunch and getting ready for "my Monday" the TOR-M2U improved version of the well, TOR-M2... Issues this comes under much improved from the first ref. "The SAM system is capable of acquiring over 40 targets simultaneously, prioritize them and engage four of them at the same time." in the SAM world that's pretty darn good.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/septe..._13009162.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi...o_2604153.html

Strela replacement and SPAA for Russian Airborne troops, the Sosna-10... Issues simply "out with the old, in with the new".
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2..._10505161.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._11312155.html


That pretty much covers most of it. As a reminder equipment status always noted on the equipment info refs or as otherwise noted in the preceding article.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Strela replacement and SPAA for Russian Airborne troops, the Sosna-10... Issues simply "out with the old, in with the new".
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2..._10505161.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._11312155.html

ATM Army Recognition is down but I did find this

http://kbtochmash.com/press-eng/arti...les-eng_4.html

"The export version of ADMS Strela-10 received the designation SOSNA."

This one does not seem to have and official designation yet but....

• increase in combat range from 3 – 5 to 8 – 10 km;
• increase in ammunition load at a launching system from 4 to 12 SAMs;
• engagement not only airplanes, helicopters, UAVs and large cruise missiles, but also small-seized air attack weapons, including striking elements of high-precision weapon;
• almost completely automated combat performance cycle, including detection, taking for autotracking and missile guidance.

So the claim made here is it can target smart bombs......if I read this right

I think we need to wait for more information before adding this to the game. I do have a bit of wiggle room to add new weapons and units but space is limited and if I add something it needs to be worthwhile to add......this would be but we have to know when it's issued before adding it

also, it indicates the range for the Strela-10 is 3-5 km....the question is.....is 3km the minimum range or is that the max range under ideal and less than ideal conditions ?

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

First I'll submit any piece of equipment in either my normal patch submission or using the same general format, as I did above in Post #103 concerning the ARCHER. It's easier and no one should assume anything else I post is anything more then just FYI outside of those afore mentioned formats. This should end any further confusion as to my intentions.

Secondly I don't know what happened with the refs from my last Post #24 again above. All I did was a simple "Cut & Paste" as I've done many, many times in the past without issue concerning the opening up of the refs.

Thirdly I did go back and verified those same refs did/do open up properly in the " "PROBLEMS WITH THE CURRENT RUSSIAN OOB (#11)" Thread Post # . So sorry for any inconvenience there as I try to figure out what happened in my last post.

I'm still evaluating this equipment issue as well, I can tell you in my opinion, that I feel the Arctic based SPAA doesn't need to be in the game just based on the fact they're meant specifically for their Arctic Defense Forces (ADF) as compared to the more main and baseline units already discussed also in that thread. The other unit is the TOR-2U do we need it? Is it that much better than the TOR-2, especially when Russia has the TOR-3 NOW BEING FIELDED?

I've got beyond these units at least 15 more new pieces of Russian equipment that is already, very soon will be and for the rest fielded by 2020. And we'll still have six more years for whatever comes down the pike and I'm already tracking some of that. A handful might already be in the game and will require date changes but, the majority aren't and that's just from my files.

The tipping point might just come within the next two years or sooner at the rate the real world for some of these OOB's are improving current equipment, developing variants of the same (Which is different then improving it.) and just fielded new equipment.

Any option to include the couple I've suggested in the past in regards to air units, or any other solution will require a lot of code and and software changes. Maybe a year or two to do that and nothing else might not be a bad idea in the long run in the near future.

By then for example we'll have a better handle on the T-14, PAK-FA, F-35 and believe me I can go on and on for the top four or five OOB's in this game. Just because I haven't submitted anything in the last two or three years doesn't mean I haven't been compiling the data for said submissions at a later date. I think I've demonstrated that recently here and elsewhere already.

I can count the slots as well, and seeing the rapid pace of advancement and looking and trying to figure out at my end what to do is almost like trying to "fit the square peg in the round hole". But I'm an analytical type person always have been and I guess always will be (I hate those Briggs Meyers and the like tests, (I just really wanted to be an astronaut! ) not ranting just concerned for the future of the game here is all and where we're heading. Clarity of purpose is all I seek, even if it means "mind your own business" I can most certainly remember worse then that being said to me.

Besides for you "code breakers" my usual response is FTITCTAJ! Though I would NEVER feel or respond that way to anyone out here!!

And I'm actually in a good mood, lost over 30 pounds, now below my retirement weight from 2002. Just making it harder for my younger co-workers to keep up with me at work and on the OTC.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

These are for now just FYI issues I'm tracking, "Wish I may, wish I might...", we'll see but, in the meantime what the hell is a STRYKER doing in this Thread!?! Well find out below...
http://www.janes.com/article/73099/b...shorad-vehicle

ALGERIA: Now confirmed has the Russian BUK-M2E in service, this is the tracked version..
http://www.janes.com/article/73123/a...s-buk-delivery
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-9K37-Buk.html
http://www.army-technology.com/proje...issile-system/
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/buk_m2e.htm

Note: Whenever I can use the "ausaairpower" website I will this think tank does excellent research. And they were right about the issues with F-35 while most were still on the "ouh ra ra" band wagon.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

ALGERIA: Now confirmed has the Russian BUK-M2E in service, this is the tracked version..
[b]http://www.janes.com/article/73123/a...s-buk-delivery:

Yes BUT..... the article says it's NOT the tracked version

The story did not mention the SAM system, which was mounted on a Belarusian-made MZKT 6922 6x6 wheeled vehicle instead of the tracked carriers used by most other Buk operators, including Egypt and Syria.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Though refs. make a distinction between the export tracked version BUK-M2E and the 6x6 wheeled version BUK-M2EK I'm not sure why the articles are leading to the tracked version. However further digging shows it is the 6x6 version.

Though ref. 1 covers the world I use the web site because it specializes on Africa and the Middle East/Persia. Also the JANE's ref. now "working" at least off the web is indicating wheeled as well. From ref. 2...
"The story did not mention the SAM system, which was mounted on a Belarusian-made MZKT 6922 6x6 wheeled vehicle instead of the tracked carriers used by most other Buk operators, including Egypt and Syria." Ref. 3 and I looked right at the "darn" thing earlier and it didn't register in my brain shows what in the lower right hand picture from the exercise? You got it.
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.ph...and&Itemid=105
http://www.janes.com/article/73123/a...s-buk-delivery
https://www.dzbreaking.com/2017/08/1...-buk-delivery/

Stared right at that picture several times-"Deer in the headlights" syndrome I guess.

Regards,
Pat