SAM

[RAYTHEON23]

[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Raytheon[/FONT][FONT=&quot] im[/FONT][FONT=&quot]eto [/FONT][FONT=&quot]на фирма која успеа да гопроизведе патриот системот кој се доказа како ефективен но ограниценоста му бесе во времето потребно за активација на системот за целосна оперативност.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]P.S ipokraj literaturata sepakpobarav sliki koi ke prezentiraat zasto stanuva zbor)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Сега со гордост ке ви гопретставам проектот [/FONT][FONT=&quot]koj se smeta za najdobar SAM system[/FONT][FONT=&quot] а тоа е СМ3([/FONT][FONT=&quot]FTM-12 stellar)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]кој има сдури три санси да ја унисти балистицката ракета првата санса е при полетуванјето на ракетата-втората во атмосферата високо а третата е кога боевата глава пага кон метата ова С-400 го нема а и дометот е помал но сепак оправдано имајки ја намерата на [/FONT][FONT=&quot]C400[/FONT][FONT=&quot] како поуниверзален систем и еден еднаков на него а тоа е [/FONT][FONT=&quot]arrow izraelskiot[/FONT][FONT=&quot] аи тука е С-400 кој сепак нема ефикасност на огромни видочини) [/FONT][FONT=&quot](имајки ја предвидзаканата одсоседите)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Toj proekt koj site tvrdat deka e podobar od S-400 vsusnos moze da unistuva balisticki raketi-pa durii onie TOPOLJ-M so poveke(12 boeci glavi-MX ima 10)[/FONT][FONT=&quot] се секавате на унистуванјето на сателитот од страна на американски дестројер[/FONT][FONT=&quot] aegis BMD [/FONT][FONT=&quot]тука се гледа глупоста на американците цитирамќова бесе само ЕДЕН слушај за да ги заштитиме насите граганиќ...апо неколку дена изјавува дека СМ-3 ке биде поставена на сите дестројери а и плус бара [/FONT][FONT=&quot]THAAD RADAR([/FONT][FONT=&quot]Theatre High Altitude Area Defense[/FONT][FONT=&quot]) kako I druga napredna opcija(skapo)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]PAC-3 (ERINT) launch (US Do[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

The PAC-3 is to provide the lower and mid altitude component of a layered defensive system, where the upper coverage would be provided by the THAAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defense) system.

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]THAAD TEL (above) and TPY-2 engagement radar (below).[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

Theatre High Altitude Area Defense System[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
The THAAD employs the Raytheon Systems AN/TPY-2 X-band Ground-Based Radar (GBR), a 9.2m² phased array with 25,344 solid-state X-band transmit and receive modules and a cited range of up to 1,000 km. The THAAD missile is a two stage design using a Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV), equipped with a liquid fuelled manoeuvring system and imaging thermal seeker. A typical battery uses 9 M1075 Oshkosh Truck Corporation Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck with Load Handling System (HEMTT-LHS) as TELs and a single towed AN/TPY-2 radar.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]sistemot na raytheon[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]AN\TPy2 koristi ground based radar no [/FONT][FONT=&quot]но не е самотој радар туку воодбраната се вклуцении контролни станици доплерови Радарии тоа најнапредни-некои од нив дурии создаваат[/FONT][FONT=&quot] 3D image[/FONT][FONT=&quot] на торнадата-но гикористат задруги цели.за разлика од С-400 којима една санса СМ3 има повеке всусност ракетата е двостепена и во главата има кинетички убиец на ракетитеЧТ.Е има инфрацрвен трагац и маневрира тоцно до боевата глава а од брзината имаи огромна кинетицка енергија.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]THAAD Seeker image .[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]IAI Arrow launch (IAI).

[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]IAI Green Pine / Arrow System[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]ова е радарот на израелскиот [/FONT][FONT=&quot]arrow I toj predstavuva THAAD no razlikata e vo toa sto raketite se hipersonocni iprvata eksplodira vo blizina na raketata a vtorata verzija ima opcija pri direkten sudir ili blizinska detonocaija[/FONT][FONT=&quot]-и за овој систем америте ќфрлија неколку милијардиоти патриотот треба да оди вопензија па како главни ке бидат најверојатно споменативе 2[/FONT]




[FONT=&quot]


[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Green Pine engagement radar for Arrow ABM (IAI Elta).СМ3 најновата верзија едвај ја најдов.

[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]сепак морнарицата го има главниот збор за СМ3 оти тие треба да се монтираат на бродови и бараат употреба на [/FONT][FONT=&quot]SPY-1 radarot koj e masterpiece[/FONT][FONT=&quot] но кавгата запоцна со баранјето на морнарицата да се користат два типа на интерцептори едниот за средна висоцина а другиот СМ-3 за озбилната работа-најверојатно од финансиски аспект,имено опремата за СМ3 е комплексна скапа а и бара модификации на бродовите)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Ова е виновникот кој е најголемазакана за балистицките ракети.[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]​

 

[RAYTHEON23]

UKRAINIAN S-300PT STATUSThe image above, captured in 2002, depicts a Ukrainian S-300PT (SA-10A GRUMBLE) SAM site south of Odessa. This specific image is interesting as it depicts an operational S-300PT site hosting a co-located S-300PS battery (SA-10B GRUMBLE). More recent imagery captured in April of 2007 indicates that the S-300PT battery has departed, with the S-300PS battery taking up primary residence at the site. This could be indicative of a reconfiguring of the Ukrainian SAM force, placing the more capable systems along the periphery of the nation. Alternatively it could be indicative of the replacement of S-300PT batteries with S-300PS units. Whatever the case may be, this example highlights the capability of using open source imagery to conduct a chronological evaluation of military facilities. While commercial satellite imagery is not able to provide current up-to-date imaging support for every significant military facility, the ability to exploit imagery in this fashion by grasping the value of the dates when images have been captured is a useful analytical tool for the open source analyst.

аххх не4 можам слика да ставам аааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааа

S-300 :wink: требат повеке зборови?! Не сека држава може да се гордее со таков систем.

системот е маестрално дело јас читав за неговиот принцип на работа и воглавно сличен е со другите НО самата координираност на командата со лансерите(кај која нема ЕМ пречки) всушност ги има за против радарските ракети на пример англиската ХАРМ.
потоа користењето на информации од радари кои имаат огромен домет.....маестрално му се дивам системот е комплексен ненормално нешто разбрав нешто не(посебно во електрониката а и не ми е струка)

ФМИ вашите балистички ракети немаа можно0ст за поставување на боева глава(биолошко-хемиско-нуклеарно) така!!! јас така знам(аххх емот икони прикачување слики не работи аааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааа

 

[RAYTHEON23]

POCETOCI

MILE STONES
Genesis of
the surfaceto-
air missile
The air war over Western Europe could
have had a very different outcome if
the Nazi leadership had invested
earlier in Surface-to-Air Missiles to
defeat Allied bombers, which in
1944/45 devastated large sectors of
Germany’s wartime industrial base.
Towards the end of the war, Germany was mere
months away from the capability to launch SAMs in
large numbers, with the potential to inflict heavy
losses on the Allied Combined Bomber Offensive.
How close Allied bombers came to facing the power
of the Surface-to-Air Missile is not well known, but
the thought provokes disturbing images of Allied
aircraft lost on a huge scale.
The impetus for the development of the SAM was
indeed the Allied Combined Bomber Offensive over
Western Europe, especially Germany, but by then it
was too late. Allied bombers initially disrupted and
later devastated the industrial base that was critical
to the maintenance of the Nazi industrial war
machine, effectively ending Hitler’s capacity to wage
war. Without any credible air defence against the
bombing onslaught the German war machine ground
to a halt, starved of ammunition, spare parts,
replacement equipment and synthetic fuel supplies.
By the end of the war, Germany had no less than five
SAM systems in development, none of which
achieved operational status, but which could have
done so much earlier had the Nazi leadership taken
the bomber threat seriously. The Wasserfall
(Waterfall), Rheintochter (Daughter of the Rhein),
Schmetterling (Butterfly), Feuerlilie (Fire Lily) and
Enzian (Mountain Violet) had been developed with
varying degrees of success.
The most mature of these was the Wasserfall, which
became the design template for development of the
post-war US Nike SAMs and the Soviet R-101 series.
Surface to Air Missiles or SAMs are ubiquitous in
modern wars, and statistically have accounted for
more aircraft losses since the 1960s than any other
air defence weapon. While less cost effective
individually than fighter aircraft, SAMs by sheer
numbers and low demands on operator skills have
occupied a permanent niche in air defence.
Little understood is that the SAM as an air defence
weapon dates back to the 1940s, when it was
devised, developed, and first attempted in use. The
first generation of genuine operational SAMs were
largely derivatives of wartime developmental SAMs.
The EMW Wasserfall
W1, W-5 and W-10 FLA
Rakete
Germany’s SAM effort was launched in late 1942
when the commander of Flakartillerie ordered the
development of ‘Flugzeug Abwehr Raketen’ or FLARaketen
as a replacement for FLAK artillery
weapons. The first contract on the Wasserfall project
was awarded within months to the
Flakversuchtsanstalt at the Peenemunde rocketry
site, to be led by Dr Thiel and later Wehrner von
Braun. Thiel earlier designed the A-4/V-2 ballistic
missile engine, and built the Wasserfall around the
earlier missile.
Unlike the V-2, which could be launched any time, a
SAM had to stand by for days or weeks fuelled and
ready to fire until a launch opportunity developed,
which precluded use of the liquid oxygen and alcohol
fuels used by the V-2. Instead, the Wasserfall’s
engine used a hypergolic (self igniting) propellant
mix, with a Tonka or vinyl isobutyl ether fuel and SVStoff
(Salbei) oxidiser, comprising 90 per cent nitric
acid and 10 per cent sulphuric acid. High-pressure
250 atm nitrogen tanks were used to drive the
propellants into the combustor, using an elaborate
plumbing system with safety interlocks.
German sources claim that a successful launch of
the Wasserfall missile against several USAAF
bombers was performed in early 1945 but there
appears to be no corroborating evidence of this. Had
this indeed occurred, unless the aircraft was
observed during the attack and the kills documented,
there could be no supporting evidence.
Of all of the German SAM systems, the Wasserfall
had by far the greatest potential, and had it entered
operational service in early 1944 could have inflicted
heavy losses on Allied heavy bomber fleets.
Fortunately, the Nazi leadership were obsessed with
bombarding Britain with strategically useless A-4/V-
2 ballistic missiles, and put their funding into that
program, launching over 3000 weapons for
negligible military effect. Had the prodigious effort
invested into the A-4/V-2 program been put into the
Wasserfall, the course of the war could have been
very different. The Wasserfall produced most
effective in providing a baseline for postwar US and
Soviet SAM designs.
Dr Carlo Kopp
Wasserfall launch
trial sequence
(RLM)
Post war launch of a US
Hermes missile, based
on the Wasserfall W-10
series (NASA).
world focus
The airframe of the earliest Wasserfall W-1 was a
scaled down derivative of the A-4/V-2 design, with
an ogival taper, cylindrical fuselage, and additional
cruciform centre fuselage wings to increase the
missile’s achievable turn rate and glide
performance. Like the A-4/V-2, the Wasserfall was
launched vertically from a mobile pad, emplaced
from a transloader truck or trailer.
The first launch attempt in January 1944 failed,
with a pad explosion, but by the end of the war
between 25 and 40 successful firings were
performed, some with prototype guidance systems
installed. Over this period, the airframe design
evolved to the W-5 configuration, with shorter span
and wider chord wings and larger tail, and the final
scaled down W-10 configuration, with a smaller
diameter and shorter fuselage and spans. The
Wasserfall W-10 weighed 3500kg, had a diameter
of 0.72m, a wingspan of 1.584m and length of
6.128m.
Achieved performance varies with sources, with
the W-5 usually credited with a top speed of
2736km/h, ceiling of 60,000ft and range of around
14 nautical miles. This is similar performance to
the much later Soviet SA-3/S-125 Pechora/Goa
SAM, but using a heavier single stage airframe.
Initial warhead was designed to use 100kg of
conventional explosive, later replaced with 300kg
or liquid explosive, using proximity or command
link fusing. German sources put the unit production
cost of the Wasserfall at 7,000 -10,000
Reichmarks, using 1/8th of the manhours to
produce the strategically ineffective A-4/V-2
missile.
The guidance and control scheme is of particular
interest. The missile used a gyro autopilot for
pitch/roll/yaw control, with pitch, roll and yaw
control forces generated by mechanically coupled
tail surfaces and graphite thrust vectoring vanes in
the exhaust, an arrangement found today in many
missiles with TVC capability.
Three guidance schemes were in development. The
baseline system used a radio command link, with
an operator using a joystick to steer the missile to
impact, a formidable task even against a 150 KTAS
cruising piston engine heavy bomber.
Two more advanced radar guidance schemes were
in development. The first was the Rheinland, which
was a manual command to line of sight system,
using a transponder beacon in the missile and a
tracking radar for both missile and target, allowing
night attacks on RAF bombers or daylight attacks
through an overcast. The second system has to
have been a beamriding automatic guidance
system, using two orthogonal fan shaped beams,
which rotated as the beam tracked the target. In
the latter system, the missile would automatically
ride the beam to impact.
It is interesting that the rotating reticle infrared
seeker, developed by
von Braun for the A-
4/V-2 and used to
this very day, never
found its way into the
Wasserfall program.
The Wasserfall
program was
suspended in
February 1945, as
Soviet forces overran
East Prussia. The Luftwaffe had ambitious plans for
the Wasserfall, envisaging 200 batteries installed in
three SAM belts across Germany, requiring monthly
production of 5,000 Wasserfall reload rounds. The
never implemented plan would have seen the first
operational battery in November 1945, with twenty
sites operational by March 1946.
10
DefenceToday
Rheinmetall-Borsig
Rheintochter R I and R III
FLA Raketen
Rheinmetall-Borsig, best known for designing guns,
were heavily involved in developing SAMs. The two
stage Rheintochter R I entered development in 1942
and first flew in August 1943, being later cancelled in
January 1945. Unlike the larger Wasserfall, the
Rheintochter R I used solid propellant rockets for both
stages and carried a 150kg explosive warhead.
Guidance was via a radio command link, with the
operator optically tracking flares on the tail of the
weapon. The Kranich acoustic fuse, designed for
Ruhrstahl’s X-4 air-to-air missile, was used to
detonate the warhead. This design sensed changes in
the Doppler shift of the target’s propeller sound to
trigger the warhead.
By the time the Rheintochter R I was cancelled, 82
rounds had been fired, with claims that only four failed.
The R I missile was limited to a ceiling of 20,000ft, and
the RLM demanded a ceiling of 27,000ft, which led to
the development of the R III variant. The R III retained
much of the R I upper stage but introduced a simpler
cruciform wing and a pair of external strap-on
boosters replacing the first stage of the R I. The
aerodynamic and control configuration of the
Rheintochter SAMs was used repeatedly by Soviet
designers during the 1950s, reflected in the S-75/SA-
2 Dvina and S-125/SA-3 Pechora SAMs.
Rheintochter R I on launcher.
Rheintochter R I at NASM, via Wikipedia.
Wasserfall W-10 CONOPS (EMW)
Wasserfall W-10 Cutaway (EMW)
Rheinmetall-Borsig
F25 and F55 Feuerlilie
FLA Raketen
Rheinmetall-Borsig’s other foray into SAM
development was the Feuerlilie series. The F25
was a subsonic test vehicle, designed to gather
aerodynamic and control data. It used a
Rheinmetall 109-505 solid diglycol fuelled
rocket, which produced a six second burn at
4900 kN thrust.
The F25 variant was designed for air and
surface launch and was trialled during 1943.
The intended production weapon was the F55,
designed to be supersonic and powered by a
liquid fuel engine, rated at 62,000 kN, using RStoff
or Tonka 250 fuel, comprising 57 per cent
crude oxide monoxylidene, 43 per cent triethylamine
and SV- or S-Stoff oxidiser.
Initial trials were flown using the Rheinmetall
109-505 solid rocket achieving supersonic
speeds, but the subsequent trials using the
liquid propellant engine failed, with the last shot
at Peenemunde cancelled.
F55 prototype during trials (RB)

 

[fmi]

UKRAINIAN S-300PT STATUSThe image above, captured in 2002, depicts a Ukrainian S-300PT (SA-10A GRUMBLE) SAM site south of Odessa. This specific image is interesting as it depicts an operational S-300PT site hosting a co-located S-300PS battery (SA-10B GRUMBLE). More recent imagery captured in April of 2007 indicates that the S-300PT battery has departed, with the S-300PS battery taking up primary residence at the site. This could be indicative of a reconfiguring of the Ukrainian SAM force, placing the more capable systems along the periphery of the nation. Alternatively it could be indicative of the replacement of S-300PT batteries with S-300PS units. Whatever the case may be, this example highlights the capability of using open source imagery to conduct a chronological evaluation of military facilities. While commercial satellite imagery is not able to provide current up-to-date imaging support for every significant military facility, the ability to exploit imagery in this fashion by grasping the value of the dates when images have been captured is a useful analytical tool for the open source analyst.

аххх не4 можам слика да ставам аааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааа



системот е маестрално дело јас читав за неговиот принцип на работа и воглавно сличен е со другите НО самата координираност на командата со лансерите(кај која нема ЕМ пречки) всушност ги има за против радарските ракети на пример англиската ХАРМ.
потоа користењето на информации од радари кои имаат огромен домет.....маестрално му се дивам системот е комплексен ненормално нешто разбрав нешто не(посебно во електрониката а и не ми е струка)

ФМИ вашите балистички ракети немаа можно0ст за поставување на боева глава(биолошко-хемиско-нуклеарно) така!!! јас така знам(аххх емот икони прикачување слики не работи аааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааааа

Аjде прво да направим разлика дека едните ракети са земja-земja,а другите са земja-воздух.
SS 21 прво не е извесно да има модел со биобошки глави.Нуклеарни има во Русиja.БГ има касетачни и фугасни. :helou:

 

[RAYTHEON23]

ако некој е заинтересиран ја имам програмата и резултатите од МДА за 2009

станува збор за одбрана исклучиво од балистички проектили.