Patriot seems to be routinely knocking down SCUD-type missiles fired into Saudi Arabia from Yeman. Of course, they may not be particularly challenging targets.
Sweden Selects Patriot
Posted 17 November 2017 - 1439 PM
Patriot uses SARH only for terminal approach like SM-2, so there's little warning about the attack. The radars only give away very late that the aircraft is under attack. That's one "scary" thing about it.
BAMSE was first and foremost a short range air defence with an astonishing effective ceiling claim and a cheap (command controlled) missile.
It would be a great complement to missiles with expensive seekers, but there are likely few suitable targets for BAMSE.
Everything that carries a radar/radio jammer might throw off the aim, the system requires line of sight between target and fire control radar and radar 'stealth' targets that would be easily visible in IIR might still be too hard to sense for the radars used. Finally, the fire control radar needs to keep looking at the target throughout the engagement. That's but a few seconds, but a shutdown due to ARM threat would break the engagement and the target might be able to triangulate the fire control radar during this time. That's troublesome if the target is a decoy drone with ESM specialised on triangulating radars or if the missile fails.
BAMSE is a bit of a bet; a bet that the relatively cheap system doesn't get defeated by ECM.
Other radar-centric air defence systems do similar bets, but with higher stakes and better odds.
I'm not all that familiar with Patriot's guidance properties, but (IIRC) it originally used a "Track Via Missile" concept in which the missile downlinked target data to the radar, which then provided guidance data. Presumable that's been succeeded by a newer design?
Posted 17 November 2017 - 1441 PM
In a shooting war with Russia, a Patriot battery can expect to also be targeted by systems that don't rely on ARM homing. I'm not saying that decoy emitters, reflectors etc. are a bad thing though.
Posted 17 November 2017 - 1859 PM
Looks like Poland finally took the plunge. Does seem a bit pricey, though:
The magic word is "offset" and shite load of PAC-3 MSE missiles for all 8 batteries.And the price probably will be cheaper like 8 billion dollars instead of 10,5.
Edited by Tantalwz88, 17 November 2017 - 1900 PM.
Posted 18 November 2017 - 1120 AM
What is "Configuration 3+"?
IBCS and SkyCeptor missile based on Israel Stunner in near future if we Polish MOD doesn't f-up.
Posted 04 August 2018 - 1457 PM
The deal for Patriot missiles for Sweden has gone one step further.
Posted 05 August 2018 - 0450 AM
What is Sweden's current SAM capability?
8 HAWK-launchers, and a few RB70 for a country the size of Germany and Austria combined. The plan is for the RB70's to be replaced by truck launched IRIS-T (with the missiles taken from the Air Force stocks) and Patriot (with virtually no missiles for the foreseeable future) We used to have Bloodhound missiles as well (1961-1978) but they were sold of with no replacement.
Posted 05 August 2018 - 0459 AM
Posted 05 August 2018 - 0907 AM
What happened to the RBS-23 Bamse?
The radar and control unit UndE 23 is in service (with non BAMSE systems) but the missile unit EldE 23 is not. Six EldE23 where acquire and three of them make up a demonstration unit (or at least used to). The other three are used by the Defence Materiel Administration and SAAB.
Edited by glappkaeft, 05 August 2018 - 0909 AM.
Posted 05 August 2018 - 0932 AM
We would never be able to cover our territory under a SAM umbrella anyway. The best area air defence system we have is the JAS-39. The older SAM systems (Bloodhounds and Hawks) where not bought in any greater numbers either, neither will the Patriots be. The point with them was to have the capability to defend a few top priority targets. With the Patriot buy there is also a fair bit of politics involved, we buy expensive stuff from the US in the hope that should we need help they will consider it to be in their interest to help us.
Posted 05 August 2018 - 1012 AM
Posted 05 August 2018 - 1027 AM
Wouldn't MEADS have been a more mobile/relocatable option?
Posted 05 August 2018 - 1149 AM
The problem is the batteries themselves become very high value targets. Thats possibly why you didnt bother replacing the essentially static Bloodhound.
We retired Bloodhound purely because of cost. We were actually developing a more mobile version of it at the time of retirement, and what we had were used in a far different way than the UK. Each battery had at least three prepared positions, the locations were top secret and they were never used in peacetime. The plan was to relocate to one of those during mobilization and then to relocate immediately after an engagement.
Posted 05 August 2018 - 1640 PM
Posted 06 August 2018 - 0537 AM
So saying that the Patriot system causes a problem because they are high value (additional) targets isn't really true - you have the problem already in that your country is targeted. You've added more targets, for sure, but even as bullet magnets they are serving a purpose - soaking up enemy resources.
Posted 06 August 2018 - 1212 PM
Posted 06 August 2018 - 1247 PM
Clearly that doesn't apply if the weapons employed fall completely out of envelope of the SAM system, which some have indicated Iskander does. I think there won't be a final answer to that question in open source.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users