Russian Iskanders Pointed at BMD Sites

[Feanor]

President Medvedev has now made concrete plans to cancel the disbanding of 3 artillery-missile regiments and to instead deploy Iskanders and radio-electronic suppression measures in Kaliningrad. Allegedly the units will be under VMF command.

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=62256&cid=24

In my opinion there isn't much to be said about the alleged Iskander deployment, but the halting of the disbanding of the missile regiments is a concrete step. Perhaps we will see those units get priority re-armament with new equipment.

EDIT: This vz.ru article clarifies that the missile division in question due for disbanding is not a missile artillery unit but an ICBM unit armed with RS-18 "Stilet" missiles.

http://www.vz.ru/politics/2008/11/5/226272.html

 

[Firehorse]

They also plan to use their Baltic Fleet ships to target BMD sites and, from Western areas of Russia, jamm BMD radars-

К противодействию системе ПРО США в Европе подключатся и силы ВМФ РФ. «Из западных регионов станы – в частности, это та же Калининградская область – будет осуществляться радиоподавление новых систем ПРО США»,..
http://www.rosbalt.ru/2008/11/06/538782.html

Ditto: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/russia/newsid_7711000/7711883.stm

More details here- http://vremya.ru/2008/205/4/216438.html

I was going to ask on this forum about the effectiveness of jamming those radars, even before this announcement. In any case, good luck to the US BMD system near Russia!

 

[Grand Danois]

Funny thing - nobody considers this as unexpected or a big deal. Au contraire, it was expected to get attention from the president elect in the US.

Apparently the world revolves around the US.

Btw, Medvedevs announcement on this replaced his much expected announcement on the Russian economy - it's overdue by two weeks.

Yup try using the Russian Navy for jamming a radar in the Czech Rep.

 

[Firehorse]

My understanding is that jamming would be done from land bases, not ships. The navy ships, planes and/or maybe subs will be tasked to target the interceptors in Poland.
The financial crises in the West probably caused Medvedev to postpone his announcement on the Russian economy- until things get sorted out. There could be other reasons, but "better later than never"!

 

[Grand Danois]

My understanding is that jamming would be done from land bases, not ships. The navy ships, planes and/or maybe subs will be tasked to target the interceptors in Poland.
The financial crises in the West probably caused Medvedev to postpone his announcement on the Russian economy- until things get sorted out. There could be other reasons, but "better later than never"!

The kinetic attack option aside - it's doesn't matter if the jamming is from ships or shorebased facilities - the radar is still in the Czech Rep.

Russia had it's own bubbles, debt- and commodity economy based weaknesses - finger pointing does not excuse Medvedev et al from their responsibility.

I wonder why data on the status of the foreign currency reserves ceased to be published after $15bn / day left the reserves for several consecutive days...

 

[Feanor]

It ceased to be published so that people can't figure out how bad the situation really is. Duh.

But this is hardly the right place to discuss that. So how realistic is it to strike the BMD facilities with SRBMs from Kaliningrad region? What kind of support assets would the Iskanders need to survive and deliver their payload?

 

[Grand Danois]

It ceased to be published so that people can't figure out how bad the situation really is. Duh.

Russia has plenty of liquidity - so not necessarily so. Perhaps it's just to manae hysterical stockbrokers?

But this is hardly the right place to discuss that. So how realistic is it to strike the BMD facilities with SRBMs from Kaliningrad region? What kind of support assets would the Iskanders need to survive and deliver their payload?

You're right - it's off topic - it's just that it's overdue and Medvedev did not adress it - again. He was expected to, but instead it was Iskanders.

On topic - three regiments - more than enough to overwhelm the single battery of Patriots at the GBI site. But they're also only there to die.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Iskander can be easily defeated by Patriot PAC-3, obviously you need more interceptors than incoming missiles! Basing missiles in Kaliningrad is probably not the best idea for anything other than some media attention. This territory can be easily captured by NATO forces. Hard to launch a missile with a Polish Leopard 2 sitting in your launch area.

The reality is Russia has very little force options to counter NATO's BMD capability and certainly doesn't have the money to get into a 'Missile Command' race with the US. All they have is the chance to make a bit of media noise with symbolism. Which as pointed out has more to do with diverting attention from the complete collapse of their domestic economy.

 

[kato]

Russia can easily saturate a Patriot network and GBI site with Tu-95 bomber sorties carrying dozens of old Kh-15. Sure, it would be nuclear, but it's not like that would matter at that point.
Iskander is just one of a couple options, and one that will give some "visible layman's capability". Let's not forget that there are also plenty of other, less publicized applications for a 500-km SRBM in the Baltic Theater.

 

[Feanor]

Iskander can be easily defeated by Patriot PAC-3, obviously you need more interceptors than incoming missiles!

Really? How so?

Oh and just a correction. The 3 regiments that aren't being disbanded are not rocket artillery regiments. I made a mistake in reading the unclear wording of the first article and edited it in afterwards. The 3 regiments are ICBM units armed with the RS-18 "Stilet", which I'm sure can overwhelm a Patriot battery.

Iirc the first artillery brigade of Iskanders has yet to be formed (it's in the process of right now).

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Russia can easily saturate a Patriot network and GBI site with Tu-95 bomber sorties carrying dozens of old Kh-15. Sure, it would be nuclear, but it's not like that would matter at that point.
Iskander is just one of a couple options, and one that will give some "visible layman's capability". Let's not forget that there are also plenty of other, less publicized applications for a 500-km SRBM in the Baltic Theater.

Well if they go nuclear then Russia is a wasteland becuase they lack the kind of force depth to go toe to toe with the US anymore. Plus the Tu-95s wouldn't get within 300km of the BMD facilities as NATO's airpower could dominate well into Belarus.

Really? How so?

Iskander is a short range missile so its apogee is very low and its descent speed equally low. It doesn't even really fly a ballistic path. So the PAC-3 missile has more than enough energy to achieve an intercept.

I don't think anyone in the professional defence world is losing sleep over this but Russia was able to divert attention and grab some 'positive' headlines. In the long run but they have just isolated themselves further and provided further encouragement for an increase in the already huge disparate force on force ratios against them.

 

[nevidimka]

AFAIK, the Iskander's has boosting phase and terminal phase defensive manoeuvrings as well as being made of special composites to reduce radar signature to enhance survival against SAM's.

 

[Grand Danois]

AFAIK, the Iskander's has boosting phase and terminal phase defensive manoeuvrings as well as being made of special composites to reduce radar signature to enhance survival against SAM's.

Just like Russian supersonic sea skimmers.... and everything else Russian...

 

[SkolZkiy]

Iskanders have radius of 400-500km. 280 km it is an export variant of the system. As I published in the thread about Russian-Georgian war - they took part in that war. The appogei of flight is something like 50 km. and this is the great advantage of this system because in the zone 30-100 km it is very difficult to hit it. also as it was said this rocket makes several manoeuvers so it is not a classical SRBM.

 

[Grand Danois]

But shooting at a defended point target.

PAC-3 has an excellent record vs such targets.

 

[kato]

I don't think anyone in the professional defence world is losing sleep over this but Russia was able to divert attention and grab some 'positive' headlines.

I agree there. Russia has a number of other options, this is just a visible power projection.

Well if they go nuclear then Russia is a wasteland becuase they lack the kind of force depth to go toe to toe with the US anymore. Plus the Tu-95s wouldn't get within 300km of the BMD facilities as NATO's airpower could dominate well into Belarus.

I think its rather naive to believe any direct exchange of force between Russia and the USA (and we're talking USA, not NATO, with the GBI base) would not turn out nuclear even on limited scales.

NATO air domination? In that sphere? There would only be Polands future 100 F-16 Block 52+, plus that single Patriot battery. Enough for what, 4 QRA double launches, and maybe 2 CAP in the air in a pinch? Add to that the CAP and QRA over the Baltic Shield nations, and perhaps even Germany's full CAP squadron, though not projected at that distance.
Would be something if Belarus tries anything, but merely a speedbump for any halfway serious Russian action.

Besides which any action from Russia against this GBI site would obviously be part of a first strike. I doubt they're losing much sleep about the GBI site as is anyway. What's problematic to Russia is the potential upscaling built into the layout.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

You could almost argue that the PAC-3 missile was designed to destroy such systems. In order to get past PAC-3 you need a much longer range missile, with a very high apogee that is going to be descending at Mach 18. Iskander isn't even in the SCUD league with it's 1,000 km apogee at Mach 3 descent.

 

[Feanor]

But shooting at a defended point target.

PAC-3 has an excellent record vs such targets.

So it's a matter of saturation? After all if there are more missiles then interceptors, you can't intercept them all. And the pk is most likely going to be significantly less then 1.

And of course there is the matter of what additional features have been built into the Iskander for penetration of missile defense sites, Skolzkiy mentioned a few of the alleged ones. I don't know that there is much open information available on that, so it could be anything from a hybrid of an SRBM and a cruise missile, to a SRBM with some ECM and minor manouver potential.

 

[Grand Danois]

So it's a matter of saturation? After all if there are more missiles then interceptors, you can't intercept them all. And the pk is most likely going to be significantly less then 1.

Agree on saturation. I do not agree on Pk being significantly less than 1.

But as I said - the Poles want the Pac-3s as a tripwire unit.

And of course there is the matter of what additional features have been built into the Iskander for penetration of missile defense sites, Skolzkiy mentioned a few of the alleged ones. I don't know that there is much open information available on that, so it could be anything from a hybrid of an SRBM and a cruise missile, to a SRBM with some ECM and minor manouver potential.

Doesn't matter how maneuverable it is when the defender is defending a point target and the trajectory is ballistic or depressed ballistic. So we need not even have to discuss what is open information or not.

 

[Feanor]

I think the Pk would be significantly different if it turns out that the Iskanders carry serious ECM built into the missiles, as well as manouverable trajectory, vs simply a classical SRBM.

EDIT: Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, this is just my assumption (based on a little reading ).

EDIT2: So apparently plans are to re-arm 5 rocket-artillery brigades with Iskanders by 2015. Belarus is also planning to re-arm one of it's rocket artillery briages, located in Mogilev, with Iskanders.

Here's an interesting description of the missile.

Ракета управляется на всей траектории полета с помощью аэродинамических и газодинамических рулей. Траектория полета "Искандер-Э" не баллистическая, а управляемая. Ракета постоянно меняет плоскость траектории. Особенно активно она маневрирует на участке своего разгона и подхода к цели - с перегрузкой от 20 до 30g. Для того чтобы перехватить "Искандер-Э", противоракета должна двигаться по траектории с перегрузкой в два-три раза выше, а это практически невозможно. Большая часть траектории полета ракеты, изготовленной по технологии 'Стелс' и имеющей малую отражающую поверхность, проходит на высоте 50 км, что также существенно уменьшает вероятность ее поражения противником.

I'll try to translate: The rocket is controlled along the entire path by aerodynamic and gas-dynamic rudders. The flight trajectory is not ballistic, but controlled. On the approach to target the rocket makes intensive manouevers at 20 to 30 G. So intercept it, the counter-missile has to be moving at double to triple that which is practically impossible. The missile has a small RCS, and flies at the height of 50 kilometers which significantly decreases changes of intercept.

Непосредственно на цель ракета выводится c помощью инерциальной системы управления, а затем захватывается автономной корреляционно-экстремальной оптической головкой самонаведения. Принцип действия системы самонаведения "Искандера" состоит в том, что оптическая аппаратура формирует изображение местности в районе цели, которое сравнивается бортовым компьютером с введенным в ходе подготовки ракеты к пуску эталоном. Оптическая головка обладает повышенной устойчивостью к существующим средствам радиоэлектронной борьбы и позволяет производить успешные пуски ракет даже в безлунные ночи, когда нет дополнительной природной подсветки цели, поражая подвижную цель с погрешностью плюс-минус два метра.

The missile is guided directly onto target by an inertial guidance system., and is then guided by autonomous optical targetting system. The optical device creates an image of the terrain around the region, which is compared with the onboards computers image which is uploaded during targetting. The optical targetting system has increased protection against ECM, and allows launches even at night without moonlight, with accuracy on moving targets within two meters.

http://rian.ru/defense_safety/20081107/154604752.html