The Russian army is armed with anti-aircraft missile systems of various classes and types. Regardless of their characteristics and purpose, they all attract the attention of foreign experts and journalists. So, a few days ago, the American edition of The National Interest published its vision of the Russian air defense system Tor-M2U and the entire Tor family. Its author considered the newest complex of the "Tor" line, and also tried to compare this sample with another modern Russian development.
On December 9, a new article titled "Why NATO (Or Anyone) Should Fear Russia's TOR Air Defense System" appeared in The Buzz column - "Why NATO (and not only NATO) should be afraid of the Russian Tor anti-aircraft system." The subtitle noted: recent history suggests such thoughts. The article was written by Charlie Gao.
A new article in The National Interest begins with a reminder of events in the recent past. Not so long ago, Russian military expert Viktor Murakhovsky got into an unpleasant situation related to the publication of some data. He wrote that the Pantsir-S1 anti-aircraft missile and cannon systems operating as part of the air defense system of the Khmeimim airbase in Syria faced certain problems. Therefore, when repelling enemy attacks, they showed themselves not in the best way.
According to V. Murakhovsky, the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system showed an efficiency of 19%. A similar parameter of the Tor-M2U missile systems was several times higher - 80%.
Ch. Gao notes that, according to statistics alone of recent times, the Tor-M2U air defense system is head and shoulders above the Pantsir-S1. However, he does not make quick conclusions and proposes to consider the situation more broadly. There are a number of questions to be answered. Why was Thor originally made? What can he do, and why did he manage to surpass a competitor in Syria?
Referring to the well-known Russian-language information and news system "Rocket Technique", the author recalls that the development of the first complex of the "Tor" family began in 1975. This sample was created as a replacement for the existing air defense system "Osa" and was intended to work at the divisional level. By this time, tactical aircraft had mastered low-altitude flight around the terrain, which made new demands on anti-aircraft systems. First of all, it was necessary to shorten the reaction time.
Another promising threat was high-precision guided aircraft weapons such as AGM-62 Walleye guided bombs or air-launched cruise missiles. A promising air defense system had to fight with such goals.
To counter current threats, the Tor anti-aircraft missile system was created. It entered service with the Soviet Army in 1985. The "Tor" complex, which replaced the "Wasp", had a similar architecture and was also made autonomous. Target detection radars, guidance station and missile launcher are mounted on a common chassis.
To reduce the reaction time and a faster target attack in the Tor project, the same solutions were used as in the S-300 air defense system. A vertical missile launch was used. Eight guided munitions were located in transport and launch containers in a vertical position. During the launch, the rocket is ejected from the container using a powder pressure accumulator. After that, the product unfolds the planes and can fly to the target.
When the rocket reaches a height of 20 m above the launcher, special gas rudders are activated on the head and tail of its hull. With the help of these devices, the missile is tilted towards the target. Upon reaching the required tilt, the rocket turns on the main engine and goes to its target.
Such features of missiles drastically reduce the time required to carry out an attack and defeat a target. While driving, it takes 10 seconds to prepare and launch a rocket. When the complex is placed in a stationary position, this time is reduced to 8 s.
On the combat vehicle SAM "Tor" there was a radar guidance station with a passive phased antenna array. Due to this equipment, the complex had advantages over the "Wasp" in terms of speed and accuracy of beam control. However, in the very first version of the Tor project, only one target channel was provided. As a result, the combat vehicle could control only one missile at a time.
This flaw was corrected in the next project "Tor-M1". The complex of this model was put into service in 1991. The modernized air defense system already had two target channels. In addition, measures were taken to improve efficiency when working on specific targets, such as guided bombs. Also, during the modernization, new computers with improved characteristics were used, which led to some reduction in the response time.
On the basis of developments on the "Toru-M1" and new solutions, another project for updating the air defense missile system - "Tor-M2" was created. Ch. Gao points out that the data on this complex are different. So, according to the website Militaryarms.ru, "Tor-M2" is capable of simultaneously firing at 4 targets. At the same time, the English-language portal Army-technology.com writes about the presence of 10 target channels. In addition, as the author recalls, some sources indicate the limited anti-missile potential of the anti-aircraft system. Allegedly, "Tor-M2" is capable of shooting down unguided missiles, which makes it an analogue of the Israeli system "Iron Dome".
Anti-aircraft missile systems of the "Tor" family are widespread in the Russian army. Moreover, such systems are built on different chassis. In addition to the standard version on a tracked chassis, an Arctic modification was created based on the Tor-M2DT articulated all-terrain vehicle, as well as a Tor-M2K version on a wheeled vehicle intended for export deliveries. Finally, successful tests were carried out, during which the whole "Thor" complex was placed on the deck of a warship.
Recalling the history of the development of the Tor air defense missile system, Ch. Gao returns to the question of comparing these systems with the Pantsir-S1 missile and cannon system. He proposes to determine why "Thor" is much better than "Shell". First of all, the author recalls the purpose of these complexes. Thus, the Tor products are designed to work as part of anti-aircraft missile divisions, while Pantsir-S1 should be responsible for the air defense of the near zone. As a result, the "Torah" have more powerful radar stations, with the help of which they can detect an approaching target before the "Shell".
The author of The National Interest believes that the missiles of the Thor complexes are more maneuverable and effective than the weapons of the Pantsir. In addition, a vertical launch with a declination of the rocket before the start of the flight is a serious advantage. This makes it possible to increase efficiency when firing at targets coming from different directions, since the missile launcher does not have to rotate for preliminary guidance. However, after launch - to ensure missile guidance - the launcher must still rotate with its locators.
There are also prerequisites for the emergence of the superiority of "Torah" of a different nature, associated with goals. SAMs of the "Thor" family are capable of attacking and destroying less complex air targets than the "Pantsir-C1" system.
Ch. Gao speculates about the events at the Khmeimim base, related to the effectiveness of the anti-aircraft weapons. ZRPK "Pantsir-S1" were developed for work in object air defense. It is quite possible that it was these complexes that were entrusted with the task of combating small-sized unmanned aerial vehicles outside the "Torov" coverage area. Intercepting such targets is an extremely difficult task, and this could have a negative impact on the numerical indicators of the effectiveness of weapons.
***
The reason for the appearance of a new publication in The National Interest, obviously, was the events of a month ago around curious information about the operation of Russian air defense systems at the Khmeimim airbase. Another publication of a well-known military expert became the reason for a real scandal. The fact that the publication did not remain in the public domain for too long added fuel to the fire of discussions - it was soon removed.
In early November, V. Murakhovsky, a well-known expert in the field of weapons and defense, published a note on the state of the air defense at the Khmeimim base and the results of its work. Some quantitative indicators were given, which became the reason for sharp criticism towards the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system, as well as the processes and persons involved in its creation and adoption. The main conclusion of the article was that the Pantsir-C1 complexes did not justify themselves in a real armed conflict.
V. Murakhovsky wrote that Pantsir-C1 systems have problems with detecting low-speed and small targets in the form of unmanned aerial vehicles, but at the same time they often detect false targets - large birds. It was precisely because of the low efficiency of such air defense missile systems in the spring of this year that the decision was made to send the Tor-M2U complexes to Syria. This technique is said to have shown its potential quickly. In the first week of July, "Torah" hit 7 enemy UAVs with a consumption of 9 missiles. From April to October, these air defense systems destroyed 80 air targets and showed an efficiency of 80%. For "Armor" this figure was only 19%.
The note on Khmeimim's air defense did not remain available for very long. It was removed shortly after publication. Nevertheless, the deletion did not prevent the start of active discussions. Moreover, the loss of an article with interesting information added fuel to the fire and led to the emergence of well-known suspicions.
It should be noted that reports of the low efficiency of the Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system contradict the reports of the recent past. Earlier it was repeatedly reported that such complexes provided protection for the Khmeimim base from various attacks, including the use of drones and unguided missiles. In addition, the Pantsiri took part in repelling the famous missile strike on April 14, 2018, and, apparently, were able to hit a number of cruise missiles. However, there were some losses. In early May, the Israeli military managed to destroy one "Pantsir-C1", which at that time was not in a state of combat readiness.
According to reports of recent months, the Tor-M2U air defense systems are on constant duty at the Khmeimim base and have already managed to repel several attack attempts. At the same time, accurate information about the operation of such complexes has not yet been officially published, but the available data show the high efficiency of combat work. One way or another, the Tor-M2U complements the previously deployed Pantsiri-S1 and provides air defense for the base.
For what reason, information from official and unofficial sources does not coincide or even contradict each other is unknown. You can express a variety of versions concerning the issues of technology, operation, organization, etc. The National Interest offered its own version of the explanation for the current situation. In the opinion of its author, obtaining the results published by V. Murakhovsky, certain technical factors could have contributed.
Ch. Gao proposed three explanations for the results obtained at once. The first assumption concerns the technical features of the complex that affect the reaction time; the second indicates the complexity of different goals; and the third is associated with the goals and objectives of the complexes, as well as with the organization of air defense. Which of them is the most consistent with reality is unknown.
The situation around the Russian anti-aircraft weapons at the Khmeimim airbase still raises certain questions, which so far remain without worthy answers. Officials from the Ministry of Defense have not commented on the latest reports in any way and prefer to praise the domestic air defense systems. The current situation raises serious questions, and in addition, attracts the attention of the foreign press - for example, The National Interest.
