About Artillery Part III: Lightning anti-aircraft missile
2s14.blogspot.com 7 years ago
Today, I will discuss a forgotten (and rather quickly) program to make a short-range anti-aircraft rocket called Lightning. In its assumptions, Lightning was to be a low-cost and simple anti-aircraft missile, which was to form the basis of the national anti-aircraft defence, and was so to be developed and manufactured by the Polish industry.
Lightning rocket demonstration
Discussion and construction of Lightning According to Lightning's assumptions, it was to be the national equivalent of Russian anti-aircraft kits Tunguska and Pancyr. For this reason, the construction of the rocket was akin to the 9M311 and 57E6 rockets utilized in Russia. As in Russian equivalents, the anti-aircraft rocket is two-step. The starting phase is simply a 171 mm-diameter booster, a 28.78 kN mid-range, and a 69.07 kNs full pulse that accelerates the anti-aircraft rocket to 1280 m/s in 2.4 seconds. erstwhile the assumed velocity is reached, the booster is disconnected and the further flight is continued by a marching step that does not have its own drive. For this reason, its ability to manoeuvre depends solely on the carrying surfaces of ballasts, so the span of the second phase ballasts is as much as 314 mm at a diameter of 91 mm and additionally the supporting surfaces were in the duck system. On the basis of the information available, it can besides be established that the full mass of the projectile was 69 kg, of which: - the level of march was to weigh about 25 kg - the starting fuel weighed 29.76 kg - an empty starting point most likely weighed about 14 kg The mark mass of the warhead, which was to be on the march stage, is unknown, but due to the early abandonment of work on Lightning (level IV / V), most likely the designers themselves may not know this value.
In order to reduce the cost of production of the Lightning missile, it did not have its own self-conducting head and thus the guidance was carried out by radio commands originating from the launcher, and the rockets were corrected on the basis of the radar readings of the fire control, which were part of the ground launcher. The advantage of specified a projectile - apart from price - was the ability to combat fast-moving targets in the absence of hazard of prior detection of a projectile. But on the another hand, the drawback was that if you didn't detect an incoming missile, you could detect a launcher due to a working radar steering fire. This made Lightning (as a rocket set) a hazard in close anti-aircraft defence of sub-terranean divisions. A Lightning was just intended to service as a primary anti-aircraft rocket for brigade-level anti-aircraft subdivisions. Thanks to its parameters, it was expected to be a immense leap against what presently offers the tandem Grom + ZU-23-2, while the Army Brigades of the Land would yet receive a good means of defence against helicopters and aircraft flying at average altitudes (including storms). In addition, crucial information, which is not mentioned, is that Lightning may theoretically have served as a complement to the Patriots in the tasks of point rocket defense. Unfortunately, however, the parameters of the rocket prevented or severely impeded the combating of low or very low-altitude flying targets (the minimum flight tallness of Lightning was 230 m), as well as the large (ceiling 10800 m). However, this could have been adequate to defend the airports and command stations against glider ammunition and maneuvering missiles. Moreover, depending on the parameters of the radar, the fire control of Lightning could besides be utilized to defend against smaller caliber missiles, including self-defense against anti-radiolocation missiles. It was originally assumed that Lightning would be part of the modernization of 9K33 Wasp rocket anti-aircraft defence kits. The rocket was characterized by a much smaller mass than 9M33M3 while at the same time higher parameters of combating targets and greater range. In addition, Lightning, like Wasp, was radio-guided, so it did not request to make major changes in the launcher design.
Comparison of Lightning parameters with 9M33 Wasp and Ukrainian T-382 missile, proposed as part of its own upgrading of the Wasp launcher
After all, the mark carrier would should be developed for Lightning. The constructors most likely did not want to show besides much creativity, which made the Self-propelled set of Anti-Aircraft Rockets "The Lightning" besides much like the Russian Pancyra. The difference was, however, that it was planned to be planted on the Hippopotam chassis alternatively than the truck and the tower were to be armed only with an 8-piece rocket launcher. The disadvantage of specified a solution was the large dead field, which Russian designers eliminated in their projects by adding automatic cannons, which were intended to service as a complement to rockets. Can not open message exclude the modularity of the tower, which would mean that if the task were to continue, Lightning would besides appear on the caterpillar chassis (IP9) in tandem with Loire (yes, she is inactive alive) or just on the chassis of a dense work truck. In addition, for the protection of airports and another crucial facilities, a cost-effective solution could be the improvement of a semi-stationed launcher, embedded on a trailer, a model of the Swedish RBS-23 BAMSE. The most crucial question is whether the constructors assumed that Lightning was expected to be able to fire with only optoelectronic means. This would consequence in a deterioration of the capabilities in the number of targets being combated (this would limit the elimination of single targets against 2 to 4 targets in the working radar), but in return in certain situations it would be possible to completely passivise the launcher in exchange for expanding the level of safety of its work. Nevertheless, the work on Lightning was abandoned 4 years after it began. This was due to the planned completion of improvement work, which was financed under the NCBiR. Nor can it be excluded that this could besides be due to both the change of the anti-aircraft defence concept (in the meantime, the Narew programme was launched) “The lightning was created under the already alternate past of the Polish Shield system, where it was to supplement 12 Patriot batteries, which were then proposed by the Germans. Due to the current situation with the Vistula programme, the then resignation of the thought of buying these launchers from the German demobility and their modernization to the then standard for a full amount of about PLN 5 billion* turns out to be a immense mistake. Otherwise, Patriots would already be in the equipment of the Anti-Aircraft defence Army, and the subject of the Vistula (if it inactive existed) would be limited possibly to further upgrade of the mid-range anti-aircraft defence system. Blaze could besides be caused by changing expectations of the rocket itself with limited financial resources. The demonstrator reached a capacity of about 16.5 km and a ceiling of 10.8 km at the assumptions of 12 km of importance and 6 km of ceiling. After changing the requirements, Lightning was expected to scope a distance of 20 km at a ceiling of 10 km, and this was not feasible with the erstwhile booster and fuel. Ultimately, erstwhile it comes to rehearsals, it was only possible to test the starting phase with the model of the march stage. And that means that no prototype of the march phase has been developed, nor has the rocket guidance strategy been tested. But this second Polish manufacture was not able to make itself. How could the R & D programme have unfolded? Now let's take the subject of alternate history, which is like the subject of Lightning had been reactivated or the program would have continued. If the requirements were to be maintained in accordance with the actual parameters of the projectile, the work on the prototype of the marching part had surely begun. Theoretically, she would be little troublesome to construct than a booster, but 1 serious "but". The problem is that the Polish manufacture has never produced a radio-guided anti-aircraft missile, and this means that in this case it would be essential to cooperate with UkrOboronoProm on the subject of guidance.
Concept of the Self-propelled Anti-Aircraft Rocket Set "Split"
After the improvement of the first mark variant of Lightning (which I discussed earlier) the subject of the improvement of Polish anti-aircraft rocket could theoretically be drawn 2 ways. Lightning due to its construction may have been characterized by a very advanced sensitivity of modernization, which would presume replacement of a booster or a appropriate projectile. This would reduce the cost of modifying the full projectile much little than the one-stage missile. The first direction, developing the Lightning concept, would imply improving rocket parameters or utilizing track-via-missile guidance in the missile. In the first case, it would be most likely to replace the booster or usage better rocket fuel. Due to the size of the full projectile, the booster could only "cut" (maximum 210 mm diameter) so that it could not affect the ability to carry missiles on 9K33 launchers. This can theoretically reduce the booster by about 0.5 metres, so the dimension of the full projectile would decrease to about 2.65 metres. On the another hand, it cannot be excluded that due to the changed aerodynamics it would be essential to increase the thrust of the starting engine, which would entail many changes in the first-degree design. Another option would be to keep the existing launch phase length, which would consequence in an increase in fuel by half as well as an increase in the mass of the projectile itself. As with abbreviation, a change in the first-degree structure would be necessary, but in return, the effect would be greater propellity and the rocket ceiling.
RBS-23 BAMSE Swedish counterpart Pancyra
Additionally, regardless of the direction of changes in the booster plan specified a rocket as Lightning can accomplish higher start speeds, which will automatically translate into the ability to capture faster flying objects. Despite current infirmities, theoretically these are the fast anti-aircraft rockets with a non-powered march phase will shortly have the best technically chances of combating hypersonic maneuvering missiles (i.e. moving at a velocity of more than 1700 m/s) and it cannot be excluded that it may be in this direction that the improvement of conventional anti-missile defence may be directed. In the case of the other, we are talking about the replacement of the march stage, due to the fact that erstwhile conducting track-via-missile, the presence of a radio-location receiver in the nose of a rocket is required. specified a projectile would have more intent in combating flying targets, so that the proximity fuse, which was to be placed together with the contact fuse in the first Lightning, would no longer be necessary. Additionally, the shifts in the march phase would most likely besides affect the removal of part of the warhead, which was to be liable for damaging the mark with shrapnel. The consequence of this modification would be to make a more costly but slimmer marching drone, which size would be comparable to a one-stage Thunder / Lightning missile. However, in order to make specified a projectile it would inactive be essential to aid the Ukrainian manufacture (and this is much bigger than erstwhile conducting radio command) due to the fact that the Polish manufacture has never worked on semi-active anti-aircraft missiles (SARH). The second, more beneficial way for us, would be to make a classic, two-stage anti-aircraft rocket with a thermal bearing of at least 20 km. Since the experience of MESKO in the production of anti-aircraft self-conducting missiles was limited only to the production of thermally guided ammunition (9M31, 9M32M, R-3S and Grom), specified a projectile could mostly be developed by the Polish industry. Moreover, specified a rocket could have a LOAL function, so that it would be possible to passivize the rocket launcher (including the anticipation of placing it even on an average truck). In addition, with specified a projectile, it would besides be essential to usage the engine to the marching stage, so that it could increase the scope and ceiling of combating targets with this projectile. On the another hand, in fact, specified a projectile should be developed from scratch to minimise the dead zone, and in addition, it would be essential to make a fresh IR seeker based on the existing in the Thunderstorm, as it would now be utilized useless against the temperature generated by the opposition of air to a rocket flying at much higher velocity than the Thunder. Summary Returning to completion, Lightning rapidly made her life as many another projects funded by the Ministry of Science. MESKO would not be able to make a radio-guided rocket on its own, so the Ukrainians needed aid in further work. Due to these difficulties, the manufacture responded to the improvement of a rocket concept called PK-6. specified a Polish manufacture would be able to make specified a projectile on its own, but this would be the equivalent of the Swedish RBS-70 or Russian 9M337 Sosna - shorter but little ranged and little runway speed. On the another hand, it is incomprehensible why TELESYSTEM had not previously developed a post-licensing product, based on a 9M31 / 9M31M Arrow-1 missile, which under the licence was produced in Skarżysk as it did with Grom, which was based on a 9M39 Needle-1E rocket license, obtained by ZM Skarżysko in the mid-1980s. specified a bullet would not be our dream come true, but could be further developed to increase its capabilities. And specified a rocket would most likely be 1 of the elements of the Poprad system's weaponry (near Thunder / Lightning) and would be a real complement to the VSHORAD systems presently in use.
Concept of PK-6 rocket anti-aircraft missile
Unfortunately, Lightning is an example of the fact that any things request to be developed further than the period of development. It is not the responsibility of the NCBiR or the operators liable for the improvement of the products concerned. It is simply that sometimes there is simply a deficiency of long-term imagination of industrial development, a kind of "road map", according to which the PPO could become more competitive. Sometimes there is besides no financial will, even if the money is on the table and waiting to be taken in exchange for selling its own product. And all this makes the PR surrounding the Polish armory 1 alternatively than another. And this PR is not generated by outsiders, but by people inside the industry. There are plenty of specified examples, although many of them are besides military faults or politicians against whom manufacture is trying to adapt. But it's an article about Lightning. The alternate communicative of its possible improvement I tried to best describe, though in the OPL rocket subject I am a layman. And in total, if Lightning had occurred (and not only Lightning), its production had been implemented, PGZ would have had a unique chance to offer elements of a comprehensive anti-aircraft defence of subdivisions of land, most likely integrated into a single, common system. But possibly I'll describe it in another article. Remarks (*) The price afraid only the acquisition of launchers, radars and parts of missiles (more than 300 pieces) in Germany and their modernization by American Lockheed Martin with the aid of Polish industry. Bibliography - Tomasz Szulc, New Polish anti-aircraft missile, NTW 10/2012, pp. 30-31 - T. Rasztabiga, K. Butterfly, B. Sigmund, R. Kazmierczak, Concept of the plan of a two-stage supersonic missile, Mechatronics Problems Armed Aviation Safety Engineering 3/2014, pp. 51-68 - Mirosław Gyurosi, Wasp inactive young, NTW 12/2008, pp. 22-28 - Andrzej Kiński, German Patriots offered to Poland, NTW 3/2011, pp. 30-31
