Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No SAM Capable of Hitting SHuttle
FAS Website ^ | 6-30-2000 | Federation of American Scientists

Posted on 02/01/2003 10:13:41 AM PST by Basilides

S-300V SA-12A GLADIATOR and SA-12B GIANT HQ-18 The S-300V (SA-12) low-to-high Altitude, tactical surface to air missile system also has anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The HQ-18 reportedly the designation of a Chinese copy of the Russian S300V, though the details of this program remain rather conjectural. In early 1996 Russia astounded the United States Army by marketing the Russian SA-12 surface-to-air missile system in the UAE in direct competition with the United States Army's Patriot system. Rosvooruzheniye offered the UAE the highest-quality Russian strategic air defense system, the SA-12 Gladiator, as an alternative to the Patriot at half the cost. The offer also included forgiveness of some of Russia's debt to the UAE. The S-300V consists of:

9M82 SA-12b GIANT missile 9M83 SA-12a GLADIATOR missile 9A82 SA-12b GIANT TELAR 9A93 SA-12a GLADIATOR TELAR 9A84 GIANT Launcher/Loader Vehicle (LLV) 9A85 GLADIATOR Launcher/Loader Vehicle (LLV) 9S15 BILL BOARD Surveillance Radar system 9S19 HIGH SCREEN Sector Radar system 9S32 GRILL PAN Guidance Radar system 9S457 Command Station

The 9M83 SA-12a GLADIATOR is a dual-role anti-missile and anti-aircraft missile with a maximum range between 75 and 90 km.

The 9M82 SA-12b GIANT missile, configured primarily for the ATBM role, is a longer range system [maximum range between 100 and 200 km] with a longer fuselage with larger solid-fuel motor. The 9A82 SA-12b GIANT and 9A93 SA-12a GLADIATOR TELAR vehicles are similar, though the 9A83-1 carries four 9M83 SA-12a GLADIATOR missiles, whereas the 9A82 carries only two 9M82 SA-12b GIANT missiles. The configuration of the vehicles command radar is also different. On the 9A83-1 the radar is mounted on a folding mast providing 360º coverage in azimuth and full hemispheric coverage in elevation. The radar on the 9M82 TELAR is mounted in a semi-fixed position over the cab, providing 90º coverage on either side in azimuth and 110º in elevation. The TELARs are not capable of autonomous engagements, requiring the support of the GRILL PAN radar.

The 9S457-1 Command Post Vehicle is the command and control vehicle for the SA-12 system, which is supported by the BILL BOARD A surveillance radar and the HIGH SCREEN sector radar. The CPV and its associated radars can detect up to 200 targets, track as many as 70 targets and designate 24 of the targets to the brigade's four GRILL PAN radar systems for engagement by the SA-12a and SA-12b TELARs.

The BILL BOARD A radar provides general surveillance, with the antenna rotating every 6-12 seconds. The radar, which can detect up to 200 targets, provides target coverage of 0-55º in elevation and 10-250 km in range with an accuracy is 30-35 min of arc in azimuth and 250 m in range. and.

The HIGH SCREEN sector radar supporst the ATBM role, providing surveillance of anticipated azimuths of threat missiles. The radar is switches to a tracking mode when high speed targets are detected, automatically transmiting the trajectory parameters to the Command Post Vehicle. The CPV prioritizes the threat and instructs the HIGH SCREEN radar to track specific missiles, with the maximum being 16 simultaneous targets.

The GRILL PAN radar system controls the battery's launcher vehicles (TELARs and LLVs). It can simultaneously track up to 12 targets and control up to six missiles against these targets The radar can acquire targets with a radar cross-section of 2m2 at a range of 150 km in manual mode and 140 km in automatic mode. The GRILL PAN tracks targets assigned to it by the CP while simultaneously maintaining a horizon search for new targets.

The LLVs (9A85 GLADIATOR and 9A83 GLADIATOR) resemble normal TELARs, but with a loading crane rather than command radars. While the primary role of the LLV is to replenish the TELARs, they can also erecting and launch missiles if needed, though they are dependent on the use of command radars from neighboring TELARs.

Specifications

SA-12a Range, (km) 6-75 km Altitude, (m) 25 km Basic load on vehicle 4 missiles on launcher Detection range, km Reaction time, sec Speed 1.7 km./sec Reload time Warhead 150 kg, HE Command guidance Combined, inertial with semi-active self-guidance Radar(s) GRILL PAN missile guidance radar, BILL BOARD surveillance radar, HIGH SCREEN sector scan radar Emplace/displace time (min) 5 Support vehicles TELAR, Transloader, command post Chassis Variations of the MT-T chassis are used for the launch vehicle, loader-launcher vehicle, missile guidance station, command post vehicle, and the radars.

Specifications

SA-12b Range, (km) 13-100 km Altitude, (m) 1-30 km Basic load on vehicle 2 missiles on launcher Detection range, km Reaction time, sec Speed 2.4 km./sec. Reload time Warhead 150 kg, HE Command guidance Combined, inertial with semi-active self-guidance Radar(s) GRILL PAN missile guidance radar, BILL BOARD surveillance radar, HIGH SCREEN sector scan radar Emplace/displace time (min) 5 Support vehicles TELAR, Transloader, command post Chassis Variations of the MT-T chassis are used for the launch vehicle, loader-launcher vehicle, missile guidance station, command post vehicle, and the radars.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: columbiatragedy; feb12003; nasa; sam; shuttle; spaceshuttle; sts107; surfacetoairmissle; tinfoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last
Just a question....are one of these capable of hitting a target like the Shuttle upon re-entry ?

I'm not saying that is what happened....but the press keeps repeating that NO SAM could have hit the shuttle.

Is that really the case ?

1 posted on 02/01/2003 10:13:41 AM PST by Basilides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Basilides
Here is one for the tin foilers. The nly thing that may have been capable would be the new "Star Wars" stuff.
2 posted on 02/01/2003 10:15:28 AM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Basilides
I would have to imagine a missile would leave a highly visible contrail that would have been seen by thousands. An ABM is doubtful.
3 posted on 02/01/2003 10:17:41 AM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Basilides
An ICBM could get the velocity to do it, but it doesn't have the targeting capability. There's really nothing, except experimental SDI technology that could do it, definitely not within a terrorists capability.
4 posted on 02/01/2003 10:17:48 AM PST by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Basilides
I don't think it was terrorism either. But the circumstances are just too weird. On the eve of the Iraq invasion, the shuttle carrying the first Israeli astronaut blows up, just as the threats from militant Arabs are heating up.
5 posted on 02/01/2003 10:20:52 AM PST by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
It would also be visible to the satellites that witnessed the explosion. Any act of terrorism would have to be an inside job, via sabotage of a timed explosive of some type. There is no way it was a missle, and it was most likely mechanical failure of some kind, not terrorism.
6 posted on 02/01/2003 10:22:57 AM PST by Steel Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GunRunner
Don't forget it blew up over Texas which makes it even more weird.
7 posted on 02/01/2003 10:24:49 AM PST by duckman (all ducked up with no place to go..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: duckman
Yeah, and wreakage rained down in Palestine, TX.
8 posted on 02/01/2003 10:25:26 AM PST by GunRunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
There's no chance it could be external terrorism (an external weapon striking the craft). As for internal terrorism (some form of sabotage to the craft), who would plan something that would cause the destruction of the craft on re-entry when it would be so much easier to plan something that would cause destruction at lift-off?

At this point, I have no reason not to suspect failure of the heat shield. I frankly doubt there will be much left of the craft with which to peace together what happened in any definitive way.

But two things I'll safely predict. First, a good many items of junk will be reported as fallen Columbia debris. Second, within a week somebody on E-Bay will try offering that junk as "Space Shuttle Debris".

9 posted on 02/01/2003 10:26:39 AM PST by Tall_Texan (Where liberals lead, misery follows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
I agree it wasn't a missile...or if it was it would have been detectable...but is the press right in saying that no SAM/ABM system such as the SA-12b GIANT listed above, was capable of doing so ?

10 posted on 02/01/2003 10:29:09 AM PST by Basilides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: Basilides
I doubt any sabotage would be reported.
13 posted on 02/01/2003 10:32:59 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (Further, the statement assumed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Basilides
You are only looking at one part of the equation, height. You need to look at the other variable too, speed.

The shuttle was going somewhere around Mach 7 at the time it broke up. Nothing short of the SDI tech we are developing now would be capable of tracking it.

14 posted on 02/01/2003 10:33:46 AM PST by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dark Templar
OK..as I said I don't believe it was a missile....but I'm dense...maybe I don't understand trajectories and such...but the range of the SA-12b GIANT is listed at 120-200KM which is approximately 72-120 miles, or...you do the math....the shuttle was approximately 40 miles high coming in at are-entry angle.....what am I missing here ?
15 posted on 02/01/2003 10:35:09 AM PST by Basilides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Basilides
Communist Chinese laser fired from the Panama Canal or University of Texas @ Austin? Wrath of Allah?

Mankind has been in the heavens for only one century; we've come a long way since Kittyhawk.

IMHO, these extraordinarly uncommon men and women had extraordinarly uncommon bad luck doing their unforgiving dangerous work. At 3.5 miles per second nearly 40 miles overhead, they reached eternity in an instant.

Hail Columbia!

16 posted on 02/01/2003 10:35:44 AM PST by SevenDaysInMay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomB
Actually the latest speed was mentioned at 4000 mph...or a little less than Mach 6
17 posted on 02/01/2003 10:36:21 AM PST by Basilides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf
Agree that an inside job is more likely. There will be rioting in the streets IF it is learned that islamic or even non-islamic illegals were working in or around the launch crew/site.
18 posted on 02/01/2003 10:36:41 AM PST by Let's Roll (Whether we bring our enemies to justice, or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Basilides

19 posted on 02/01/2003 10:36:43 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson