tanks/vehicles 2k22 "Tunguska" - A Tier 6 SPAAG ( USSR)

[kev2go 5,112]

2k22 Tunguska ; the official successor to the ZSU23-4 Shilka

 

 

 

 

 2k22 Tunguska: General Specifications

 

Weight about 35,000 kg (77,000 lb)

Length  about 7.90 m (25 ft 11 in)

Width    about 3.25 m (10 ft 8 in)

Height   about 4 m (13 ft 1 in) or about 3.35 m (10 ft) (radar stowed)

Crew     4 (vehicle commander, driver, gunner, radar operator)

Armour : protects the vehicle from 7.62 mm small arms fire and shell splinters

Main armament: 8 × 9M311 Missiles  

Secondary armament: 2 × 30 mm 2А38M , (1,904 rounds carried)

Gun elevation/ Depression :  + 80 degrees  / - 6 degrees

 

Engine  : V-46-6-MS,  V-12 with 780 HP

Transmission: Hydromechanical

Suspension:  Hydropneumatics

Ground clearance: 7–57 cm

Operational range: 500 km (310 mi)

Speed: 65 km/h maximum (on roads)

Early warning radar :  Detection range 20 Km, Tracking range 11 KM.

 

 

 3m911 Missile Specifications

 

Weight 57 kg

Length:   2560 mm

Warhead: Continuous-rod and steel cubes

Warhead weight: 9 kg

Detonation Mechanism: Laser fuse

Propellant: Solid-fuel rocket

Operational range: 8 KM

Flight ceiling: 3,500 metres (11,500 ft)

Boost time:         stages: boost to 900 m/s, then sustained 600 m/s stage to range

Speed   900 m/s maximum

Guidance system: Radio Command guidance , SACLOS based

Steering system: rocket motor with four steerable control surfaces

 

 

History:

 

Spoiler

 

Development of the 2K22 anti-aircraft system began on 8 June 1970. At the request of the Soviet Ministry of Defence, the KBP Instrument Design Bureau in Tula, under the guidance of the appointed Chief Designer A. G. Shipunov, started work on a 30mm anti-aircraft system as a replacement for the 23mm ZSU-23-4.

 

The 2K22 Tunguska owes its earliest origins to a 1970 directive for the replacement of the ubiquitous ZSU-23-4P SPAAG which Soviet analysts were unimpressed with the lethality and the  engagement envelope of the 23 mm  weapons. Analysis indicated that a 30 mm gun would be much more lethal. 

The project, code-named "Tunguska", was undertaken to Improve range and lack of early warning in the ZSU23-4  , and a counter to new ground attack aircraft in development, such as the A-10 Thunderbolt II, which was designed to be highly resistant to 23 mm cannons. Studies were conducted and demonstrated that a 30 mm cannon would require from a third to a half of the number of shells that the 23 mm cannon of the ZSU-23-4 would need to destroy a given target, and that firing at a MiG-17 or similarly at, in case of war, NATO's Hawker Hunter or Fiat G.91 flying at 300 m/s, with an identical mass of 30 mm projectiles would result in a kill probability 1.5 times greater than with 23 mm projectiles.

 

Soviet operational analysis also indicated that the performance of the acquisition radar on the SPAAG was critical to combat effectiveness. The defeat of anti-tank  helicopters ( such as the AH1 Cobra)  in pop-up engagement geometries became an additional requirement after the  1972 debut of these weapons in Vietnam. Trials of the prototype 2S6  / 2K22 Tunguska SPAAGM commenced in  1980.  The prototypes introduced several innovations, including  a 30 mm gun  derivative aircraft cannon,  the  9K311  missile and a digital computer for controlling the system.

 

The earliest production variant, the 2K22 / SA-19 Grison, achieved Initial Operating Capacity in 1982.

 

The immediate operational imperative for the PVO-SV was to defeat the then new A-10A Thunderbolt, and US Army helicopters firing anti-armour missiles, such as the TOW equipped AH-1S and Hellfire equipped AH-64A Apache. From the Soviet perspective, both of these threats would pop up briefly above the radar/visual horizon, fire at Soviet tanks or SPAAGs, and then disappear below the horizon before the ZSU-23-4 or 9K33 Osa / SA-8 systems could respond with defensive weapon fire.

 

The missile requirement led to the unusual two stage 9M311 design, in which the first stage boosted the round to 900 m/s at burnout, the sustainer in the terminal stage burning to impact and maintaining a 600 m/s velocity. The missile employs command link guidance, with an automatic Command to Line Of Sight (CLOS) control loop for the terminal phase to impact, with an 18G capability. The engagement radar component of the 1RL144M Hot Shot system is claimed to operate in the millimetric band, using jam resistant monopulse angle tracking; a 1A29M optical sight is bore sighted with the radar. A 1RL138 IFF system is included. Conceptually the 2S6 missile package has its closest Western equivalents in the Franco-German Roland system, and the UK Rapier Blindfire and Seawold systems.

 

The gun requirement led to the adaptation of  the 30 mm GSh-30 aircraft cannon, carried by Russian fighters: the 2A38 series liquid cooled 30 mm gun delivers a rate of fire of 1950-2500 rds/min, a muzzle velocity of 960 m/s, using the 2A42 cartridge and 0.39 kg projectile.

 

The initial 1982 2K22 2S6 Tunguska variant was superseded by the 2K22M/2S6M Tunguska M in 1990, and the 2K22M1/2S6M1 Tunguska M1 in 2003. The product line has been further developed as the Pantsir S, primarily in a road mobile configuration.

 

The Missile system:

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

This is a 57 kg launch weight missile, with a low smoke motor intended to avoid problems with optical/infrared tracking of targets and laser rangefinding. Initial speed is 900M/S. After it runs out of rocket motor,  The second terminal kill stage is unpowered and relies on kinetic energy imparted by the boost stage, the design strategy intended to minimise the dead weight and drag of the kill stage. Average missile speed is cited at 600 m/s (~Mach 2), and the weapon has a cited capability to engage targets manoeuvring at 5-7G.

Early variants of the missile use a laser proximity fuse, later variants a radio proximity fuse, with a blast fragmentation warhead. The fuse is triggered 5 metres from the target. An impact fuse is also provided, with the proximity fuse disabled for shots against surface targets.

 

3D art of Interior operators station

 

 

 

 

So to Sum up In essense this IS a valid additon for a Tier 6 ground forces to suceed the ZSU23-4 Shilka, especially if Tier 6 Air forces come around. The ZSU's missile system would not break gameplay because Radar is used as for detecting targets as well as provding ranging for the Gunner Soultion ( tracking and a Lead INdicator) whilst the Missiles are SACLOS guided requiring operator targeting until impact.  

 

IN essense they will work just like AGTM's for ground forces  except being used for aircraft. if implemented it would be mouse guided by a player maintaining cross hairs on a aircraft so the missile will travel to that location. However if you overshoot or miss a target the missile will not be able to tun around. It Motor burns out quick , detaches and then stage 2 it relies on Kintetic enegry. IT  looses energy fast.  and By the time it reach 8KM distance its Kinetic energy has ran out and the begins to fall towards the ground, and Explodes, and another shot is needed. IT has a maxlimum of 8 93M11 Missiles. At closer distances it will be more practical to use a its 30 mm guns as as there is a minum distance and the inital rocket motor makes it difficult to maintai visual contant with a Air target.

 

The easiest way to counterwill be not  caresely and constnatly fly at low altitudes. Even if flying at low altitudes & it launches missiles , evasive manuvers should make a player Controlling a missile  towards a Aircraft difificult  to hit. It is not ideally suited to Fast flying aircraft and last but not least.

 

IF Tier 6 aircraft include aircraft with Radar Warning Recieivers , Player will know One is active due to radar soruce, and they will get a Unique Tone and symobology chhange that they specfically are being targeted by that spefic Tunguska ( when locks them) , However again the Missile itslef is not reliant on radar lock. Radar lock is just for providing a lead indicator for gunnnery. It is a SACLOS missile guided up to 5 meters  before detonation from a given target. Ethier way such a feature would further negate the SACLOS missile  because no one would be caught by surprise.

 

Virtual Example 

 

Some Videos below of how Implenation in Game could work ,  certainly simple enough  , and easy enough for a player to operate for a game environment  like War thunder, that is a MMO and not a Study SIM.

 

Also too note these tests are done against predictable flying aircraft not attempting to engage me , And as you will see even then not a impressive hit rate at altitudes above 1000m  (absolute max the 3m911 can effectively reach is 3,500 meters  altitude)

 

2K22 Vs Slow mover ( A10)

 

 

2k22 VS Fast mover ( F5 tiger) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sources

 

 

http://www.military-today.com/artillery/2s6_tunguska.htm

 

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/tunguska/

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-96K6-Pantsir-2K22-Tunguska.html

 

https://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=18

 

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/4112249/sa-19-grison-2k22-tunguska

 

 

Edited October 16, 2017 by kev2go

[SAUBER_KH7 3,326]

Open for Discussion.

 

For those who might ask, TL;DR: The missiles are not fire and forget. They are basically anti-aircraft versions of ATGMs we have ingame. Thanks @kev2go for clarifying that in your videos.

[Thug Shaker Actual 225]

Oh man, I was super unsure of SPAA's with Missiles, but this system is absolutely gorgeous, and obviously requires much skill to use effectively. Those 30 mm's are mean too. Id also be super stoked to see the active radar tracking and all that. This system does have a balance as these missiles are literally AA ATGM's. The range is very short and can be evaded with maneuvers and even just speed or cover. I like, I like very much. +111111111 <3

Edited October 16, 2017 by KapitanSolovey

[Dundee93 508]

Good suggestion. It might be hard to balance, however. 

[Necrons31467 14,236]

Just curious, are those missiles proximity detonated or do they require direct contact with the aircraft?

Edited October 16, 2017 by Necrons31467

[xX_Lord_James_Xx 2,400]

Can you find equivalent vehicles for other nations? Because that is Gaijin's (supposed) policy when adding something. 

Edited October 16, 2017 by xX_Lord_James_Xx

[kev2go 5,112]

1 hour ago, Necrons31467 said:

Just curious, are those missiles proximity detonated or do they require direct contact with the aircraft?

 

Yes It was included in the OP.

 

There is a proximity fuze ( laser based) and that distance is 5 Meters to a target before detonation. Which obviously isnt direct but still pretty darn close.

 

Either way the reason this was done is so the  warhead Detonation can Fragment. IMost RL missiles that air intended  ( irregardless of guidance type) for air targets blow up just before an actual impact for this reason.

Edited October 16, 2017 by kev2go

[WulfPack 1,693]

According to Encyclopedia of Fatherland Artillery by A.V. Shirokorad

[kev2go 5,112]

8 hours ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

Can you find equivalent vehicles for other nations? Because that is Gaijin's (supposed) policy when adding something. 

 

Closest comparable ?  Some ideas were included in my First post of this Thread.

 

Uk has the Tracked Rapier system

 

Spoiler

 

 

Germany has Roland ( based on Marder IFV)

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

with Franch having the Roland system on the AMX30 chasis (AMX30R)

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

US never officially had anything comparable design in  actual Service.

 

However this tech gap can be filled with a prototype, which never reached mass production status. : the  XM975 ( which was built upon a the M109 Howitzer chasis) which was tested with the ROland Missile system that USA purchased from France,and if produced would have been designated the M975. 

 

Spoiler

 

 

In official Service US low level mobile air  defenses of the cold war basiclaly were only covered by  M163  vads and then evnetually long with Humvees with Stingers as well as the M6 linebacker. ( Bradley with stingers) however these are fire and forget IR missiles.

 

All other stuff  ( Hawk and Patriot) are medium to long range systems respectively  that arent really mobile enough to be impleneted in player control anyhow, and would be too OP anyhow. They are required to be set up, and need an external Radar station to target for them.

 

In any case  it should be note however the Roland  is more potent Range ( up to 5,500M) can be applied in either Optical or Rader guided modes , latter of which would have to be left out in war thunder, So its not slef guided by a rader lock. In Optical mode it is controlled by an Operator.similar to tunguska.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2017 by kev2go

[WulfPack 1,693]

56 minutes ago, kev2go said:

US never officially had anything comparable design in  actual Service.

 

However this tech gap can be filled with a prototype, which never reached mass production status. : the  XM975 ( which was built upon a the M109 Howitzer chasis) which was tested with the ROland Missile system that USA purchased from France,and if produced would have been designated the M975. 

How about the MIM-72C or MIM-72G?

Edited October 16, 2017 by WulfPack

[kev2go 5,112]

9 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

How about the MIM-72C or MIM-72G?

Its not exactly comparable those are Aim9 Sidewinder launchers. Ir missiles are fire and forget. the idea behind the tunguska is that its missiles are basically like A2A AGTMS, therfore are not being fire and forget , thus requiring a player  control to maintain guidance at a target. ( MOuse Aim) 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2017 by kev2go

[WulfPack 1,693]

2 minutes ago, kev2go said:

Its not exactly comparable those are Aim9 Sidewinder launchers. Ir missiles are fire and forget. the idea behind the tunguska is that its missiles are basically like A2A AGTMS, thus not being fire and forget , thus requiring a player  control to maintain guidrance at a target.

 

 

Ah.

[swpixy 1,220]

9 hours ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

Can you find equivalent vehicles for other nations? Because that is Gaijin's (supposed) policy when adding something. 

Well,theres the ADATS for the US,which is basically a SAM armed with 8 missiles that are SACLOS.Its party trick is that it can engage both aircraft and tanks-the missiles have ~900mm of penetration vs RHA.Was not too effective IRL,but could potentially work in WT-although most people would probably try to misuse it as TD.Not a direct counterpart,but its something,i guess...

[Grand_Moff_Tano 3,460]

26 minutes ago, swpixy said:

Well,theres the ADATS for the US,which is basically a SAM armed with 8 missiles that are SACLOS.Its party trick is that it can engage both aircraft and tanks-the missiles have ~900mm of penetration vs RHA.Was not too effective IRL,but could potentially work in WT-although most people would probably try to misuse it as TD.Not a direct counterpart,but its something,i guess...

And the Rapier for the British which is, iirc, SACLOS.

Edited October 16, 2017 by VengefulChipmunk

[xX_Lord_James_Xx 2,400]

39 minutes ago, swpixy said:

Well,theres the ADATS for the US,which is basically a SAM armed with 8 missiles that are SACLOS.Its party trick is that it can engage both aircraft and tanks-the missiles have ~900mm of penetration vs RHA.Was not too effective IRL,but could potentially work in WT-although most people would probably try to misuse it as TD.Not a direct counterpart,but its something,i guess...

 

However, the ADATS system is still classified, so not able to be implemented. 

 

2 hours ago, kev2go said:

 

Closest comparable ?  Some ideas were included in my First post of this Thread.

 

Uk has the Tracked Rapier system

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Germany has Roland ( based on Marder IFV)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

with Franch having the Roland system on the AMX30 chasis (AMX30R)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

US never officially had anything comparable design in  actual Service.

 

However this tech gap can be filled with a prototype, which never reached mass production status. : the  XM975 ( which was built upon a the M109 Howitzer chasis) which was tested with the ROland Missile system that USA purchased from France,and if produced would have been designated the M975. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

In official Service US low level mobile air  defenses of the cold war basiclaly were only covered by  M163  vads and then evnetually long with Humvees with Stingers as well as the M6 linebacker. ( Bradley with stingers) however these are fire and forget IR missiles.

 

All other stuff  ( Hawk and Patriot) are medium to long range systems respectively  that arent really mobile enough to be impleneted in player control anyhow, and would be too OP anyhow. They are required to be set up, and need an external Radar station to target for them.

 

In any case  it should be note however the Roland  is more potent Range ( up to 5,500M) can be applied in either Optical or Rader guided modes , latter of which would have to be left out in war thunder, So its not slef guided by a rader lock. In Optical mode it is controlled by an Operator.similar to tunguska.

 

 

 

Hmmm, none of those systems have secondary, autocannon armament though. I'm curious, are the Roland and Rapier systems declassified? I don't know too much about SHORADs (SHOrt Range Air Defence) or LORADs (LOng Range Air Defence). 

[kev2go 5,112]

29 minutes ago, VengefulChipmunk said:

And the Rapier for the British which is, iirc, SACLOS.

 

 

Yup i brought that up. Although the example i isted was a Tracked Rapier system, so itl be Drvable ( (thus playable) vehicle

 

2 hours ago, kev2go said:

 

 

Uk has the Tracked Rapier system

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

 

However, the ADATS system is still classified, so not able to be implemented. 

 

 

Hmmm, none of those systems have secondary, autocannon armament though. I'm curious, are the Roland and Rapier systems declassified? I don't know too much about SHORADs (SHOrt Range Air Defence) or LORADs (LOng Range Air Defence). 

 

nope,no guns but they do have higher altitude  engagement range though when compared to the 9M311 Missile on the 2k22, and a larger explosive warhead . (5,500  vs 3,500 metres) , but i suspect they might not be as manuverable in changing direction  because of thier larger diamater and size compared to the 9M311.

 

Im not too sure about the French AMX30 but the Marder IFV with Roland does have 8 additional rolands stowed away within the compartment.  its just a matter of reloading them afer the 2 Launchers have shot them out.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2017 by kev2go

[swpixy 1,220]

17 hours ago, kev2go said:

nope,no guns but they do have higher altitude  engagement range though when compared to the 9M311 Missile on the 2k22, and a larger explosive warhead . (5,500  vs 3,500 metres) , but i suspect they might not be as manuverable in changing direction  because of thier larger diamater and size compared to the 9M311.

 

Im not too sure about the French AMX30 but the Marder IFV with Roland does have 8 additional rolands stowed away within the compartment.  its just a matter of reloading them afer the 2 Launchers have shot them out.

 

17 hours ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

However, the ADATS system is still classified, so not able to be implemented. 

Hmmm, none of those systems have secondary, autocannon armament though. I'm curious, are the Roland and Rapier systems declassified? I don't know too much about SHORADs (SHOrt Range Air Defence) or LORADs (LOng Range Air Defence). 

Well,more on the ADATS is here:

http://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?t=47122

Apparently there one of the variants that the US tested had both the ADATS missiles and the 25mm Bushmaster (basically making it a Linebacker on Steroids).

As for classification...dunno.There seems to be quite a bit of information around for it,in any case.

 

(sidenote-AFAIK some of the data for the RU-251 is still classified aswell.Didnt stop Gaijin from implementing it,though)

Edited October 17, 2017 by swpixy

[swpixy 1,220]

Oh,and i just remembered...

Werent these SACLOS aswell?

[captinjoehenry 278]

36 minutes ago, swpixy said:

Oh,and i just remembered...

Werent these SACLOS aswell?

They are manually guided yes but they first entered service in 1997 which is quite a bit too modern for being in game.

[Deathbringer007 118]

Sure why not along with the M42 Sergeant York

[xX_Lord_James_Xx 2,400]

2 hours ago, Deathbringer007 said:

Sure why not along with the M42 Sergeant York

 

M247 Sergeant York* not M42

 

Spoiler

 

[Deathbringer007 118]

46 minutes ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

 

M247 Sergeant York* not M42

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

My mistake thanks.

[Grand_Moff_Tano 3,460]

I'd also like to see Ground Based Radar Guided Missiles along with SACLOS, which should be fairly easy to balance when you bring ECM and ARM into the equation.

[Querulous1 3,276]

If anti air missiles come in, this would be good to have in game

[RogueStarflyer 1,242]

+1, especially if we do end up getting modern jets.  This vehicle, and similar vehicles, would be great counters.