9M337 Sosna-R: air defence on the go

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

The Sosna, which is due to enter service in the coming years (and in light of real life experience, may go through further iterations before entering service), differentiates itself from the bigger SPAA by being a purely passive system. Meaning that it doesn´t have a radar, making it so much harder for enemy aircraft to locate and engage. Instead, its thermal optic can automatically recognize and track enemy aircraft and missiles within its FOV up to 25-30km in range. The system can also rotate automatically or perform sector search. The Sosna can receive the location of enemy targets detected by other radar equipped systems via networked connections.
Its 9M340 missiles are reminiscent of the Tunguska or the Pantsir, but they are smaller and feature a different guidance system that is a dual type: radio command at the beginning of the flight after which the missile switches to laser beam riding at the terminal phase. This means that the enemy aircraft has a very short laser warning time. In addition, the passive nature of the whole system allows it to engage aircraft at lower altitudes than a radar can handle. Furthermore, the SACLOS guidance makes it virtually immune to countermeasures deployed by the enemy, the only way to break the tracking would be to completely break LOS with the Sosna. The missile has a maximum range of 10km and 5km in altitude, achieving velocities of more than 900m/s and can sustain a whopping 40g. Sosna can fire and guide missiles even while on the move.
Finally, the choice of the BMP-3 chassis instead of the venerable MTL-B ensures high mobility performance and commonality with the vehicles its supposed to accompany. A version of the same system is being worked on for the VDV, using the same Sosna system on a BMP-4M chassis.

Tactical and technical characteristics

Target engagement range, km 1.3-10
Flight altitude of targets to be hit, m 2-5000
Reaction time, s 5
Reload time, min 10
Optical-electronic control system
Guidance angle range, deg:
azimuth ±178
elevation from -20 to 82
Maximum angular velocity, deg/s 50
Maximum angular acceleration, deg/s2 150
Field of view, deg:
television system 2.0x3.0 /6.5x9.0
thermal imaging channel 1.67x2.5 /8.0x12.0

Target acquisition range for automatic tracking at MDV=15 km, p=80%, km:
aircraft 16-30
helicopters 10-14
cruise missiles 8-12
armored objects 8

Accuracy (RMS):
stabilization, mrad 0.07
of coordinate determination, mrad 0.2
of range determination, m 5.0
of LD guidance 0.1
of LLCU information field guidance, mrad 0.08-0.12

Rocket 9M340 “Sosna-R”
Zone of destruction, km:
by range: 10
by height: 5

Flight speed, m/s:
maximum 875
average taking into account guidance 565

Total mass of warhead, kg 6.9
Weight of SAM, m:
launch 30.6
in TPK 42

Caliber, mm:
before division 132
after division 72

Length of the SAM, mm:
in flight 2317
in the TPK 2400

Vehicle specifications:

Vehicle mass: 18-20t

Max speed: 70 km/h (forwards) - 20 km/h (reverse)

Crew: 3

Armor: same as BMP-3

Hull dimensions: same as BMP-3

In summary

All in all, this vehicle ingame would compliment the existing Tunguska or Pantsir, being better and worse than it depending on the situation. It would boast good mobility, better protection to the crew against MGs and some medium caliber rounds. However it would lack the situational awareness an early warning radar could give (for which it must rely on teamplay), but in return this vehicle would be undetectable by aircraft and helicopters until its too late (that is, the final stage of missile approach to target, when it switches to laser beam riding) and once it locks to a target, it would be pretty much immune to any kind of countermeasure. On the down side, the lack of autocannons would make this vehicle a little less useful when it comes to ground combat, even if its missiles can have some effect on ground vehicles.

So, what do you think?

Sources:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190329130855/https://vz.ru/news/2019/3/29/970597.html

http://roe.ru/esp/catalog/marina-de-guerra/armas-de-la-nave/palma/

https://defence-blog.com/worlds-first-air-droppable-missile-system-being-developed-for-russian-airborne-forces/

https://topwar.ru/159232-zrk-sosna-ochevidnye-preimuschestva-i-zametnye-nedostatki.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20160304191707/http://www.npovk.ru/zenitnye-kompleksy-blizhnego-dejstviya_0_10.html

http://bastion-opk.ru/sosna-r/

http://bastion-opk.ru/sosna-r-news/

Сосна (зенитный ракетный комплекс) — Википедия

2 Likes

What’s the benefit of this over the Tunguska or Pantsir?
Potential 10.7-11.0 Sam?

Well it could fit those niches but this being completly passive (how detection would be modelled ingame I´ll leave it to Gaijin) it can be more survivable vs modern aircraft and also able to shoot them down without them being alerted. Also this thingy can receive radar targets from other systems, such as the aforementioned Pantsirs, Tor, what have you. This mechanic also will be up to Gaijin.

Think of a Stormer HVM but with 10km range missiles and passive target detection up to 30km.

4 Likes

Russia does not need its 500th undertiered SPAA

3 Likes

I’m going to say no just because it isn’t in service yet, and will likely be changed considerably before that happens. Essentially it’s a very immature vehicle, and I believe there are better options of similar capabilities that are much more mature, being in mass service.

It had already passed state triales right before a certain military operation started. Its future is uncertain yet just like with many other vehicles that never entered service, it would be a good addition for the game.

4 Likes

Oh nice, should be added then.
I remember seeing this weapon system on the BTR platform as well.

3 Likes

2s38 is too weak!~ Russian mains probably.

btw, i much prefer the mt-lb variant to the bmp-3 variant. This kind of vehicle needs to be nerfed by their platform, and the btr-zd is a prime example of that. Anything based on a light chassis with somewhat good armament should be based on it. Not only it’s a beautiful platform, it also is pretty weak being originally a pt-76.

1 Like

Nah the BMP-3 hull is much cooler. This thing will be balanced vis a vis AA capabilties to which the hull doesn´t add or take away much.
Besides it was scheduled to enter service in that configuration. Another alternative would be the Ptitselov which is the same exact AA module but mounted on a BMD-4M hull.

1 Like

F-15E’s biggest nightmare
+1

Always liked the look of this system, and honestly I’d be fine with either the BMP-3 or MT-LB. +1

we need spaa ++++!