CPMIEC HQ-7/FM-80 / CSA-4 Sino-Crotale
CPMIEC
HQ-7/FM-90
/
CSA-5 Sino-Crotale
Self Propelled Air
Defence Systems
Technical
Report APA-TR-2010-0901
|
Carlo
Kopp,
BE(hons),
MSc,
PhD, AFAIAA,
SMIEEE,
PEng
Martin
Andrew,
BA(hons),
MA,
PhD,
RAAF(Retd)
Imagery
©
2010
Air
Power
Australia
September, 2010
Updated January, 2011
Updated April, 2012
Text,
Line
Art
©
2009 -
2012
Carlo
Kopp
|
China
continues
to
manufacture
and
export
the
cloned
Crotale
SAM.
The
latest HQ-7B/FM-90
Crotale
variant is carried on
a new
Chinese designed 6 x 6 AFV chassis, replacing the cloned French Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R
chassis. Additional image [1]
(via Chinese internet).
|
|
|
Introduction
The
HQ-7 is a Chinese clone of the French Thales/Thomson CSF Crotale SAM.
During
the 1970s the French supplied samples of the Crotale
which
was promptly reverse engineered. The cloned Crotale has been built in
two
configurations, a high mobility variant for PLA Army units on a 4 x 4
cloned French Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R armoured
vehicle, and a less mobile PLA-AF air field defence system, using
either a
trailer or a truck platform. Since then, derivative variants have
emerged in the FM-90 series, in addition to the shipboard variants. The
Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R vehicle uses either a diesel or
gasoline engine driving an alternator which powers electrical motors
driving the wheels. Chinese sources sometimes label the P4R as a B-20.
A naval variant of the Crotale as also been developed.
A four round elevating tube
launcher
turret is
used, mounting the Ku-band Automatic Command to Line Of Sight monopulse
radar
dish antenna. Export variants are the FM-80 and improved FM-90 with a
FLIR
tracker and
longer ranging missiles. HQ-7/FM-80/90 batteries are typically
supported by an
acquisition radar system, the FM-90 usually on a new design indigenous
6 x 6 light armoured personnel
carrier.
|
|
|
|
|
Thomson-CSF
(Thales)
Crotale
Rattlesnake
|
|
|
|
|
|
The origins of the prolific Crotale
family of missiles lie in a South African order placed in 1964 with
French radar and systems integration contractor Thomson-Houston
(later Thomson CSF and now Thales) for the
development of a point defence SAM system. Funded mostly by the South
Africans, and partly by the French government., the system was
developed through the late 1960s. The South Africans took delivery of
their systems between 1971 and 1973, naming them the Cactus in
operational service. The French air force soon ordered the system for
airfield point defence use, acquiring twenty batteries by 1978, and
naming the system the Crotale, or Rattlesnake [1, 2, 3].
Since the first Crotale was ordered almost 40 years ago, the
system has remained in production and a wide range of variants and
configurations have been built and exported. The Crotale
remains one of the most successful SAM designs ever built, with over
300 systems exported to 15 nations.
The basic design concept and the performance of the early Crotale
is closest in most respects to its Soviet contemporary, the early
variants of the NIEMI 9K33 Osa / Romb or SA-8 Gecko.
Where the two systems diverge is in the regime of deployment, as until
the most recent Crotale NG, the Crotale system was mobile but
split
across multiple cable connected TELARs and an Acquisition and
Co-ordination Unit (ACU) equipped with an acquisition radar; the SA-8
and Crotale NG colocate the engagement and acquisition units on
the single TELAR and are capable of autonomous operation.
The Crotale has been produced in a number of consecutive variants:
Crotale 1000 Series (1969):
Baseline Crotale weapon system built
in a mobile configuration on the Hotchkiss P4R vehicle or a relocatable
container for fixed sites. All system components linked by cables. A
typical configuration is two or three P4R TELARs tied to a single ACU.
Crotale 2000 Series (1973):
Enhanced acquisition and tracking by addition of a television channel;
addition of IFF capability for deconfliction.
Crotale 3000 Series (1978):
Further enhanced tracking capability by addition of automatic
television track capability.
R460/Shahine/SICA (1980):
Unique variant developed for Saudi Arabia following a 1975 order. The
Crotale weapon system was rehosted on the Giat AMX-30 tank chassis to
improve mobility in soft terrain and survivability against hostile
fire, as the Shahine was intended to provide fully mobile air defence
for armoured manoeuvre formations.
Crotale 4000 Series (1983):
Replacement of cable interconnections with the LIVH (Liaison Inter
Vehicule Hertzienne) radio datalink, which permits separation of up to
3 kilometres between TELARs and ACU, and up to 10 kilometres between
proximate ACUs. Improved radar ECCM and addition of thermal imaging
tracker channel.
Crotale 5000 Series (1985):
Modernisation of French Crotale systems incorporating a an optical
tracker and improved radar antenna to permit acquisition out to 18
kilometres range.
Crotale NG (1990):
The Crotale NG (New Generation) is a deep redesign of the basic
Crotale, in which the legacy missile round is replaced by a new VT-1
hypervelocity round which provides a 35 G manoeuvre capability, Mach
3.5 speed, 11 kilometre range, and an 8 metre lethal radius using a new
directional warhead. The radar and fire control systems were improved,
and the acquisition radar colocated on the turret with the TELAR
launchers and engagement radar, making the system fully mobile. The
Crotale NG is supplied self-propelled on a range of different
chassis, or on a towed 3 axle trailer.
Crotale Mk.3 (2008):
The Crotale Mk.3 is a further
evolution of the Crotale NG. The improved missile round has a range of
16 kilometres, and ceiling of 9 kilometres, and the new Shikra 3D
multibeam surveillance radar is a derivative of the Thales Netherlands
SMART-S Mk.2 radar.
Variants of the Crotale have been deployed by France, Finland, Greece,
Portugal, South Africa, South Korea, Bahrain, Egypt, Morocco, Oman,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Chinese HQ-7 Crotales have been
exported to Iran, and an Iranian assembled variant has been marketed.
Above, below: Crotale 3000
series Fire
Unit on Hotchkiss P4R 4 x 4 vehicle. Note the cable spool above the
vehicle engine bay (Thales).
Crotale Acquisition and
Co-ordination Unit (ACU) on Hotchkiss P4R 4 x 4 vehicle. The Mirador IV
acquisition radar antenna is fully deployed, and hydraulic stabilising
supports extended (Thales).
|
|
|
Crotale 3000
series Fire
Unit on Hotchkiss P4R 4 x 4 vehicle, with launcher elevated. This image
shows the coaxial turret arrangement clearly, with separately driven
Castor 2 radar and launcher components (Thales).
|
|
|
|
|
China was supplied by France with a small
number of Crotale and Sea
Crotale systems during the late 1970s, for evaluation purposes. The
post Tiananmen embargo prevented import of production quantities.
Chinese sources claim that the 2nd Academy reverse
engineered the
missiles, the 23rd Institute the radar systems, and the 206th
Institute
the Hotchkiss P4R vehicle. The reverse engineered Crotale and Sea
Crotale entered production about a decade later, designated the HQ-7
and HHQ-7 respectively. Export variants have been designated FM-80, and
FM-90 in the evolved variant.
In terms of capabilities and performance the HQ/HHQ-7/FM-80/90 closely
compare to the Soviet/Russian built Almaz-Antey/Kupol 9K331M/M1 Tor
M/M1 SA-15B/C Gauntlet and early configurations of the KBP 2K22M1/2S6M1
Tunguska-M1/ SA-19 Grison SPAAGM missile system.
The key difference is that both Soviet/Russian systems integrate the
acquisition radar on the TELAR, and were designed like the 9K33 Osa /
SA-8 Gecko before them, to “shoot and scoot”, providing high mobility
point defence capability for land force manoeuvre elements. The
baseline Crotale, which is the basis of the HQ-9, was built for rapid
intra- and inter-theatre redeployment, but limited “shoot and scoot”
capability.
The original design aim of the Crotale was to engage supersonic low
flying fighters, to provide a rapid reaction terminal point defence for
airfields, and other high value static or redeployable targets. PLA
Crotale units appear to remain dedicated to this role.
The kinematic performance of the Crotale missile and angular field of
regard of the engagement radar are both compatible with the
“Counter-PGM” role, which has now become the primary role of the
Russian 96K6E Pantsir S1E / SA-22 and 9K331M2E Tor M2E / SA-15D. While
the new acquisition radar for the HQ-7B / FM-90 has the technological
potential for use in this role - it employs the same antenna technology
as the 9K331M2E Tor M2E / SA-15D - there is no evidence to date that
the PLA intends to reorient the operational use of the HQ-7B to
“Counter-PGM” role.
Equally so, there is no evidence of any indigenous PLA effort to
develop a unique replacement for the HQ-7/HHQ-7 series. Given the past
propensity of the PLA to extract every possible use out of a mature
design, and the inherent growth potential of the Crotale family as
demonstrated by the evolution of EU Crotale variants, the most likely
outcome is that the HQ-7/HHQ-7 will continue to evolve new variants for
the forseeable future.
|
HQ-7/HHQ-7
/
Sino-Crotale Technical Analysis
The
HQ-7/HHQ-7 SAM systems are often described as “based on” and “derived from” the Crotale. Close inspection
of the wealth of detailed HQ-7/HHQ-7 imagery suggests that the first
generation of the HQ-7/HHQ-7 system are almost exact clones of the
French originals, with differences which at best qualify as cosmetic,
such as the headlight arrangement on the P4R, or the shape of the
frangible launch tube covers.
The changes observed in newer FM-90 system appear to be primarily in
the replacement of the acquisition radar, replacement of the P4R
vehicle, and internal enhancements to the system electronics. The
Chinese have published very little of substance on the Crotale, in
comparison with other indigenous weapons systems.
Accordingly, this technical analysis will be based on the original
baseline French Crotale, with the caveat that the PLA may have made
numerous incremental detail improvements to the internal design of the
system, as has been observed with reverse engineered Russian weapons.
The best single discussion of the design rationale behind the original
Crotale is the excellent 1970 Interavia/International Defense Review
analysis “Design Philosophy of the Crotale AA
System”, authored by le Sueur, who was a design engineer at
Thomson CSF involved in the definition and development of the Crotale [2].
The imperative for the development of the Crotale was the emergence of
terrain avoidance and terrain following radar as penetration aids for
tactical aircraft, permitting them to penetrate especially hilly
terrain, abundant in Europe, by using terrain masking to conceal their
approach. The combination of transonic or supersonic speed and
altitudes between 150 and 330 ft AGL typically results in targets which
pop-up above the radar horizon a mere 15 to 25 seconds away from the
target. Such short reaction times are a genuine challenge for most SAM
systems, and typically beyond the capabilities of 1950s and early 1960s
SAM designs which dominated NATO air defences during that period. The
then new Soviet MiG-23BN/27 Flogger, Su-7/17/22 Fitter and Su-24 Fencer
would this be capable of bypassing most NATO IADS components no
differently than USAF F-105D Thunderchiefs and F-111 Aardvarks sliced
through North Vietnamese defences.
Figure 1 Low level penetration envelope [2].
Figure 2 Crotale threat engagement
requirement [2].
Design requirements for the Crotale were detailed by le Sueur thus
[cited] [2]:
|
|
|
|
Design principles
A multi-capability solution to the low altitude problem should
therefore provide the following:
1. Radar detection in all weathers of a 1 m2
fluctuating target flying at speeds up to Mach 1.2, amongst ground
clutter and fixed echoes of 105 m2 equivalent
area (corresponding to a
collection of large buildings seen against a rock face 1,500 metres
taller).
2.Tracking of the target accurately in this environment, even if
it
flies at ground level, hugs the side of a hill or valley, or passes
through a nodal point close by. Guidance of the missile
accurately under whatever conditions the target imposes.
3.Fast reaction, so that the following operations can take place
whilst the aircraft in question (flying at Mach 1.2) travels no more
than 4 km, allowing an intervention time of just under 10 seconds:
- detection of the target as soon as it appears,
- determination of its type (single or multiple),
- identification
friend or foe (with the possibility of interrupting the
acquisition/firing sequence at any time in case of a belated
'friendly' response),
- determination of its
course parameters,
- automatic tracking lock-on,
- firing of one or several
missiles,
- interception.
Should the attack be
of large proportions, this sequence must still take no longer than for
a single attacking aircraft. In addition to the above requirements, the
weapon system should:
- classify
targets
by the urgency of the threat which each represents whenever a
fresh attack is detected,
- engage
targets
in this order of priority classification,
- be
capable
of co-ordinated engagement of several targets on different
bearings simultaneously.
4. Firepower sufficient to ensure a kill probability of 90%.
This
involves:
- highly accurate missile guidance,
- a high-acceleration, high-speed missile,
- missile manoeuvrability, even at maximum range,
- controlled detonation of the warhead for maximum
effect in a position
relative to the target's leading-edge and engine infrared sources,
- a proximity warhead, the destructive range of which
is considerably
greater than the missile's miss-distance,
- the possibility of firing several missiles at the
same target if needs
be, without starting the acquisition sequence again; immediate,
automatic realization of the need for this without human intervention;
the automatic firing of such a salvo.
5. Mobility comparable to that of the combat formations which
the system will protect, particularly cross-country, without
degradation of its detection capability; self-propulsion;
self-contained operation and air-portability.
6. Maximum reliability in spite of enemy
electronic countermeasures. Detection of faults the moment they occur
and not when the approach of an enemy aircraft sets off the full
operating sequence.
7. Simplified training of operating and maintenance crews.
|
|
|
|
|
These design requirements are not dissimilar
to such a requirement were it drafted today, indeed the principal
differences would be in more challenging specific requirements for ECCM
capability and detection performance against low signature targets in
clutter.
The design strategy defined for the Crotale was
detailed by le Sueur thus [cited][2]:
|
|
|
|
The following are the
solutions which have been adopted to fulfil the
stated requirements:
1.A fully coherent [Mirador IV] pulse Doppler surveillance
radar. This will
detect aircraft of an area equivalent to a 1 m2 fluctuating
target
flying at radial speeds of 35 to 440 m/s (156 to 890 mph) at altitudes
from 0 to 3,000 m (0 to 10,000 ft) and ranges up to 18.5 km (11.5
miles). At maximum range the probability of detection is 90% with each
antenna revolution. The chances of a false alarm are low and radar
visibility through the fixed echoes is so good that even when Crotale
was tested in the most difficult conditions, no ground shadow whatever
appeared on the screen. A computer logic circuit correlates the data
gathered on each antenna revolution, rapidly extracting all but the
useful information and allowing automatic tracking of any aircraft
within detection range. So as not to lose the benefits of the fast
reaction time, information is renewed at the very high rate of one
antenna revolution per second. Using a pulse Doppler radar, this
antenna revolution speed is incompatible with precise target definition
and suppression of ambiguities and 'blind speeds' within the range
limits imposed by the terrain, unless the S-band is used for the
surveillance role. The radar coverage is so designed that it
immediately
provides not only the bearing of the target. but also a first
indication of its range and elevation (high, medium or low).
2.Tracking of the target is carried out by a Ku band [Castor 2]
monopulse
radar,
the narrow beam and short pulse of which give very high definition; the
use of multiple frequencies gives good protection against jamming as
well as very smooth tracking. The tracking radar antenna has been
separated from the co-axially mounted missile launchers, in order to
reduce its inertia to a minimum. Missile guidance is accurate to
within 0.1 milliradians, this unequalled performance being the result
of using the beam-riding guidance technique in direct combination with
the target tracking technique described above. This process eliminates
the mechanical and electronic errors common to systems with separate
target tracking and missile guidance equipment.
3. The very fast reaction time required of the system
necessitates total automation. Crotale is the first example of a weapon
system to be so designed. A computer
mounted in the surveillance/target designation vehicle determines
whether the target is approaching or receding and its nature (one or
several aircraft); it processes the data provided by radar, initiates
tracking of each aircraft, and classifies it in terms of immediacy of
the threat in relation to other targets already being tracked. After
identification of the aircraft as hostile, the computer communicates
with its counterparts in the firing unit vehicles, before assigning the
target to whichever of the latter is best placed to deal with it. This
causes all the uncommitted tracking radar/missile launcher mountings to
turn towards the target. The designated fire unit then receives an
accurate bearing on the target, together with its approximate elevation
and height. The fire unit computer then guides the tracking radar
within these limits, by continually updating target elevation and
height data (Fig. 3), until the automatic tracking mode locks on.
During this period of search, the fire unit computer remains under the
overall control of the computer in the
surveillance/target designation vehicle. It calculates the
interception possibilities and decides when target engagement becomes
possible. Once the order to fire is given, several irreversible missile
launching procedures take
place: internal power is switched on, the autopilot is activated,
the missile container is opened, and the missile is fired. At any
time between tracking lock-on and interception of the aircraft, a
'friendly' IFF response, however belated, will automatically interrupt
the intercept sequence; if this occurs during missile
flight, the latter will destroy itself.
On the standard version of the Crotale system, the intervention of
human operators has been kept to two levels:
- In the surveillance/target designation vehicle, an
operator
assigns the target classified as top priority to the fire unit
indicated to him by the computer as being that best capable of dealing
with it.
- In the fire unit, an operator presses the firing
button when it illuminates.
These two functions - as we have seen - are not essential, and when the
computer calculates that the available reaction time offered by a
priority target is incompatible with the real time constants of the
human operator, it deprives him of his authority to intervene in the
operational sequence.
The attachment of several fire units to the same surveillance unit
allows the most flexible and economic defense of various types of
point targets. One surveillance unit will therefore be under-utilised
in many cases if it is linked with only one firing unit. But more
important still, if the fire of the various units co-operating to
protect the same target is not co-ordinated, then there is nothing to
prevent those fire units whose operating envelopes overlap engaging the
most urgent target simultaneously, leaving the field wide open for
following aircraft. By ensuring the co-ordination of several firing
units against a large-scale attack therefore, the Crotale
organisation
optimizes their performance.
4.The firepower of Crotale results from the
combined effect of several devices which have been incorporated in the
system. An advanced operational research study showed that, faced with
the threat posed in the next decade and taking account of the
restricted range of fire compatible with terrain limitations, the
beamriding guidance technique with continuous deviation correction
offers a cost-effectiveness ratio superior to any other. Designed and
produced by Engins Matra with the assistance of several divisions in
the Thomson Brandt group for in particular, the propulsion unit,, the
warhead and the transponder, the Crotale missile is gathered by the
radar in under 500 metres. Its single-stage motor propels it to Mach
2.3 in 2.3 seconds. and at the limit of its range its speed is still
supersonic.
The missile is roll-stabilized in order to allow a high degree of
guidance precision and to provide the ability to absorb the high load
factors imposed by crossing targets. Canard-type surfaces provide
the required manoeuvrability with a minimum of drag, and at the limit
of combat range, the missile still has a manoeuvrability of 7 g which
allows it to cope with fluctuations and evasive manoeuvres of the
target.
The 15 kg warhead was specially designed for high efficiency: its
detonation produces a burst of fragments moving at over 2,000 m/sec
localised in space and time, the fragments retaining the same lethality
to a distance of 8 metres. The warhead is detonated by an infra-red
proximity fuze in the standard version (an electromagnetic fuze is
optional) at a point determined by the ground-based computer as a
function of the relative positions of the missile and its target.
The flexibility of the digital computer allows full simulation of the
firing and intercept sequence before it takes place. This permits, for
example, the avoidance of a situation in which a missile could be fired
at an aircraft which would be masked by terrain at the theoretical
point of interception: a firing lock avoids waste of this missile. In
the same way, if it appears that an airborne target will present itself
in conditions which would make interception difficult (very high speed,
very brief appearance within the limits of action of the missile) so
degrading the hit probability, the computer will give authority to
launch a salvo of two missiles the moment the operator presses the
firing button.
All these provisions have allowed verification during the firing trials
that the 90% destruction probability indicated by the design
calculations can, in fact, be achieved in reality.
5.To conform to the requirement to support mobile combat forces, it was
necessary that the surveillance radar be capable of giving the alarm
whilst on the move, so as not to lose the advantage of the very short
reaction time by a long detection period. Without this capability, it
would be necessary to resort to the classic “leapfrogging” technique
with the slowness of movement and the doubling of surveillance
equipment which it involves.
The stable oscillator of a pulse Doppler radar is sensitive, in certain
frequency ranges, to the mechanical vibrations of vehicles. These
generate false alarms which the computer confuses with the actual
signal of an airborne target. To eliminate these vibrations, mechanical
transmission has been dispensed with and a very flexible suspension
adopted for the thermal [internal combustion engine in P4R] motor. The
power supplied by this motor, converted into electrical energy, is fed
via cables to electric motors on each wheel. The missile launch vehicle
uses the same system.
The first military application of a principle already proven
commercially, combined with a very elaborate hydropneumatic suspension
system, ensures a smooth ride for the Crotale vehicles on varied
terrain, and a high initial starting torque [characteristic of DC
electric motors], well above the usual norms for a four wheeled air
transportable vehicle of 13 tonnes powered by the 230 SHP motor.
|
|
|
|
|
The ACU S-band pulse Doppler Mirador IV
acquisition radar is designed to reject 60 dB of ground clutter, and
performs a single scan per second. Two stacked beams for
heightfinding are produced by a pair of feeds on a boom, with a third
feed for the IFF channel. The digital data processor can concurrently
track up to 12 targets on different bearings.
The HQ-7/FM-80 ACU antenna is of a similar configuration to the Mirador
IV, with a feed boom and rear V-shaped structural frame which appear
identical. The sculpted Mirador IV reflector is replaced by a
truncated concave mesh and frame reflector, which permits a HQ-7 ACU to
be easily recognised when compared to the Thomson-CSF original product.
The digital data processing system communicates with the Fire Units
through a datalink interface, which employs either cable or radio link
channels. The cable allows communication between the ACU and a fire
unit up to distances of 400 metres. The alternate VHF-band radio
datalink permits communication over distances of 50 to 5,000 metres.
The Fire Unit Thomson-CSF Castor 2J/C pulse Doppler engagement radar
employs a circular parabolic reflector with splayed monopulse feeds on
a characteristic four spoked strut frame, which appears identical on
both HQ-7 Type 345 systems and French built Crotales. The radar
operates in the Ku band producing a 1.1° circular pencil beam for
target tracking. Three channels are used to permit tracking of a single
target and one or two outbound missile round Ku-band transponders, the
arrangement intended to minimise the relative angle errors between
target and missile tracks. An X-band missile uplink is employed.
Frequency agility is employed to minimise susceptibility to jamming.
For a more detailed discussion refer HQ-7/FM-80FS/FM-90FS/Type
345 Crotale Engagement Radar.
An infrared tracker with a ±5° FOV is employed to ensure that the
antenna boresight is aligned with the missile flightpath vector
immediately after launch, before the missile is captured by the
guidance command link 500 metres after launch.
Most Crotale systems, including the HQ-7,
employ a TV telescope to provide ECCM capability, and redundancy in the
event of radar failure.
The Fire Unit digital mission computer is employed to calculate the
parallax offset relative to the ACU, acquisition and tracking
algorithms, speculative intercept parameters against possible targets,
command uplink instructions for missile capture and command link
guidance to intercept, fusing control calculations, and missile self
destruct commands.
Crotale
engagement
envelope
[1].
Conceptually the HQ-7/Crotale radar suite most closely resembles its
Soviet/Russian analogues, the Land Roll system in the 9K33 Osa / Romb /
SA-8 Gecko, and the later 9K331 Tor / Tor M/M1 / SA-15 Gauntlet. The
French design is cleaner and more compact, and shares the antenna
across multiple functions, whereas the Soviet/Russian designs employ
additional function specific antennas.
Figure 3, reproduced from le Sueur's paper, shows the transfer of the
target track from the ACU to the Fire Unit. The Mirador IV localises
the target into an angular box cited at 4 milliradians, which falls
well inside the 20 milliradian mainlobe angular coverage of the
engagement radar. This permits the Castor 2 to acquire and lock very
rapidly, as the acquisition and lock process primarily involves driving
the antenna boresight to null the initial angular error, and
establishing range and velocity tracks. There is no need for the Castor
to perform a search to place the target into the mainlobe.
What specific changes the Chinese may have
made to the Mirador IV and Castor 2 in the process of reverse
engineering the Crotale has never been disclosed. Given the good
quality of the original Thomson-CSF design, there would be few useful
optimisations possible to improve upon the basic functions of these
radars.
Unvalidated Chinese Internet claims are that the FM-90 is fully
digital, and the engagement radar operates in two bands to improve ECCM
capabilities - the Russians employed a dual band engagement radar in
this class in developmental variants of the 96K6 Pantsir S - and that
the FM-90 is intended to engage cruise missiles, ASMs, anti-radiation
missiles and aircraft.
Figure.3 [cited] “Diagram showing
the
interface between the two radars, and
automatic tracking lock-on. Key: A - designated tracking envelope; the
volume of this envelope depends on the elevation bracket, range bracket
and the bearing, which is always given by the surveillance radar to
within 4 milliradians. The accuracy of the given bearing obviates the
need for a three-dimensional target search by the tracking radar, B -
target; C - radar echo on the PPI; D - bearing vector, E - tracking
radar beam.”[2]
Figure 4, 5, 6 Crotale engagement sequences[2].
Type 345 engagement radar on
towed
HQ-7 TELAR (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
Engagement radar on HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR (via Chinese Internet).
Type 345 engagement radar on
FM-90/HQ-7B TELAR (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
FM-90 ACU (Zhenguan
Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
Detail of FM-90 ACU
acquisition radar antenna.
This
is a mechanically steered rotating 3D planar array design with
frequency scanning of eleven
element
rows in elevation, likely operating in the upper S-band. The upper IFF
array produces a fan shaped fixed beam (via Chinese Internet).
FM-90
ACU
acquisition radar antenna backplane and feed detail. Note the coaxial
feeds to the electronically steered IFF array elements (Zhenguan
Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
FM-90
ACU
acquisition radar antenna elevation scan feed (Zhenguan
Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
The new FM-90 acquisition radar is a major
departure from the Mirador IV and likely has its origins in the family
of S-band and L-band planar array acquisition radars developed by CETC.
The design is a mechanically rotated planar array with electronic
mainlobe steering in elevation, very similar in concept to the new
Russian Kupol 9K332 Tor M2/M2E / SA-15D Gauntlet acquisition radar. The
FM-90 radar has eleven rows of elements, in 26 columns. This would
permit better sidelobe performance than the legacy reflector antenna,
but will yield inferior heightfinding accuracy compared to the Tor
M2/M2E / SA-15D design. Neither the FM-90 nor the Tor M2/M2E / SA-15D
antenna designs are optimal for the crucial “Counter-PGM” role, which
requires the ability to accurately track multiple incoming targets in a
fixed angular sector, with exceptional heightfinding accuracy to
intercept weapons flying steep dive trajectories.
This indicates that the primary role of the FM-90 remains in the
engagement of fast jet and low flying helicopter targets. The
introduction of a mechanically steered AESA design with a square or
near square aspect ratio would be an unambiguous indicator of a role
change in the HQ-7 system.
The baseline HQ-9 / FM-80 is hosted on what appears to be an exact
clone of the Hotchkiss P4R armoured TELAR / ACU vehicle. This design
is, as discussed previously, unconventional. A diesel or gasoline
engine is employed to drive an alternator, which in turn drives via a
rectifier power supply DC electrical motors on each wheel, the latter
coupling torque via a planetary gearing system on each wheel. Messier
developed the hydro-pneumatic suspension system. The hydraulic system
also powers the three stabilising jacks. The P4R has a road range of
600 km and 60 km/hr road speed to match armoured formations. It can be
airlifted by C.160 Transall. Reload time for the TELAR is circa 2
minutes with a proficient crew - comparable to the 9K33 Osa/Romb / SA-8
Gecko.
The new FM-90 6 x 6 vehicle has yet to be publicly designated, or
detailed.
HQ-7/FM-80/FM-90 / CSA-4 Sino-Crotale
Missile
Design
The
HQ-7
Sino-Crotale
round
on
display (via
Chinese Internet).
Above, below: HQ-7B/FM-90 Sino-Crotale
round
on
display (image Zhenguan Studio © 2010, Air Power Australia).
The 84 kg mass R440 Crotale missile round design is similar in
configuration and performance to the Soviet/Russian built NIEMI 9K33M
Osa/Romb / SA-8 Gecko and Almaz-Antey/Kupol 9K331M/M1 Tor
M/M1 SA-15B/C Gauntlet rounds, sharing a canard control airframe with a
nose mounted proximity fuse and tail mounted uplink and transponder
antennas.
Crotale
subsystem
schematic
and
velocity
profile[1]
The R440 nose section is fitted with either an infrared proximity fuse,
or a Thomson-CSF FPE pulse-Doppler X-band radar proximity fuze standard
in naval variants, with both equipped with a backup impact fuse. The
proximity fuses are typically armed 350 m prior to estimated
impact. The nose canard controls are driven in the pitch/yaw axes by an
actuator package in the nose. The nose section includes the battery,
power supply and autopilot module.
The centre fuselage carries the 15 kg directional fragmentation warhead
which has a lethal radius of 8 metres, producing fragments with a
velocity of 2,300 metres/sec. The warhead arms 2.2 sec after launch.
The aft centre fuselage houses the SNPE Lens III solid rocket motor
with ~25 kg of propellant, the motor
exhausts through a cylindrical exhaust duct to the tail nozzle. The
motor impulse is sufficient to accelerate the round to 750 metres/sec
in 2.3 seconds.
The tail section contains the roll control actuator, the Ku-band
transponder beacon and antenna, the uplink receiver and antenna, and
launch tube umbilical interface. Cited transponder types are the
Thomson-CSF Stresa with 8 km range in early missiles, and the solid
state Thomson-CSF RTKu M with 10+ km range in later missile builds.
Cited missile performance varies across
sources. The single shot kill
probability is claimed to be 80 percent to 90 percent, rising to 96
percent for a two round salvo. Effectiveness varies, as with all
missiles in this class, on target velocity and engagement geometry,
with claims that the baseline missile has successfully killed slow
moving targets at 14.6 kilometres, considerably more than the cited
range for fast jet targets. Two round salvoes have a 2.5 second
separation between launches.
Schematic
of
Crotale
guidance
system
[1].
Crotale R440
Kinematic Performance
|
Range
[km]
|
5.0
|
6.0
|
10.0
|
13.0
|
Flight
Duration
[sec]
|
10.0
|
13.0
|
28.0
|
46.0
|
Load
Factor
[G]
|
27.0
|
18.0
|
8.0
|
3.0
|
There have been to date no disclosures on
specific design changes made to the R440 missile design in reverse
engineering it into the HQ-7/HHQ-7. The CPMIEC FM-90 brochure indicates
at best incremental improvements against the baseline FM-80, these
likely being in improved rocket propellant, improved flight control
algorithms, and the previously discussed improvements to the radar
suite.
Data processing improvements in the FM-90 provide the ability to track
24 targets concurrently.
Above, below: detail of TELAR
turret with four missile tubes loaded (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air
Power Australia).
Above, launch from P4R TELAR; below: launch from FM-90
TELAR (via Chinese Internet).
|
Production and Exports
While the
HQ-7, HHQ-7, FM-80 and FM-90 have appeared prominently in PLA media,
exact numbers on production and operational deployments remain scarce.
Unlike strategic SAM systems which tend to be tied to fixed operational
bases and can be easily counted, highly mobile point defence systems
like the HQ-7 series are difficult to locate, and easy to hide. All
indications at this stage are the the HQ-7 family systems are the
principal point defence weapon used by PLA Army, PLA-AF and PLA-N units.
There is some evidence that the FM-80 was exported to Iran, but numbers
have never been disclosed.
|
HQ-7/FM-80/FM-90 / CSA-4
Sino-Crotale
Technical
Data
HQ-7 [Thomson CSF R440 Crotale]
Specifications |
Length |
2.89
m |
Diameter |
0.15
m |
Wing
span |
0.54
m |
Launch
weight |
84
kg |
Propulsion |
solid
propellant
rocket
motor |
Guidance |
command
link |
Warhead |
15
kg HE fragmentation with contact and proximity fuzing |
Max
speed |
750
m/s |
Maximum
range |
>10
km |
Minimum
range
|
500
m |
Max
effective
altitude |
5,000-5,500
m
(depending
upon
target
velocity) |
Min
effective
altitude |
15
m |
Reaction
time,
sec |
6.5 |
Reload
time |
2
min (full 4-round load) |
Single-Shot
Pk
|
0.8
|
Engagement
Radar |
Thomson-CSF
Ku-band
monopulse
radar |
Detection
range
|
18.5
km |
FM-90 Specifications (CNPMIEC)
|
Effective
Range
|
ASM
Target
600
m/s
|
700
-
7,000
m
|
Cruise
Missile
Target
300
m/s
|
700
-
11,000
m
|
Aircraft
Target
|
700
-
12,000
m
|
Helicopter
Target
|
700
-
15,000
m
|
Effective
Altitude
|
ASM
Target
600
m/s |
30
-
3,000
m
|
Cruise
Missile
Target
300
m/s |
30
-
6,000
m
|
Aircraft/Helicopter
Target
|
30
-
6,000
m |
Single
Shot
Pk
|
≤0.85
|
Radar
System
|
Maximum
Detection
Range
RCS=0.1
m2
|
20
km
|
Maximum
Tracking
Range
RCS=0.1
m2 |
18
km
|
Concurrent
Target
Detection
Qty
|
48
|
Concurrent
Target
Tracking
Qty |
24
|
Fire
Control
Channels
|
7
|
Reaction
Time
|
6.5
to
10.5
sec
|
Missile
Maximum
Velocity
|
930
m/s
|
Missile
Maximum
load
Factor
|
35
G
|
|
HQ-7/FM-80/FM-90 / CSA-4 Sino-Crotale
Battery
Components
|
HQ-7/FM-80
Battery
Components
|
System
|
Function/Composition
|
Vehicle
|
TELAR
(2-3)
|
Self
Propelled Transporter
Erector
Launcher |
P4R
|
ACU
|
Self
Propelled Engagement Radar
|
P4R
|
-
|
Transporter
/
Transloader
/
Crane
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
HQ-7B/FM-90 Sino-Crotale TELAR
HQ-7B/FM-90
TELAR
on
parade
in
2009
(via
Chinese
Internet).
HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR on parade in
2009 (via Chinese Internet).
HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR on parade in
2009 (via Chinese Internet).
HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR stowed (via Chinese Internet).
HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR (image Zhenguan Studio © 2010, Air Power Australia).
HQ-7B/FM-90 TELAR (image Zhenguan Studio © 2010, Air Power Australia).
FM-90
Crotale
TELAR
display
model
at
Zhuhai,
2008.
The
engagement
radar
appears
to
be
identical
to
the
earlier
FM-80
configuration (image ©
2009,
Zhenguan Studio).
|
HQ-7/FM-80 Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R
Sino-Crotale
TELAR
The
earlier self propelled HQ-7/FM-80 variants employ a reverse engineered
variant of
the original Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R electrically driven armoured chassis
which
weighs in at 32,965 lb / 14,950 kg (via Chinese internet).
HQ-7
Sino-Crotale on cloned Thomson-Hotchkiss P4R chassis (via Chinese internet).
|
HQ-7
Sino-Crotale Towed
TELAR
Above, below: Towed HQ-7 TELAR on
display at Datangshan (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power Australia).
Above, below: Towed HQ-7 TELAR on
parade (via Chinese Internet).
|
|
HQ-7B/FM-90
Sino-Crotale ACU Self Propelled Acquisition Radar
FM-90
ACU
Sino-Crotale acquisition
radar.
The
system
employs
a planar array with a boresighted IFF
array (via
Chinese Internet).
FM-90 Crotale acquisition radar display model at Zhuhai,
2008. The acquisition radar uses a planar array with a boresighted IFF
array (image ©
2009,
Zhenguan Studio).
FM-90
ACU (Zhenguan Studio, © 2010 Air Power
Australia).
|
HQ-7/FM-80
Sino-Crotale ACU Self Propelled Acquisition Radar
HQ-7/FM-80 acquisition
radar deployed on the P4R vehicle (via Chinese Internet).
HQ-7/FM-80 acquisition
radar deployed on the P4R vehicle (via Chinese Internet).
HQ-7/FM-80 acquisition
radar stowed on the P4R vehicle (via Chinese Internet).
Hybrid acquisition radar
vehicle. This system combines the FM-80/HQ-7 radar with the FM-90/HQ-7B
6 x 6 vehicle (via Chinese Internet).
|
HHQ-7/FM-80(N)/FM-90(N) Naval Sino-Crotale
|
HHQ-7 launch (via
Chinese Internet).
|
HHQ-7
launcher
(via
Chinese
Internet).
|
HHQ-7
launcher,
unloaded
(via
Chinese
Internet).
|
Reloading
a
HHQ-7
launcher
(via
Chinese
Internet).
Type 345 HHQ-7 Naval Sino-Crotale engagement radar
(image © 2009, Zhenguan Studio).
|
|
Notes/References
- Crotale: A Missile
Defense System against Supersonic Low-Level Air Attack, International
Defense
Review 1/1970, Interavia S.A.
- H. le Sueur, Design Philosophy of the Crotale AA
System, International Defense Review - Air Defence Systems, Special
Series, 1976, Interavia S.A.
- Crotale in Service: organizational maintenance of a
missile system, International
Defense
Review 2/1973, Interavia S.A.
- Crotale NG Multi-Mission Air Defense Missile System,
France,
army-technology.com, Net Resources International, URI: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/crotale/
- CNPMIEC HQ-7 (FM-80) and FM-90 surface-to-air
missile systems
(China), Land systems - Air defence - Missiles, Janes, URI: http://www.janes.com/.../CNPMIEC-HQ-7-FM-80-and-FM-90-surface-to-air-missile-systems-China.html
- Line artwork and cited text © 1970 - 1976, Interavia
S.A.; reproduced in accordance with 17 U.S.C. §107,
this material is distributed for non-profit research and
educational purposes only.
|
|
Technical
Report
APA-TR-2010-0901
|
|