FrankenSAM Project

aonestudio

I really should change my personal text
Joined
11 March 2018
Messages
2,866
Reaction score
7,062
Desperate for Air Defense, Ukraine Pushes U.S. for ‘Franken’ Weapons
To meet the demand, the U.S. is producing so-called FrankenSAM systems that marry advanced Western weaponry with Soviet-era items still in Ukrainian stockpiles.

American officials call it the FrankenSAM program, combining advanced, Western-caliber, surface-to-air missiles with refitted Soviet-era launchers or radars that Ukrainian forces already have on hand. Two variants of these improvised air defenses — one pairing Soviet Buk launchers and American Sea Sparrow missiles, the other marrying Soviet-era radars and American Sidewinder missiles — have been tested over the past several months on military bases in the United States and are set to be delivered to Ukraine this fall, officials said.

A third, the Cold War-era Hawk missile system, was displayed on Ukraine’s battlefield this week for the first time, in an example of what Laura K. Cooper, a senior U.S. defense official, had described this month as a FrankenSAM “in terms of resurrection” — an air defense relic brought back to life.

Together, the FrankenSAMs are “contributing to filling critical gaps in Ukraine’s air defenses, and this is the most important challenge that Ukraine faces today,” said Ms. Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia policy.

The FrankenSAMs project is now trying to do the same for Ukraine’s air defenses.

Over the past 20 months, the West has supplied a range of air defenses to Ukraine, including state-of-the-art Patriot and IRIS-T systems, tanks fitted with antiaircraft guns and more than 2,000 shoulder-fired Stinger missiles.

On Thursday, the administration announced another $150 million in military aid for Ukraine, a package of weapons that included additional munitions for three kinds of air defense systems — including Sidewinder missiles for one of the FrankenSAMS.

FrankenSAMs are a mix of both. The program’s origins date to late last year, when Ukrainian officials asked the allies to help them find missiles for around 60 Soviet-era Buk launchers and radars that were sitting idle in Kyiv’s arsenal. Knowing it would be difficult for the West to obtain Russian-manufactured munitions to fit the Buk systems, the Ukrainians instead suggested refitting the launchers to use NATO-caliber antiaircraft missiles donated by the United States.

“We realized we needed to come up with some solutions,” said Oleksandra Ustinova, the chairwoman of a commission in Ukraine’s Parliament that oversees arms transfers from the West. She said Ukrainian officials offered to jury-rig the weapons themselves, in the interest of time, “because for the winter period we need desperately the air defenses, and this is what is going to be used.”

But American engineers insisted on doing the work, and they needed more than seven months to test and approve the mash-up after the Pentagon agreed in January to provide Sea Sparrow missiles for the project. The first few refurbished Buk launchers and missiles arrived in Ukraine only recently, Ms. Ustinova said.

She said Ukraine was prepared to send 17 more Buk launchers to the United States to be refitted, but American engineers had been able to turn around only five each month.

Ukraine has also had to wait for the older Hawk systems to get up and running after they were initially pledged by Spain in October 2022. A month later, the United States said it would pay to refurbish older Hawk missiles for the donated Spanish systems. But at least some of them were delivered to Ukraine without the necessary radar equipment. That took another nine months to arrive.

Another creation — an improvised ground launcher that uses Soviet-era radars to fire old American missiles that are usually used on fighter jets — was revealed in tandem with a $200 million security assistance package that the Pentagon announced on Oct. 11.

That FrankenSAM uses American-made supersonic AIM-9M Sidewinder missiles, which were developed in the 1950s and are used on F-16 and F-18 fighter jets. They are now part of the improvised ground-launching system, which Ms. Cooper previewed in Brussels as “a real innovation” that she said would help speed air defenses to Ukraine, “instead of it being, you know, years and years of development time.” It is not clear precisely when it will arrive in Ukraine.

American defense officials and engineers are also still testing what may be the most powerful FrankenSAM yet: a Patriot missile and launching station that operates with Ukraine’s older, domestically made radar systems.

A Pentagon official said on Wednesday that a test flight of the system this month, conducted at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, successfully hit the drone it had targeted. The system is scheduled to be sent to Ukraine this winter, the official said, accompanied by donated missiles and other Patriot parts from multiple allies.

Can Kasapoglu, a defense analyst for the Hudson Institute in Washington, praised the idea of integrating the Soviet-era equipment with more sophisticated Western missiles as a way to help Ukraine “maintain its arsenal for the long war ahead.”

It also “provides an opportunity to put weapons that are collecting dust on NATO capitals’ shelves,” Mr. Kasapoglu said, “into practical use.”
 
She said Ukraine was prepared to send 17 more Buk launchers to the United States to be refitted, but American engineers had been able to turn around only five each month.

I wonder if these modified SA-11 launchers will also be able to fire the ESSM?

American defense officials and engineers are also still testing what may be the most powerful FrankenSAM yet: a Patriot missile and launching station that operates with Ukraine’s older, domestically made radar systems.

NOW, that, will be interesting, I wonder if they will use the PAC2 or the PAC3?

It also “provides an opportunity to put weapons that are collecting dust on NATO capitals’ shelves,” Mr. Kasapoglu said, “into practical use.”

It provides a good way of getting rid of old stock without the time and expense of de-milling them.

It has just occurred to make there's another retired long-range AAM that could be used after refurbishment and that's the AIM-54 Phoenix, that is assuming those missiles haven't been dismantled and recycled since their retirement.
 
It has just occurred to make there's another retired long-range AAM that could be used after refurbishment and that's the AIM-54 Phoenix, that is assuming those missiles haven't been dismantled and recycled since their retirement.
I suspect they all got demilled, as there wasn’t a ship launched version, and the only other user is Iran, so they very much would like to keep them out of other people’s hands.
 
I suspect they all got demilled

A distinct possibility and if so NASA blew a big chance to use converted AIM-54s as the New Air-Launched Small Missile (ALSM) Flight Testbed for Hypersonic Systems. Anyway is there a main AIM-54 thread?

On another note Ukraine has been, as noted in this thread, using AIM-9Ms as ground launched SAMs from modified Soviet-era launchers, I wonder if any other surplus Sidewinder variants such as the AIM-9P for example will be used or the AIM-9X?
 
On another note Ukraine has been, as noted in this thread, using AIM-9Ms as ground launched SAMs from modified Soviet-era launchers, I wonder if any other surplus Sidewinder variants such as the AIM-9P for example will be used or the AIM-9X?
Maybe once all the -Ms are used up.

Though at least all-aspect Sidewinders are easy to use as SAMs. Search radar to get them pointed in the right direction, wait for tone, slap launch button.
 
Something else that could looked in regards to another frankensam system is modifying SA-6 launchers (And other launchers for which Soviet-era missile stocks are exhausted) to fire old early model SM-1s and SM-2s provided the available illuminators can be modified to give a comparable waveform for the missiles seekers. For longer range versions just attach Terrier Mk-70 boosters and basically get a 21st century version of the Land Terrier.
 
Something else that could looked in regards to another frankensam system is modifying SA-6 launchers (And other launchers for which Soviet-era missile stocks are exhausted) to fire old early model SM-1s and SM-2s provided the available illuminators can be modified to give a comparable waveform for the missiles seekers. For longer range versions just attach Terrier Mk-70 boosters and basically get a 21st century version of the Land Terrier.

Not sure we even have stocks to Terrier boosters left that aren't committed to use as targets or sounding rockets. But even so, it's not that easy. Standard MR has a different rocket motor thrust profile from the ER upper stage, so you can't just use the MR as an ER upper stage.
 
Not sure we even have stocks to Terrier boosters left that aren't committed to use as targets or sounding rockets. But even so, it's not that easy. Standard MR has a different rocket motor thrust profile from the ER upper stage, so you can't just use the MR as an ER upper stage.
So use old SM2ERs, RIM-156As, since those have basically been replaced in service by SM6s. The newest RIM156s are 13 years old, I'm sure there's some over 20 years old that should be used or rockets replaced.
 
So use old SM2ERs, RIM-156As, since those have basically been replaced in service by SM6s. The newest RIM156s are 13 years old, I'm sure there's some over 20 years old that should be used or rockets replaced.

So, SA-6 weighs ~600 kg. Any version of RIM-156 weighs at least 1400 kg. (It's also not designed for rail launching or being carried horizontally not in a canister.) At that point, just ship Ukraine some Mk 70 trailer launchers; it's easier and faster than trying to turn SM2 into a weird chimera.

SM2 in general is also likely to be much more complicated to fit into a system not originally designed for it. For starters, it wants a datalink, not just illumination or general cueing, like the missiles we are seeing used in these FrankenSAM setups. And that means the entire architecture behind the missile needs to be different to track the target at long range and pass the kinds of position data the SM2 autopilot needs to calculate its intercept trajectory. There's a reason NTU was such a big change, after all.
 
Last edited:
So use old SM2ERs, RIM-156As, since those have basically been replaced in service by SM6s. The newest RIM156s are 13 years old, I'm sure there's some over 20 years old that should be used or rockets replaced.

Object lesson in why we don't do that. This is an old (not even technically expired) SM2 going roman candle on The Sullivans a few years back.

1698862656518.png
 
This is an old (not even technically expired) SM2 going roman candle on The Sullivans a few years back.

That incident happened in 2015 according the wikipedia article on The Sullivans just after it was launched (It had cleared its' launch-cell), so if any old Standard Missiles are given to Ukraine first inspect their Mk-104 DTRMs with a detailed ultrasound scan and if in doubt replace the old rocket-motors with new ones (The old ones could then either be de-milled, sent back to the factory to be reloaded or used as second-stages in the Terrier-Lynx sounding rocket).
 
High value ships need newer fare...a launcher in the field with only cables to it--well, it's a fireworks show...no biggie.
 
It provides a good way of getting rid of old stock without the time and expense of de-milling thIt has just occurred to make there's another retired long-range AAM that could be used after refurbishment and that's the AIM-54 Phoenix, that is assuming those missiles haven't been dismantled and recycled since their retirement.

The AIM-54 missiles were decommissioned in 2004, two years before the F-14 Tomcat itself. Missiles were promptly scrapped to prevent the usual suspect from obtaining parts.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20231102_091202_Samsung Notes.jpg
    Screenshot_20231102_091202_Samsung Notes.jpg
    327.1 KB · Views: 13
  • Screenshot_20231102_091209_Samsung Notes.jpg
    Screenshot_20231102_091209_Samsung Notes.jpg
    151.7 KB · Views: 13
So, SA-6 weighs ~600 kg. Any version of RIM-156 weighs at least 1400 kg. (It's also not designed for rail launching or being carried horizontally not in a canister.) At that point, just ship Ukraine some Mk 70 trailer launchers; it's easier and faster than trying to turn SM2 into a weird chimera.

SM2 in general is also likely to be much more complicated to fit into a system not originally designed for it. For starters, it wants a datalink, not just illumination or general cueing, like the missiles we are seeing used in these FrankenSAM setups. And that means the entire architecture behind the missile needs to be different to track the target at long range and pass the kinds of position data the SM2 autopilot needs to calculate its intercept trajectory. There's a reason NTU was such a big change, after all.
I keep forgetting how chunky SM2s actually are. My bad.
 
Given that the war in Ukraine is going to drag on for quite a while I could see the US DoD in conjunction with Raytheon and the relevant missile manufacturers in Ukraine creating a Land Standard using reconditioned old stock of SM-1 Block VIs and SM-2s (Using the Terrier Mk-70 launch booster). With either SA-6 and SA-11 launchers modified with suitable launch rails and/or modifying a suitable US Army/Ukraine Army trucks with Mark 11, Mark 13 or Mark 26 launchers. The next thing of course would be modifying the SA-6 and SA-11 illuminator radars to provide a comparable waveform for the SM seekers and creating a suitable adaptor to interface the SM-2 datalink with the SA-6/SA-11 fire-control systems. If successfully done this would create a mobile frankenSAM system that would be very dangerous to Russian fighters and fighter-bombers.
 
a Land Standard using reconditioned old stock of SM-1 Block VIs and SM-2s (Using the Terrier Mk-70 launch booster). With either SA-6 and SA-11 launchers modified with suitable launch rails and/or modifying a suitable US Army/Ukraine Army trucks with Mark 11, Mark 13 or Mark 26 launchers.

OK, so none of the launchers you just listed are even remotely compatible with the long Terrier-style booster. They are all Tartar or or SM MR launchers. And none of them make any sense at all for truck mounting (even assuming you are talking about just the launcher and not full GMLRS with the magazines, because those weigh 60-70 tons and are 6 meters tall).

PS: There hasn't been a Mk 11 in use for maybe 30 years, and every ship I know of that had one was either scrapped or sunk by the 1990s.
 
PS: There hasn't been a Mk 11 in use for maybe 30 years, and every ship I know of that had one was either scrapped or sunk by the 1990s.
Taiwan and a few other non-US countries still use them, they took over support when the US stopped using them.

But yeah, that's not the US stuff.


Edit: was confusing the Mk11 with the Mk13 on the Perry class etc.


Given that the war in Ukraine is going to drag on for quite a while I could see the US DoD in conjunction with Raytheon and the relevant missile manufacturers in Ukraine creating a Land Standard using reconditioned old stock of SM-1 Block VIs and SM-2s (Using the Terrier Mk-70 launch booster). With either SA-6 and SA-11 launchers modified with suitable launch rails and/or modifying a suitable US Army/Ukraine Army trucks with Mark 11, Mark 13 or Mark 26 launchers. The next thing of course would be modifying the SA-6 and SA-11 illuminator radars to provide a comparable waveform for the SM seekers and creating a suitable adaptor to interface the SM-2 datalink with the SA-6/SA-11 fire-control systems. If successfully done this would create a mobile frankenSAM system that would be very dangerous to Russian fighters and fighter-bombers.
No way, just start sending over more of those Mk41 cells on trucks that the Army and Marines are buying, and ship them with the older SM2s already in canisters ready to swap over.
 
Last edited:
Taiwan and a few other non-US countries still use them, they took over support when the US stopped using them.

But yeah, that's not the US stuff.

Actually not. The Mk 11 only showed up in two classes -- the Albany conversions and the first thirteen DDG-2s. I checked, and all of those ships have been scrapped or sunk. There are still Mk 13s a bunch of places and Mk 26s in Taiwan (on the ex-Kidds), but that's it.
 
Actually not. The Mk 11 only showed up in two classes -- the Albany conversions and the first thirteen DDG-2s. I checked, and all of those ships have been scrapped or sunk. There are still Mk 13s a bunch of places and Mk 26s in Taiwan (on the ex-Kidds), but that's it.
Was I confusing the Mk11 with the Mk13? (checks wiki) Crap, I was confusing the Mk11 for the Mk13. My bad!
 
View: https://twitter.com/AKamyshin/status/1732858363409490372

The Department of Defense and industry partners provided Ukraine with technical data to start local production of some of the FrankenSAM projects that seek to enable Ukraine’s legacy air defense systems by integrating certain Western munitions. Parallel production of these systems in Ukraine and the United States will allow for faster fielding and enable Ukraine to contribute significantly to the sustainment of its air defense systems.
 
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-at...systems-will-protect-ukraine-this-winter.html

So Zelensky apparently said several Patriot systems will come to Ukraine this winter.
Third patriot battery, courtesy of Germany, was delivered to Ukraine several days earlier, so one might expect that particular battery is not part of the package Zelensky mentioned.

But if that's the case, what Patriots is Ukraine getting? From whom? Is a "system" a launcher or a battery? Or are systems he is talking about actually the first frankensams using patriot missiles? Personally, that seems most logical to me, knowing everything else that was written before.

Unrelated, there is another patriot system mentioned, https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-de...t-system-personally-from-scholz-zelensky.html
which seems to be additional to the german battery mentioned above. But is it a battery or additional launchers?
 
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-at...systems-will-protect-ukraine-this-winter.html

So Zelensky apparently said several Patriot systems will come to Ukraine this winter.
Third patriot battery, courtesy of Germany, was delivered to Ukraine several days earlier, so one might expect that particular battery is not part of the package Zelensky mentioned.

But if that's the case, what Patriots is Ukraine getting? From whom? Is a "system" a launcher or a battery? Or are systems he is talking about actually the first frankensams using patriot missiles? Personally, that seems most logical to me, knowing everything else that was written before.

Unrelated, there is another patriot system mentioned, https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-de...t-system-personally-from-scholz-zelensky.html
which seems to be additional to the german battery mentioned above. But is it a battery or additional launchers?
A "system" is usually an entire battery.
 
Defense Updates has just put out a video about the Frankensam project:


Ukrainian Minister of Strategic Industries, Oleksandr Kamyshin, revealed during a ministry briefing that the newly deployed "FrankenSAM" air defense systems are actively safeguarding the front line against Russian air attacks.
Kamyshin's statements were reported by the Ukrainian public broadcaster Suspilne.
He was reported as saying by local sources, “The first solutions from the FrankenSAM project portfolio are already operating on the battlefield. In the United States, with the minister of defense, we saw systems developed jointly by Ukrainian and American companies. And at the same time, they are now operating on our frontline. They can protect critical infrastructure and cities. These solutions allow us to have our rapid air defense,”
In this video, Defense Updates how Franken SAM could be very useful for Ukraine ?

Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
05:21 POTENTIAL USAGE
 
Details are sorely lacking. Which frankensam of the 3 types was used? Given the 9 km distance and shahed target mentioned, the aim-9 based one seems plausible.

Still, it's a bit strange that it happened only now. Rim7 based ones should have been in Ukraine for a few months now.

Patriot based ones will, however be by far the most important ones. Depending on number of batteries available for conversion, ukraine might again be able to fully shut down the high altitude airspace over the front lines.
 
Patriot based ones will, however be by far the most important ones. Depending on number of batteries available for conversion, ukraine might again be able to fully shut down the high altitude airspace over the front lines.

I'm not at all sure what Patriot FrankenSAM would look like, or 2hy it would be preferable to using the Patriot batteries as intended. Maybe mounting the Patriot launcher and radar on old S-300 TELs for improved mobility?
 
I'm not at all sure what Patriot FrankenSAM would look like, or 2hy it would be preferable to using the Patriot batteries as intended. Maybe mounting the Patriot launcher and radar on old S-300 TELs for improved mobility?
More likely its to allowed Patriot Radar and Command trailer to guide S300s and vice versa.

That would open up a WHOLE LOT of options for Ukraine if they can get thise two to talk to each other.
 
(Nota Bene to moderators: nuke that if off-topic or too political. I thought it was interesting. And yes, it relates to FrankenSAMs, because old stocks of old weapons)


 
(Nota Bene to moderators: nuke that if off-topic or too political. I thought it was interesting. And yes, it relates to FrankenSAMs, because old stocks of old weapons)


The Congressional Republicans clearly don't seem to understand that president Biden using the EDA is actually saving the US DoD money as they don't need to demilitarise that old equipment.
 
Details are sorely lacking. Which frankensam of the 3 types was used? Given the 9 km distance and shahed target mentioned, the aim-9 based one seems plausible.

Still, it's a bit strange that it happened only now. Rim7 based ones should have been in Ukraine for a few months now.

Patriot based ones will, however be by far the most important ones. Depending on number of batteries available for conversion, ukraine might again be able to fully shut down the high altitude airspace over the front lines.

More likely its to allowed Patriot Radar and Command trailer to guide S300s and vice versa.

That would open up a WHOLE LOT of options for Ukraine if they can get thise two to talk to each other.

There's some talk on Telegram that the A-50 and Il-22 that went down only saw a S300 radar active, and didn't consider it a threat due to distance. And then they got swatted with something a lot longer ranged.

So yeah, looks like the FrankenSAM project might have merged Patriot and S-300.
 
There's some talk on Telegram that the A-50 and Il-22 that went down only saw a S300 radar active, and didn't consider it a threat due to distance. And then they got swatted with something a lot longer ranged.

So yeah, looks like the FrankenSAM project might have merged Patriot and S-300.

That makes sense. It also means that the only merger of S-300 and Patriot is likely in networking radar data. This is something the US understands really well these days, getting disparate radar systems to share track data.

The question is whether Patriot can support a "silent" engagement with remote track data. The Patriot radar still has to send course updates to the missile, and ultimately PAC-2 GEM still needs illumination, since it does track-via-missile rather than active guidance. But maybe it can send guidance commands in a way that doesn't set off the target's RWR until it illuminates late in flight.
 
That makes sense. It also means that the only merger of S-300 and Patriot is likely in networking radar data. This is something the US understands really well these days, getting disparate radar systems to share track data.

The question is whether Patriot can support a "silent" engagement with remote track data. The Patriot radar still has to send course updates to the missile, and ultimately PAC-2 GEM still needs illumination, since it does track-via-missile rather than active guidance. But maybe it can send guidance commands in a way that doesn't set off the target's RWR until it illuminates late in flight.
It’s entirely possible the Russians fell to the same thing that F-117 fell to in Yugoslavia: Following a predictable flight path day after day. All the S-300 radar needed to do then was confirm that the planes were keeping their regular flight path, and the Patriot launcher could lob a missile in a precise direction and time, and it would be on an intercept, not even updates needed….
 
It’s entirely possible the Russians fell to the same thing that F-117 fell to in Yugoslavia: Following a predictable flight path day after day. All the S-300 radar needed to do then was confirm that the planes were keeping their regular flight path, and the Patriot launcher could lob a missile in a precise direction and time, and it would be on an intercept, not even updates needed….

Except that PAC-2 does not have an active seeker. It's semi-active with TVM, so the Patriot battery radar HAS to go active in the endgame or the missile can't guide. And it probably has to send periodic updates or the missile is going to be dumb. But if Patriot is only using the comms built into the radar and not an actual tracking signal until late, it potentially doesn't look like a Patriot engagement on ESM until it's too late to do anything about it.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom