Please GarryB read it ,is very interesting
To me it is fairly obvious...
You are in a gun confrontation with someone and all of a sudden they slip on a bullet proof vest... you have to make a decision... estimate how effective his vest is or might become in the near future and develop new ammo for your guns to defeat it... or improve accuracy so you can shoot him in the head... or buy a flame thrower...
victor7 you instead don't read it for any reason at world ,ok ?
I suggest instead to you to go here
Now don't be mean.
Victor has admitted that he is new to this stuff, so rather than put him off and drive him to be one of those drones you are accusing him of being, have some patience and cover his points clearly and explain why he is mistaken.
Anyway, fight between F-22 and Su-35 or PAK FA will be decided in dogfight, where pilot's skills are decisive.
Location will be pretty important too.
Btw, does Russia have something like JORN radar that Australia has. Russian radar in Azerbaijan named Gabala, is it as power also. Although in war situation, these are the first items to go like Awacs having 8 minute time span in European theater.
Russia has lots of such radars, which are protected by the air defence network. An attack on such strategic elements would raise the question of a sneak attack with nuclear missiles (with those radars taken out Russia would not detect an ICBM attack with its land based radar network, the normal response to such a situation would be to assume these radars were taken out to conceal an attack which could be anything from a single bomber to a full strategic nuclear attack. The response will be use it before you lose it full nuclear attack, so I rather doubt it will happen in the first place.)
There is no use splitting hairs on this or that. Basic idea is to have some sort of fire mechanism on each high value item to deflect bombs and if possible the missiles launched by planes.
It would need to be a fairly substantial system to detect and track such targets let alone allow engagement from extended ranges.
The Pantsir-S1 and TOR systems were developed specifically for the role, rather than try to shoehorn mini Tor systems on every tank and IFV it makes more sense to operate a TOR battery with each brigade and to use concealment systems like Nakidka that reduces RCS by something like 6 times and IR signature several times too, so they aren't seen in the first place.
US has already tested a system which kills a RPG round fired at a tank or bmd.
Good for them. The Soviets tested the T-55AD which had a system called Drozd in the mid 1980s in Afghanistan where it was successful in stopping RPG attacks.
Stopping a bomb is a totally different thing.
The detection equipment using MMW radar would actually make the tanks and armoured vehicles easier to detect at extended ranges...
There is another system that is stopping bullets.
Tanks already have armour that stops bullets.
HERE YOU GO, WHAT AM I RANTING ABOUT ALL ALONG. RUSSIA HAS A ARENA SYSTEM WHICH CANCELS OUT RPGs AND MISSILES FIRED EVEN FROM HELICOPTERS ETC. COSTS $300K. IF IT CAN BE MODIFIED TO KILL THE JDAMS/JSOWS THEN ALL THE CONCEPT OF AIR BOMBING IS A BIG HOLE IN PENTAGON'S BUDGET.
ARENA is developed by a different company from Drozd and Drozd 2, the problem is that its munitions are designed to defeat anti armour weapons and it does so by prematurely setting off the target missile several metres away from the tank. Setting off a JDAM several metres from a tank will still kill the tank.
To detect a JDAM and successfully engage ir you need long range detection sensors and long range interception munitions... like the radar and missiles of the TOR, or Pantsir-S1... neither of which will fit into a tank without stopping it from being a tank and making it into an AD vehicle which TOR and Pantsir-S1 already are...
Btw, glad to have made you day!
Sorry Victor, I think he was being very sarcastic...
Btw, can systems like Shilka and others be jammed by SEAD type operations. I think they can be because of radar feature. What is the way out of that scenario, IRST?
Most air defence gun vehicles have optical backups. The Shilka has a modest optical backup with reduced accuracy and effectiveness, but still very potent against helicopters and UAVs within range.
The Tunguska and Pantsir-S1 have more sophisticated optics systems that include autotrackers and night and all weather capability and of course larger calibre guns effective to longer range and higher elevations.
Such systems using guns and missiles represent a serious threat to all low flying targets including but not limited to cruise missiles.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Why you point out Podzolnuh ? 
-even only the same aircraft involved would have the whole Chinese IAD tracking and EW structure at play to theirs advantage.
.... in Desert Storm, before G-day (beginning of the ground operations) after over one month and half of operations -literally some thousands of dedicated mission !!!!- less than 10% (9,4%) of Iraqi armoured units and 16 % of not armoured ones had been destroyed by Air Attacks and wide majority of them by Ah-64 not fixed wing aircraft ,in few hours of ground battle Iraqi divisions losses was,naturally, 5-6 times higher than those suffered in the month and half of Air campaign !! .
