Russia - Egypt military contracts

Interfax also states that the export version of the S-300V4 is Antey-2500 but it would not make any difference even if it did not. Price is the same for Egypt and Venezuela. It would make difference only if some CSTO country where to buy it. Other than that different additional subsystems like more command posts, radar systems ECM, passive or active radar sets as well as additional missiles, training etc could make the difference in price. wrote:

Thanx Vector , but why some opinions said that S-300PMU2 is more capable against aircrafts than VM , are PMU missiles are more maneuverable than VM missiles ?

ahmedfire wrote:

Thanx Vector , but why some opinions said that S-300PMU2 is more capable against aircrafts than VM , are PMU missiles are more maneuverable than VM missiles ?

Each of two system is top noch in World terms but each in comparison has its advantages and disadvantages. People have not been familiar with the S-300V version for a very loooong

time much less know the difference and most of them where not even aware about its existence. S-300P started to receive upgrades much sooner due to its export success which

made its shortcomings fixed in its early stages. Antey-2500 received its final modernization only in 2011 vs 1996-1999 for S-300P and that made a lots of difference.

Right now S-300V by my opiinion surpasess latest S-300PMU2 modernizations in its capabilities. I have made comparison list somewhere here and sometime ago.

Viktor wrote:

ahmedfire wrote:One B$ for three divisions ,little expensive ?

Price of S-300V4 regiment for the Russian army is in range of 0.75-0.85 bin $ depending on the accessories.

S-300V4 does not come cheap and has never been cheap but it is a top tier SAM system than integrates Buk, Tor and the other AD systems into a single IADS

increasing efficiency of all existing SAM systems by large margin.

Its a powerful system that keeps away AWACS, tankers and ELINT planes with its massive range from sneaking into a country airspace looking for targets.

It can be seen also as a first step towards ballistic missile defense of the country.

Do u mean that one battery of s-300v4 for the russian army costs 0.75 billion $???
Why it is so expensive in comparison to s-300pmu2 which I think its price is around 200 million $ in 2013 ?
Could u provide me by a source of its cost ?

S-300VM is all tracked vehicles, which are more expensive to buy and to operate, but offer similar mobility to tanks off road.

In terms of radar and systems the S-300VM (old NATO codename was SA-12 A and B) is much better able to deal with ballistic weapons than PMU models... it is a very capable system.

GarryB wrote:S-300VM is all tracked vehicles, which are more expensive to buy and to operate, but offer similar mobility to tanks off road.

In terms of radar and systems the S-300VM (old NATO codename was SA-12 A and B) is much better able to deal with ballistic weapons than PMU models... it is a very capable system.

It is a great system no doubt .. but not to worth 4 times the price of pmu2
anyway .. could u please give me a link that confirm this price ?
either for export version or russian version (s-300v4)

house200888 wrote:

GarryB wrote:S-300VM is all tracked vehicles, which are more expensive to buy and to operate, but offer similar mobility to tanks off road.

In terms of radar and systems the S-300VM (old NATO codename was SA-12 A and B) is much better able to deal with ballistic weapons than PMU models... it is a very capable system.

It is a great system no doubt .. but not to worth 4 times the price of pmu2
anyway .. could u please give me a link that confirm this price ?
either for export version or russian version (s-300v4)

Think of it this way, 750 million dollars, vs tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars of damage done by powerful hyper-sonic ballistic missiles.

I would expect if they bought the PMU system right now the price would be more than a quarter of a billion... many of its components will need to be outsourced from other places now that the west has sanctions imposed on Russia so they will have to change to either domestic chips or chinese made chips.

According to my book from 2002 the Antei-2500 can hit aerodynamic targets up to 200km away and ballistic targets up to 40km away, and can hit aerodynamic targets from 25m up to 30km in altitude and ballistic targets up to 30km altitude. It can hit targets travelling at 4,500m/s or 4.5km/s, which would make them Mach 14 speed targets... and can hit targets as small as 0.02 sqm targets.

It can engage up to 24 aerodynamic targets at once, or 16 ballistic targets at one time...

In comparison the S-300PMU2 can guide 12 missiles at once at 6 targets. range is similar at 3-200km for aerodynamic targets with altitude 10m to 27km altitude. Ballistic target performance is similar up to 40km in range and 25km in altitude but is limited to targets flying at up to 2.8km/s or just under mach 9.

As you can see both systems are very capable.. but the S-300VM is more capable in some areas... and more expensive.

Personally it would be the one I'd choose... much harder to overwhelm with sheer numbers... especially with TOR or Pantsir-S1 supporting it.

Range has been increased to 350 km.

Recently our industry has managed to increase the range of one of the most powerful systems – Antey-2500. Its maximum firing range was increased from 250 to 350 km. It is the world record.

link

magnumcromagnon wrote:

house200888 wrote:

GarryB wrote:S-300VM is all tracked vehicles, which are more expensive to buy and to operate, but offer similar mobility to tanks off road.

In terms of radar and systems the S-300VM (old NATO codename was SA-12 A and B) is much better able to deal with ballistic weapons than PMU models... it is a very capable system.

It is a great system no doubt .. but not to worth 4 times the price of pmu2
anyway .. could u please give me a link that confirm this price ?
either for export version or russian version (s-300v4)

Think of it this way, 750 million dollars, vs tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars of damage done by powerful hyper-sonic ballistic missiles.

In that case .. It is a very cheap system

GarryB wrote:I would expect if they bought the PMU system right now the price would be more than a quarter of a billion... many of its components will need to be outsourced from other places now that the west has sanctions imposed on Russia so they will have to change to either domestic chips or chinese made chips.

According to my book from 2002 the Antei-2500 can hit aerodynamic targets up to 200km away and ballistic targets up to 40km away, and can hit aerodynamic targets from 25m up to 30km in altitude and ballistic targets up to 30km altitude. It can hit targets travelling at 4,500m/s or 4.5km/s, which would make them Mach 14 speed targets... and can hit targets as small as 0.02 sqm targets.

It can engage up to 24 aerodynamic targets at once, or 16 ballistic targets at one time...

In comparison the S-300PMU2 can guide 12 missiles at once at 6 targets. range is similar at 3-200km for aerodynamic targets with altitude 10m to 27km altitude. Ballistic target performance is similar up to 40km in range and 25km in altitude but is limited to targets flying at up to 2.8km/s or just under mach 9.

As you can see both systems are very capable.. but the S-300VM is more capable in some areas... and more expensive.

Personally it would be the one I'd choose... much harder to overwhelm with sheer numbers... especially with TOR or Pantsir-S1 supporting it.

U r absolutely right
antei-2500 is much better than pmu2
but would u really prefer 1 antei-2500 battery than 4 pmu2 batteries
and what about s-400 . it is even more expensive than the great s-400

the deal with Egypt (and also Venezuala) is around 1 billion $

I have another Q .. russian sources said that the egyptian deal will be delivered in 3 divisions .. could it mean 3 batteries or is it for sure 1 battery in 3 parts?

antei-2500 is much better than pmu2
but would u really prefer 1 antei-2500 battery than 4 pmu2 batteries

PMU2 is no longer in production, and 4 batteries of PMU2 that can't keep up with armoured units would be better used defending fixed things like Cairo or airfields.

and what about s-400 . it is even more expensive than the great s-400

S-400 has similar mobility to S-300PMU2 and would be best used to defend fixed sites rather than mobile armoured formations.

Remember those 4 S-300PMU2 batteries would mean 24 aerodynamic targets can be engaged at once, which is the same performance as the VM while the VM has a 350km range (thanks ahmedfire) there are fewer platforms that can attack it outside its reach.

Four separate systems can cover more targets, but only stationary targets effectively.

Personally I would do what the Russians are doing... VM for army units to defend mobile forces, and S-400 and S-350 for smaller lighter fixed or only semi mobile forces and strategic assets like power stations, HQs and capital cities...

house200888 wrote:

GarryB wrote:I would expect if they bought the PMU system right now the price would be more than a quarter of a billion... many of its components will need to be outsourced from other places now that the west has sanctions imposed on Russia so they will have to change to either domestic chips or chinese made chips.

According to my book from 2002 the Antei-2500 can hit aerodynamic targets up to 200km away and ballistic targets up to 40km away, and can hit aerodynamic targets from 25m up to 30km in altitude and ballistic targets up to 30km altitude. It can hit targets travelling at 4,500m/s or 4.5km/s, which would make them Mach 14 speed targets... and can hit targets as small as 0.02 sqm targets.

It can engage up to 24 aerodynamic targets at once, or 16 ballistic targets at one time...

In comparison the S-300PMU2 can guide 12 missiles at once at 6 targets. range is similar at 3-200km for aerodynamic targets with altitude 10m to 27km altitude. Ballistic target performance is similar up to 40km in range and 25km in altitude but is limited to targets flying at up to 2.8km/s or just under mach 9.

As you can see both systems are very capable.. but the S-300VM is more capable in some areas... and more expensive.

Personally it would be the one I'd choose... much harder to overwhelm with sheer numbers... especially with TOR or Pantsir-S1 supporting it.

U r absolutely right
antei-2500 is much better than pmu2
but would u really prefer 1 antei-2500 battery than 4 pmu2 batteries
and what about s-400 . it is even more expensive than the great s-400

the deal with Egypt (and also Venezuala) is around 1 billion $

I have another Q .. russian sources said that the egyptian deal will be delivered in 3 divisions .. could it mean 3 batteries or is it for sure 1 battery in 3 parts?

You got it all wrong when a newspapwer reporter says S-300V division it means regement and when a newspaper reporter say S-300P division he
it means battery wheather a newspaper reporter knows it or not. It is because S-300V does not exist in a battery form unlike S-300P. So, one Antey-2500 regimen Egypt will get will consit of 3 Antey-2500 batteries meaning you must devide 1 bin $ with 3 to get the price of one Antey-2500 battery. In comparison with the S-300PMU2 (250million$) you get a bit more capability for a bit more money but still much cheaper than SAMPT and much more powerful

Nice

Russia may create a second device for Egypt remote sensing

flamming_python wrote:With the S-300V, you also get the limitation of only being able to use far more expensive missiles than the low-range ones available to the S-300PMU; a fact that seems to have escaped many here but I can assure you that this would come as a big consideration to the Defense Ministries deciding between the S-300PMU and S-300V; and perhaps is part of the reason that Iran is so hesitant about Russia's offer.

And the BUK missiles are far cheaper than "small" and new S-300 yet dangerously good against HARM type targets etc ... than comes Tor-M1/2 and Igla types all integrated with

command posts calculating the most efficient (even from the economical point of view) target distribution.

Are there already some information of deployment or garrison of S-300V in Egypt?

there is a lot of talks about finalizing a deal of 48 MIG-35 and KA-52 to Egypt very soon

Great news!!!

George1 wrote:Contract for a supply of 46 MiG-29 fighters to Egypt was agreed, according to newspaper "Vedomosti"

in response to Saudi I gather

We should wait for confirmation of this report. Apparently Rosoboronexport refused to comment and RSK MiG couldn't be reached for comment

http://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/articles/2015/05/25/593348-soglasovan-kontrakt-na-postavku-46-istrebitelei-mig-29-v-egipet


i wasnt lying when i said that Egypt will get 46 mig35
you can check my post in 19 April
(there is a lot of talks about finalizing a deal of 48 MIG-35 and KA-52 to Egypt very soon )

Mig 29 is good buy.

Good news if it turns out to be true. We'll have to wait till its confirmed though. The amount of reports about the MiG-29M/35 getting exported over the past years that never materialised is quiet a lot.

If this deal goes ahead Egyptian air force is going to have a weird make up. I guess they'll be retiring some older aircraft soon to keep the number of fighter types down.

in response to Saudi I gather

Why would it be a response to Saudi?

Flyboy77 wrote:Good news if it turns out to be true. We'll have to wait till its confirmed though. The amount of reports about the MiG-29M/35 getting exported over the past years that never materialised is quiet a lot.

What is the difference between MIG-29M and MIG-35 apart from the AESA radar?