S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #1

Is there any good document that archives how SA-6 and SA-3 performed in the Arab war since 60's ?

January 26, 2012. Channel NTV. Russia, Leningrad region. Demonstration of new technics, in 11th educational center of Air Defense. S-400, S-300, Pantsir-S1. ( via mp.net )

Nice video.

Russia to supply S-400 systems to Belarus, Kazakhstan after 2015

Russia will start supplying S-400 Triumf air defence systems to Belarus and Kazakhstan after 2015 when its own new plants launch serial production of Almaz-Antey-designed S-400 and S-500 systems for the Space Defence Troops, a source in the government’s Military-Industrial Commission said.

“Once serial production of these systems begin, we will have to rearm up to 30 air defence regiments with S-400 systems and supply about ten S-500 squadrons to the Space Defence Troops by 2020 under the governmental armament programme,” the source told Itar-Tass on Saturday.

“As we meet the needs of the Space Defence Troops, we will be able to start supplying S-400 systems to Belarus and Kazakhstan after 2015,” the source added.

In February 2011, Vladimir Popovkin, who was first deputy defence minister at that time, said that regular S-400 supplies to the army were scheduled until 2020 to arm 28 air defence regiments.

He also said that Almaz-Antey was designing the unique long-range S-500 air defence system capable of intercepting ballistic targets at high altitudes.

“They plan to finish all design work in 2013 and start regular supplies to the army in 2015. A total of ten S-500 squadrons will be supplied,” Popovkin said.

While the current S-300PM1 is being updated to PM2 standards , new generation of jammer threats are emerging and are under works , specially the one that uses Ga/N TR module

New EW Capabilities To Emerge With NGJ

Austin wrote:While the current S-300PM1 is being updated to PM2 standards , new generation of jammer threats are emerging and are under works , specially the one that uses Ga/N TR module

New EW Capabilities To Emerge With NGJ

I'm curious on what kind of jamming technique will be used this time.. clearly.. typical Noise jamming won't going well with S-300's ..RGPO and VGPO may work but it still does not deny target acquisition ..cross eye, cross pol need high Jammer to Signal ratio to realize its effect and the former may limit platform movement (yaw isn't good for cross eye jammer platform) ..false target hm this might work.. as long as the jammer can synchronize its emission with the grave stone.

hmm maybe SOC can provide some nice info

BTW hmm this is the seeker of early 48N6 variant from Almaz video

The measure/countermeasure war is an ongoing fluid battle with no end...

If the US didn't come up with a new jammer, the Russian SAM developers would get bored and lazy...

Austin wrote:Is there any good document that archives how SA-6 and SA-3 performed in the Arab war since 60's ?

Pervov's SAMS of the PVO book looks at the S-125 in various conflicts, as well as the S-75 and S-200.

Interview with Almaz-Antei CEO

http://i-korotchenko.livejournal.com/384407.html

http://vz.ru/news/2012/2/6/559333.html

As I understand this article, first examples of S-500 (prototype) will bi build to the end of this year.

Yes, that is how I read it too.

Will be interesting as they mention interceptions above 200km too, which means it is likely endo and exo atmospheric.

If you read the Almaz Antei CEO interview and if translation is not playing tricks.

S-500 interceptor will be unique and it will have no comparision with any thing in the world.

And it will be smaller then S-400 interceptor and will have nothing in common with it.

Which does make sense really.

While it might reduce costs to reuse S-400 support equipment where appropriate the S-500 system is going to be a significant deployment... much the same way that the PAK FA will be a significant aircraft and its deployment to a region has significance.

Being able to deploy S-400 to a region is one thing but also deploying S-500 is something extra.

It either means there is something very special there to protect, or there is a serious threat there that justifies its deployment.

An S-500 system will likely be co-located with S-400 for protection from cruise missiles and air attack because in military terms the S-500 is a strategic weapon system.

The S-500 is very much like a super THAAD, that will not be wasted on aircraft or cruise missiles and will likely intercept its target well above the atmosphere.

It will likely be smaller than the large S-400 missiles, but it will also likely be multistage too.

GarryB wrote:It either means there is something very special there to protect, or there is a serious threat there that justifies its deployment.

The S-500 is very much like a super THAAD, that will not be wasted on aircraft or cruise missiles and will likely intercept its target well above the atmosphere.

Given that the S-500 will be an ABM/ASAT capable system, it's deployment doesn't necessarily mean anything about significant complexes in the region. You can drop it underneath known satellite overflight paths, you can stick it along the border to target inbound ICBM RVs, etc. Sure, they're probably going to drop some near Moscow, someplace in the FEMD, and on the Kola peninsula, to protect things that are already there (namely Moscow and the Northern/Pacific Fleet SSBN ports, in theory). But the mobility of the system means you can do a lot more with it than purely defend locations already in existance. You can put it places to maximize its capability in its design role. This also makes all of those large equipment garrisons around Moscow and other places far more significant. S-500s can take out IMINT assets prior to deploying more SAMs or offensive units from those locations. A proven, tested S-500 could force the USAF to re-think its reliance on satellites and look at developing an airborne, survivable wide-band VLO ISR platform again. A 200km+ reach is a nice figure to quote, but if it can in reality reach a little over 300km, then you can hold all of the Keyhole satellites at risk near periapsis.

And calling it a super-THAAD is insulting to the S-500. THAAD is reported to top out at 150km in altitude, lacking the reach to hit a satellite (over the 100km Karman Line you're technically exoatmospheric, but LEO doesn't typically begin until 160km), and lacks the velocity to deal with an ICBM RV. THAAD does seem to be very capable in its design role, with every one of the EMD tests succeeding, save three where no THAAD was launched as the target missile failed prior to the launch point. MASSIVE improvement over the initial test sequence.

I wonder what they mean by "unique" when referring to the missile. Smaller than the "40N6" leaves a lot of wiggle room, depending on how big that thing actually is. A developed version of the 9M82 would not shock me in the least, that thing has a cubic buttload of KE to exploit. And in terms of capability it would still qualify as "unique." Plus, this makes a bit of sense from a historical standpoint. If we assume that Fakel designed all of the S-400's missiles, then the "40N6" could represent a fatter, improved 48N6. Novator designed the 9M82 and the 53T6, as well as the 5Ya26 for the S-225, giving them a theoretical leg up on any future mobile ABM and making sense as the contractor for the S-500's weapon.

And calling it a super-THAAD is insulting to the S-500.

I don't think it is insulting....

If you take into account the meaning of the word super I think my use was accurate.

To demonstrate I would suggest you test the value of Super by replacing THAAD with Man.

The difference between man and superman I believe illustrates my point...

Regarding your other comments, yes, I forgot that a missile able to intercept incoming ICBMs should also be able to hit satellites in orbit and therefore become quite a valuable asset.

No one relies on satellites more than the US.

More importantly... with a 600km range I would think basing them in Cuba just to protect Russia from those Argentine ICBMs and nuclear weapons potential might be very interesting...

Don't worry... it is a defensive weapon not directed at the US... but we wont sign anything to that effect...

GarryB wrote:More importantly... with a 600km range I would think basing them in Cuba just to protect Russia from those Argentine ICBMs and nuclear weapons potential might be very interesting...

...except that in this case you're really doing nothing except placing the emitters in a very good spot for ELINT collection. 600 km range won't get an S-500 anywhere near an ICBM fired from the US to Russia

As a political statement placing the S-500 in Kaliningrad makes more sense. Or Syria. Either way, of course the US government will whine about it, and I'll be the first person to state that they (the US gov't) can sit and swivel, that an agreement between sovereign states to place defensive assets is perfectly acceptable provided you can live with the new geopolitical climate you've created as a result. Just like Russia's agreement to sell the S-300PMU-2 to Iran was perfectly legal, even under existing UNSCRs, whatever those are worth these days.

The more I think about the latter incident, the more I think Russia may have decided to purposely misinterpret the UNSCRs to avoid Israel potentially defeating the system. The Israelis have stated that they can defeat the S-300PMU-1/2 on various occasions, and they are pretty damn good at EW. What if they made a mockery of the system in Iranian hands? Even if it was due to the fact that Iran has never touched anything this advanced before (think operator error rather than a system flaw), it'd hurt export sales to future clients and allow factions within the Russian government to question spending so much on S-400 batteries (which are pretty much the penultimate S-300P evolution despite the fancy new designators used). On the other hand, the amount of whining Israel does at any S-300P series sale to anyone it finds disagreeable brings their claims into question.

At least they haven't made themselves to look like complete fools by objecting to the sale on the grounds that the missile can possibly be used as an SSM. Like, you know, Turkey.

Russia’s Almaz-Antey concern will finish the development of the advanced S-500 air defense system by 2017, two years later than the deadline announced earlier, the company’s General Director Vitaly Neskorodov said.



The S-500, a long-range air defense missile system, is expected to become the backbone of a unified aerospace defense system being formed in Russia.



Neskorodov said in an interview with Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper on Monday that the complexity of technical solutions used in this unique system and some management problems led to the delay in the development.



“We have to step up the work and make up for lost time,” he said. “Nevertheless, we will have prototypes of several components of the system ready for testing by the end of 2012.”



Russian officials provide sketchy details on the technical characteristics of the new system.



The S-500 will reportedly have an extended range of up to 600 kilometers (over 370 miles) and simultaneously engage up to 10 targets.



The Russian military has demanded that the system must be capable of intercepting ballistic missiles and hypersonic cruise missiles and plans to order at least ten S-500 battalions for the future Russian Aerospace Defense.



The S-500 could become a trump card in Russia’s response to the U.S.-backed European missile shield, which Moscow believes may threaten Russia’s nuclear deterrent.



Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin has proposed setting up a government body responsible for consolidating efforts aimed at the creation of an effective aerospace defense network in the country.

http://www.en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120207/171194086.html

...except that in this case you're really doing nothing except placing the emitters in a very good spot for ELINT collection. 600 km range won't get an S-500 anywhere near an ICBM fired from the US to Russia

You miss the point. They don't actually deploy anything to Cuba, but the plans to base something there with a 600km range that could use nuclear tipped missiles that might end up intercepting something very close to the ground in... say Miami... might refocus the US on the effects of its encirclement of Russia and ABM systems with radars that look deep into Russian territory...

A bargaining chip they can pretend is of vital strategic importance to Russia that is a red herring to give away when the offer by the other side to do away with something becomes an option...

The Israelis have stated that they can defeat the S-300PMU-1/2 on various occasions, and they are pretty damn good at EW. What if they made a mockery of the system in Iranian hands? Even if it was due to the fact that Iran has never touched anything this advanced before (think operator error rather than a system flaw), it'd hurt export sales to future clients and allow factions within the Russian government to question spending so much on S-400 batteries (which are pretty much the penultimate S-300P evolution despite the fancy new designators used). On the other hand, the amount of whining Israel does at any S-300P series sale to anyone it finds disagreeable brings their claims into question.

If they could defeat it so easily what is with all the complaints and behind the closed doors efforts to stop the sale and transfer? The S-300 was built on the experience of previous systems performance against the US and Israel... even if they have solutions I rather doubt they will be perfect and 100% effective solutions.

The issue of course is how the systems will be used... put a fool at the controls of an F-22 and a professional in a Mig-21 might eat him for breakfast... stealth doesn't stop 23mm cannon shells...

Lets face it... weapons are designed for war and you can test the hell out of it all you want but it takes a decent enemy to really test a system.

If Russia supplies Iran with S-300s and somehow the Israelis defeat it, or the Iranians don't use it properly, then the lessons learned can be applied to the S-400 and S-500 to make them better.

One or two SAM batteries will not stop NATO, they might cause damage, or might simply be used up shooting down UCAVs.

Air defence is about layers and communication and surveillance and depth with a range of platforms all working together to blunt attacks and make make the efforts of the enemy too expensive in terms of material and personel to warrant attacking in the first place.

It is a bit like Japan attacking Pearl Harbour... even if the carriers were there and were hit it was only a matter of time before the US overwhelmed the Japanese. In the case now of Iran or any other small country without nukes the comparison is even more one sided... look at the poverty in North Korea and Cuba... it is not because they are communist... look at China. It is economic isolation that plays a major part in keeping these countries and others where they are.

put a fool at the controls of an F-22 and a professional in a Mig-21 might eat him for breakfast... stealth doesn't stop 23mm cannon shells...

Garry , is that true

I think no one will own F-22 except he was professional

It wouldn't take much to upgrade a Mig-21 to make it a very capable dogfighter, and its 23mm cannon is very effective.

A fat complacent, over confident pilot in an F-22 could easily be surprised.

In fact put DIRCMs on the Mig-21 to deal with IIR Sidewinders and some podded jammers and towed decoys that are able to deal with AMRAAMs and the fight would be very interesting.

F-15 pilots might have not been able to get a lock, but a modern IRST and laser rangefinder with the cannon will get you a lock and a kill... if you know what you are doing.

So , amodernized mig-21 can make adefensive role against Raptor , not reasonable for the first time , but theoriticaly as you said there is another ways to deal with modern technology using old platform , not surprised now when egypt modernized it's mig-21s in the 21 century !

If History can be a lesson:
- Propeller driven Mustangs and La-7s have shot down jet powered German Me-262.
- Vietnamese MiG-17s have shot down US F-4 Phantoms.

Having an aircraft from a previous generation does not necessarily mean "Game Over". As Garry said, a professional can more than make up for the generation difference in case the opponent is foolish enough.

GarryB wrote:You miss the point. They don't actually deploy anything to Cuba, but the plans to base something there with a 600km range that could use nuclear tipped missiles that might end up intercepting something very close to the ground in... say Miami... might refocus the US on the effects of its encirclement of Russia and ABM systems with radars that look deep into Russian territory...

I think you overestimate the amount of give-a-crap the US would have if Russia based a non-nuclear (unless I'm missing something, otherwise the AMRAAM may as well be classified as just as nuclear capable in theory) ABM system in a location that'd guarantee it's ability to not hit ICBMs.

GarryB wrote:If they could defeat it so easily what is with all the complaints and behind the closed doors efforts to stop the sale and transfer?

Exactly. Either 1) they're full of crap, or 2) they know that to defeat the system they'd need a big strike package full of support assets, not something they could sneak into Iran to bomb a reactor complex.

Probably new build as existing S-300V are rather old.

I think you overestimate the amount of give-a-crap the US would have if Russia based a non-nuclear (unless I'm missing something, otherwise the AMRAAM may as well be classified as just as nuclear capable in theory) ABM system in a location that'd guarantee it's ability to not hit ICBMs.

Ummm Sean... the US is currently shtting its pants and preparing to build a 50 billion plus ABM system in Europe to defend against Iranian ICSMs that don't exist, and Iranian nukes that also don't exist.

Are you telling me they will look at 600km range Russian missiles in Cuba and not care?

The media will go mental... those crazy Russians are trying to restart the Cold war... how dare they place offensive weapons close to mother america!!! It wont be the same thing as US Defensive missiles in Europe of course because they will only be used for peaceful means... to protect the ozone layer or something.

GarryB wrote:Ummm Sean... the US is currently shtting its pants and preparing to build a 50 billion plus ABM system in Europe to defend against Iranian ICSMs that don't exist, and Iranian nukes that also don't exist.

Are you telling me they will look at 600km range Russian missiles in Cuba and not care?

I'm telling you that the DoD won't care, or the White House. They'll be too busy drooling over the ELINT. And like I said, they'll know it means absolutely zero in the strategic balance to have ABMs in Cuba.

Or, they'll decide that Russia has discovered Chavez's ICBM program, and initiate bombing raids accordingly.

Either way.

GarryB wrote:The media will go mental... those crazy Russians are trying to restart the Cold war... how dare they place offensive weapons close to mother america!!! It wont be the same thing as US Defensive missiles in Europe of course because they will only be used for peaceful means...

Of course the media will go mental, because they have no real desire to promote sanity and lack general intelligence in most of these matters.

And, please, we aren't Turkey. We can recognize a defensive weapon for what it is.

GarryB wrote:to protect the ozone layer or something.

Heh. Go green, buy THAAD!