S-300V Army SAM System

And that is not propaganda, again let 217km sink in

Yesterday and today ukrainian bombed Belgorod successfully

In response to air strikes by Ukrainian Air Force fighters on targets in Russia’s Belgorod region, air defence systems deployed to defend the area have reportedly broken a world record for the longest ranged surface to air kills. A Ukrainian Su-27 and Su-24 aircraft, which are thought to be some of the last of these relatively scarce and heavyweight classes operational after over six months of war, were responsible for the strikes on Russian targets and benefit from significantly longer ranges and higher weapons payloads than Ukraine’s drones and more widely used lighter MiG-29 fighters. Both moved in at a very low altitudes, rising to fire rocket pods and again descending as part of a flight pattern referred to locally as “jumping,” before being fired on by Russian surface to air missile batteries - specifically an S-300V4 system. The missile system neutralised both aircraft at extreme ranges of 217km, surpassing the 150km range kill previously recorded by a Russian S-400 system against a Ukrainian Su-27 over Kiev in March, with this achieved despite the Su-27’s high manoeuvrability and impressive flight performance designed to allow it to effectively evade standoff missile attacks.

The Su-27 strike into Russian territory followed shelling of Russian population centres near its Ukrainian borders. The Flanker moved in at a very low altitude, but was engaged by Russian air defences with an S-300V4 system credited with shooting it down. The Flanker and an accompanying Ukrainian Air Force Su-24MR strike fighter were reportedly shot down at a 217km range - representing one of the longest ranged surface to air kills on record. The age of the Ukrainian jets’ electronic warfare systems was likely a significant factor in guaranteeing they would be vulnerable when engaging 21st century air defence systems, with the S-300V4 being one of the most advanced in the Russian arsenal and entering service in the 2010s even more recently than the more well known S-400 system.

The S-300V4 deploys two kinds of missiles capable of engaging targets at ranges of over 200km, including the 48N6DM with a 250km engagement range and the 40N6 with a 400km engagement range, both of which travel at speeds well over Mach 10 and can intercept hypersonic targets. The surface to air kills surpass the 150km range kill by a Belarus-based S-400 against a Su-27 over Kiev reported in March. The fact that Su-27s are still flying represents a signifiant failure in Russia’s ability to destroy Ukrainian airfields and logistics, although the fact that fighters have consistently taken heavy losses once airborne highlights Russia’s vast superiority in surface to air and air to air capabilities.

Russia’s S-400 long range air defence system has reportedly seen its first combat and gained its first kill during the country’s military intervention in Ukraine, engaging and neutralising a Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 fighter near the country’s capital Kiev according to a number of reports. The shootdown reportedly took place on February 25, a day after Russian military operations in Ukraine began, when the Ukrainian Air Force had yet to suffer more serious losses. The S-400 was reportedly not deployed to Ukrainian soil, but engaged and neutralised its target from the territory of neighbouring Belarus where Russian forces retain a large presence. The fighter was reportedly piloted by Ukrainian Air Force Colonel Oleksandr Oksanchenko, a display pilot well known in the West for his airshow performances, who was posthumously granted the title of 'Hero of Ukraine' by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Oksanchenko had trained in the Soviet era, but flew in wartime despite his senior age of 53 due to a shortage of trained pilots in Ukraine.

a signifiant failure in Russia’s ability to destroy Ukrainian airfields and logistics

You can destroy hangars and planes on the airfield. Runway can be fixed. Airplanes hit by 500kg bombs not really.

Isos wrote:
You can destroy hangars and planes on the airfield. Runway can be fixed. Airplanes hit by 500kg bombs not really.

Isos wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

Isos wrote:
You can destroy hangars and planes on the airfield. Runway can be fixed. Airplanes hit by 500kg bombs not really.

If they wanted they could use Iskanders or Kalibrs but you are the only one who believes those rockets are not accurate enough to take out hangars and are just used to hit the runway.

They already used iskander against an airbase and it missed. I showed you the picture. Reality isn't an opinion.

I never said Kalibr isn't precise.

You are getting as dumb as the other two.

Isos wrote:
They already used iskander against an airbase and it missed. I showed you the picture. Reality isn't an opinion.

I never said Kalibr isn't precise.

You are getting as dumb as the other two.

Arrow wrote:Does anyone know how many S-300V and S-300V4 complexes or launchers Russia currently has? They provided a lot of information about the quantities of S-400 delivered, but there is little information about the S-300V4?

Isos wrote:I claim nothing. There is a fucking satellite image that shows they attacked an airvase and missed.

If you think that is a fake, good.

Attacking airvase has its value. Just look how ukrainian manage to destroy su-30 at a russian airbase.



Look another attack destroyed half a dozen valuable russian aircraft.



Meanwhile russian missed by more than 50m. There is at least 11 aircraft in the open that survived :




Is more clear with the pictures dumbass or do you need a drawing ? I just proved with pictures that you are totally wrong and you keep making up claims and situations that are dumb as they happen. What happens and really happened is in those pictures. If they don't need runways why are they using those airfield where they lost as much aircraft as in the air in Ukraine ?

Your dumb ideas are not the reality. No one cares about your thoughts.