S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

jhelb wrote:

Viktor wrote:
S-400 and alike Russian AD systems are meant to simultaneously work with ECM systems meaning enemy radars are supposed to be blinded anyway as 40N6 and 48N6 steam rolls its way towards the target.

With one important caveat. Targets must be in line of sight. You see ECM does not work if the target is not in line of sight. And hostile forces will ensure that they are not.

Say tomorrow some of China's enemies like Japan, India, Vietnam decide to attack the S 400. What do you think they will do? Their fighters  will fly a nap of the earth profile thereby allowing them to rely on  terrain masking & terrain-hugging flight profiles and consequently launch their missiles like Kh-31 to strike the S-400 from standoff range.

You mean over the horizon. Where curbure of earth help hidin against radar waver. Well here would be two options: one would be that ECM to be powered up at high altitude. Drone whit radar will have important role. The second option would be that the radio waves are reflected by athmosphere so they will be reflected over the horizon.

GarryB wrote:The air and space (aerospace) defence forces... a combination of the PVO air defence forces of the Air Force, and the Space defence forces of the strategic forces, will also operate S-400 along with the S-500 and the Moscow based ABM system.

Like the Air Force, the VKKO wont be so interested in theatre mobility (ie tracked vehicles) as strategic and short range mobility (wheels).

A nuclear bomb can destroy a ICBM? Cause in this in a sattelite can be put up to 30 nuclear devices that can intercept from far away the ICBM. Whit low altitude sattelites can be done.

Viktor wrote:

EKS wrote:So, correct me if i'm wrong, but 8 s400 regiments are deliverd to the airforce till today. The others in service (not army systems) are the s300 pmu1/2/3 series. And there are shorads for point defence. In addition to this there are long range EW radars service for early detection.

I wonder what the strategic air defence of russia would look Like in 2020. The nummer of deployed systems (s400,s350,s300,s500 and pointdefence systems), the EW, and the area's of airdefence focus.

I guess, besides moscow, we will see deployment focus in the western and southern military district (against Nato) In the ural (probably s350 and s500, to protect the missile silo's) and around the pacific fleet (for bastion defence).

Roughly and in general, Russia currently has about 220 batteries of S-300PX/VX/400 systems and somewhere in between of 500-1000 active fighters. Nuf said

+ whole lots of other stuff and by 2020 situation will further and rapidly improve.

Here are some problems: one of them is that must be a fast rate of replace whit new things because older ones doesnt work anymore. Also often maintenance is required. Russia would better right now start a huge trial in wich major test to all sistems and weapons to be made. Then a correct rate of replace must be maked.

The second option would be that the radio waves are reflected by athmosphere so they will be reflected over the horizon.

The russians already have widely deployed over the horizon radars as part of their early warning systems.

A nuclear bomb can destroy a ICBM? Cause in this in a sattelite can be put up to 30 nuclear devices that can intercept from far away the ICBM. Whit low altitude sattelites can be done.

A sharpened pencil through a fuel line can destroy an ICBM too, but getting the pencil to those fuel lines is the problem... the same as getting nuclear warheads to the ICBMs before they deploy their warheads and decoys... Low altitude satellites orbit the earth in 90 minutes and would spend about 6 minutes over any one point on earth so for total coverage of Russia you would need an enormous number of satellites... and low orbit satellites would be vulnerable to S-500.

one of them is that must be a fast rate of replace whit new things because older ones doesnt work anymore.

Combination of new models and upgrades to older models works best.

lso often maintenance is required.

New and upgraded models are generally easier and cheaper to maintain and often contain self diagnostic systems built in.

Russia would better right now start a huge trial in wich major test to all sistems and weapons to be made. Then a correct rate of replace must be maked.

For decades Russia has been continually upgrading and developing new systems based on needs and developments elsewhere. rate of replacement is largely based on funding, which is rather better currently than it has been since the end of the cold war.

Russian PVO troops trains more than in Soviet times so there is no point in reporting every single one of them - except for noticable ones

Anti-aircraft gunners on the teachings JUVO destroyed about 500 aerial targets

"It has been performed more than 150 tactical missions of exploration, discovery, maintenance and destruction of the order of 500 different single and multiple air targets imaginary enemy", - said in a statement received by Interfax-AVN on Monday.

Nice

PF: third party S-400 came to Kamchatka

Viktor wrote:Nice  

PF: third party S-400 came to Kamchatka

How many S-400 complexes they got in Kamchatka? It looks like whole brigade, not a regiment.

medo wrote:

Viktor wrote:Nice  

PF: third party S-400 came to Kamchatka

How many S-400 complexes they got in Kamchatka? It looks like whole brigade, not a regiment.

It would certainly seems so but I can not be sure based on the reports I have seen so far. If I knew that all the equipment said where only of S-400 systems we could speak

about the brigade lvl deployment but unlike in S-300 case, S-400 regimental command post can control passive and ECM command posts and even SHORAD command post

or aviation command posts indicating massive deployment of ECM and passive radars so we can not be sure if what we are reading about is a brigade or regimental lvl deployment.

I'm not sure, but this is only about S-400 regiment. But anyway, a brigade of S-400 should have 32 SAM launchers (4x8), 8 search radars + 4 engagement radars, 4 battalion command posts + brigade command post. This is around 50 vehicles. To them you could only add missile supply vehicles and logistic+support vehicles.

medo wrote:I'm not sure, but this is only about S-400 regiment. But anyway, a brigade of S-400 should have 32 SAM launchers (4x8), 8 search radars + 4 engagement radars, 4 battalion command posts + brigade command post.

At its minimum, yes.

medo wrote: This is around 50 vehicles. To them you could only add missile supply vehicles and logistic+support vehicles.

Usually you have one NEBO-M complex per S-400 regiment for instance. You have low lvl altitude detectors in different frequency ranges, jammers, passive detection radar system,

Pancir-S1 units etc ... we can not know how many of other stuff was brought up to Kamchatka but reported as just S-400. Anyway will have to wait for more info.

medo wrote:

Viktor wrote:Nice  

PF: third party S-400 came to Kamchatka

How many S-400 complexes they got in Kamchatka? It looks like whole brigade, not a regiment.

It makes no sense to speak about Brigade regarding S-400. Because an AD BGD has much more equipment than just the S-400 system!

For S-400 we only can figure out Air Defense Regiments.
Regarding Kamchatka it is definitely
1532 AD RGT which belongs to the 12 Aerospace BGD
1532 AD RGT had three Battalions (firing complexes with 8 launchers each) with S-300 PS which are replaced now by S-400.
So we have 3 battalions at three sites: 53.060366° 158.773051° and 53.121334° 158.394619° and 52.925954° 158.498924°
Big Bird is here 53.115504° 158.671700° under a tent
note: google earth still shows S-300PS

Why there is not fixed surface EW and ECW radars and antenna that are just power up from lectric civil line?

I think that from electricity turbines that produce electricity special lines could power up huge EW ECW ECCW antennas.

Fixed = vulnerable.

Only the biggest most heavy systems are fixed... things like airfields, and strategic over the horizon radars for early warning of nuclear strikes.

everything else is safer being mobile.

Just because they are mobile does not mean they can't patch them in to the local power grid... in fact setting up near a powerstation means the defending units defending the EW site can also defend the local power station too. They will of course also have their own power generation capacity so they wont rely on nearby energy sources.

How USA Could Destroy Russian S-300 in The Future - DARPA's Project

Austin wrote:How USA Could Destroy Russian S-300 in The Future - DARPA's Project

It was already discussed in another thread, and here were some of the conclusions (plus additional ones I added):

- Completely unrealistic, a 'made for Hollywood' level of fiction.

- No ground based jammers, decoys, SHORAD, and medium range SAMS defending the S-300 are present in the video.

- The presence of L-Band radars in the S-300 battery could detect the F-35, and the stealth missiles with enough time to react.

- The tactical airlift plane (converted to firing missiles) that was accompanying the F-35, wouldn't even be 1/5th as stealthy as the F-35, and could be spotted at long stand off ranges, and can be shot down early on.

- Doesn't factor in Nakidka-style ground vehicle camouflage (effective against thermal and radar detection).

- Doesn't factor in staggering effect of short and medium range SAM's such as Pantsir, and BUK that are camouflaged hiding farther away and ahead of the S-300 battery, with their radars on silent and optical tracking systems on, sharing information between  short, medium, long range SAM's.

- The video is demonstrating that the Pentagon could develop strategy's to defeat Iran's IAD's, but they're just assuming Russia would just sit ideally by and not share information from ground based (OTH radars), spaced based (spy satellites) systems, and or not use strategic long range ECM systems such as Murmansk-BN.

- Doesn't factor in real-life NATO SEAD/DEAD exercises using old and obsolete Slovakian S-300's and their real-world results. Those exercises were anything but successful for NATO SEAD/DEAD stratagems.

Nato got its hands on S-300 ? Scary .

max steel wrote:Nato got its hands on S-300 ? Scary .

Russia sold an entire S-300V battery to the US in the 90s.....

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Austin wrote:How USA Could Destroy Russian S-300 in The Future - DARPA's Project

It was already discussed in another thread, and here were some of the conclusions (plus additional ones I added):

- Completely unrealistic, a 'made for Hollywood' level of fiction.

- No ground based jammers, decoys, SHORAD, and medium range SAMS defending the S-300 are present in the video.

- The presence of L-Band radars in the S-300 battery could detect the F-35, and the stealth missiles with enough time to react.

- The tactical airlift plane (converted to firing missiles) that was accompanying the F-35, wouldn't even be 1/5th as stealthy as the F-35, and could be spotted at long stand off ranges, and can be shot down early on.

- Doesn't factor in Nakidka-style ground vehicle camouflage (effective against thermal and radar detection).

- Doesn't factor in staggering effect of short and medium range SAM's such as Pantsir, and BUK that are camouflaged hiding farther away and ahead of the S-300 battery, with their radars on silent and optical tracking systems on, sharing information between  short, medium, long range SAM's.

- The video is demonstrating that the Pentagon could develop strategy's to defeat Iran's IAD's, but they're just assuming Russia would just sit ideally by and not share information from ground based (OTH radars), spaced based (spy satellites) systems, and or not use strategic long range ECM systems such as Murmansk-BN.

- Doesn't factor in real-life NATO SEAD/DEAD exercises using old and obsolete Slovakian S-300's and their real-world results. Those exercises were anything but successful for NATO SEAD/DEAD stratagems.

Thanks any more info on the Slovakian S-300 exercise involving NATO ?

Austin wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Austin wrote:How USA Could Destroy Russian S-300 in The Future - DARPA's Project

It was already discussed in another thread, and here were some of the conclusions (plus additional ones I added):

- Completely unrealistic, a 'made for Hollywood' level of fiction.

- No ground based jammers, decoys, SHORAD, and medium range SAMS defending the S-300 are present in the video.

- The presence of L-Band radars in the S-300 battery could detect the F-35, and the stealth missiles with enough time to react.

- The tactical airlift plane (converted to firing missiles) that was accompanying the F-35, wouldn't even be 1/5th as stealthy as the F-35, and could be spotted at long stand off ranges, and can be shot down early on.

- Doesn't factor in Nakidka-style ground vehicle camouflage (effective against thermal and radar detection).

- Doesn't factor in staggering effect of short and medium range SAM's such as Pantsir, and BUK that are camouflaged hiding farther away and ahead of the S-300 battery, with their radars on silent and optical tracking systems on, sharing information between  short, medium, long range SAM's.

- The video is demonstrating that the Pentagon could develop strategy's to defeat Iran's IAD's, but they're just assuming Russia would just sit ideally by and not share information from ground based (OTH radars), spaced based (spy satellites) systems, and or not use strategic long range ECM systems such as Murmansk-BN.

- Doesn't factor in real-life NATO SEAD/DEAD exercises using old and obsolete Slovakian S-300's and their real-world results. Those exercises were anything but successful for NATO SEAD/DEAD stratagems.

Thanks any more info on the Slovakian S-300 exercise involving NATO ?

Antiquated Slovakian S-300PMU's proved to be highly resistant and resilient against SEAD/DEAD including ECM, though I head French Rafale's faired better but don't quote me on that.

Here's a better S-300 video:

magnumcromagnon wrote:Antiquated Slovakian S-300PMU's proved to be highly resistant and resilient against SEAD/DEAD including ECM, though I head French Rafale's faired better but don't quote me on that.

Here's a better S-300 video:

"Slovakian S-300" i thought they were Greek?

AlfaT8 wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:Antiquated Slovakian S-300PMU's proved to be highly resistant and resilient against SEAD/DEAD including ECM, though I head French Rafale's faired better but don't quote me on that.

Here's a better S-300 video:

"Slovakian S-300" i thought they were Greek?

S-300's were sold to Slovakia separately, but Greece acquired S-300's when Turkey pressured Cyprus to give their's to Greece...yeah you can tell NATO values 'certain' member states over others.

Russia sold S-300 to usa ? Ah!  Having another Yeltsin like leader in Russia the liberals and murican leaders ultimate wet dream . They might have reverse engineered it ? US never sells its best weapons to others let alone enemies .

Austin wrote:Thanks any more info on the Slovakian S-300 exercise involving NATO ?

In May 2012, a large exercise took place in Slovakia under the code name MACE XIII. The SA-300PMU was challenged by modern NATO ECM/ESM sets under complex SEAD conditions. Several NATO countries took part in this exercise. French Mirage and Rafale, Danish F-16, Norway with DA-20, NATO E-3 AWACS, Turkish F-4, German Learjet with an ECM/ESM set and approximately four ground jammers had partial success.

NATO concluded that the S-300PMU with a professionally trained crew is capable of effective operations in a complex ECM/ESM environment, with a high level of success.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_%28missile%29#Combat_history

The following is something I saved from a blog that has since been taken off the net

Part of the "attacking force" were:

- French Air Force Mirage 2000Ds
- Royal Danish Air Force F-16AMs
- a NATO E-3A and a French Air Force E-3F
- Royal Norwegian Air Force Falcon 20
- Slovakian Air Force MiG-29AS/UBS and L-39ZAM
- The Turkish Air Force participated with its F-4E-2020s Phantom II with israelian Elta EL/L-8222 ECM Pods.
- There was also a private owned German Learjet 35A with 2 Cassidian ECM pods.

The "attacking force" (except the Rafale B) achieved a partial suppression of the S-300, but well-trained SAM crews were able to overcome this and keep the system combat ready. I. e. in a real fight the attacking force had to take serious losses.

Russia sold S-300 to usa ? Ah! Having another Yeltsin like leader in Russia the liberals and murican leaders ultimate wet dream . They might have reverse engineered it ? US never sells its best weapons to others let alone enemies

It was the middle of the 1990s and money was nonexistent. they sold components of an S-300V battery to the US... likely the oldest model they had that was incomplete.

With the money they made they upgraded the whole system to S-300VM or Antei-2500.

So in effect the US paid for the next generation to replace the generation that was compromised.

And the S-300V was in service in most former Soviet republics so chances were eventually they would get their hands on it anyway... at least this way they got their own funding to develop a replacement system.

i would say well done Russia... making the best of a bad situation.