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

Cyrus the great wrote:The United States has apparently developed a range of weapons that can overwhelm and neutralise advanced IADS such as those deployed by Russia and China. Is this true or is it just commercial propaganda? It just doesn't seem realistic that this would work against Russia. The title of the video is stupid -I know- but let's discuss the content.

Cyrus the great wrote:The United States has apparently developed a range of weapons that can overwhelm and neutralise advanced IADS such as those deployed by Russia and China. Is this true or is it just commercial propaganda? It just doesn't seem realistic that this would work against Russia. The title of the video is stupid -I know- but let's discuss the content.

Alfa T8 wrote:

Not this again.

BS propaganda my friend, this entire scenario wreaks.

This entire stratagem relies on two factors the survivability of MALD and the ability of JSOW and HARM to actually hit there targets.

What i mean by this, is that when advanced long range SAMs are deployed they are always backed up by both Short and Mid range AA systems as well, and these systems will have there own radar as well as thermal/TV backups, even the ships will have these.

And then we have the passive decoys that will be deployed as well.

So the possibility of HARM or JSOW actually hitting there targets is pretty low, and if MALDs jamming were to prove insufficient or were it to fly within the range of the short/mid range AAs it would also be destroyed.  

And this is to say nothing of what would happen if the opponents airforce were to also appear.  

So yea, nothing to worry about, just another stupid Raytheon commercial.

GarryB wrote:Very simply any air defence can be overwhelmed with raw numbers... the problem for the US and NATO however  is that Russia is both enormous and very heavily defended and also able to fight back.

This means that unlike say Libya with major SAM sites with 2 guidance channels able to engage up to one target at a time with up to two missiles... so launch four missiles at them and while the system is engaging the other three missiles the fourth one almost always gets through and takes down the system opening it to attack by other weapons... the S-400 system is a layered defence with TOR or Pantsir-SM close in defences and hundreds of kms of airspace patrolled by armed aircraft and of course sensors and other SAMs of all types all looking for threats.

Not only are there jammers and decoys, but the SAMs of the current and most recent generations are all able to engage high speed anti radiation missiles (ie the missiles used to defeat an air defence can be directly targeted and defeated).

Of course given enough attack assets any defence can be defeated, but with Russia if NATO sends thousands of missiles from hundreds of aircraft and Naval platforms then Russia is not like Iraq or Libya... it could mount attacks on the platforms that launched the weapons and it can send cruise missiles to attack the bases the aircraft were launched from and attack the ships carrying the missiles and more missiles too.

Very simply the US is no more able to defeat Russia than Russia would be able to defeat the US using just ICBMs.

"Before the end of 2015, the concern will deliver to the Russian Defense Ministry two more regimental sets of the S-400 Triumph air defence missile weapon systems. Thus, the state customer will receive three regimental sets of this system this year," [b]the Almaz-Antei CEO said[/b]. wrote:

George1 wrote:Head of anti-aircraft missile forces Air Force Major-General Sergey Babakov said that the S-300PS today already "physically and morally" outdated.

Militarov wrote:

George1 wrote:Head of anti-aircraft missile forces Air Force Major-General Sergey Babakov said that the S-300PS today already "physically and morally" outdated.

Wish he knew how much people here were dreaming of S300 some 15 years ago. It was like some kind of Myth for us kids...."S300". Ppl watching into sky observing bombers, and you hear older men saying: "If just Russians gave us S300 on time, eh"...

Stealthflanker wrote:

Militarov wrote:

George1 wrote:Head of anti-aircraft missile forces Air Force Major-General Sergey Babakov said that the S-300PS today already "physically and morally" outdated.

Wish he knew how much people here were dreaming of S300 some 15 years ago. It was like some kind of Myth for us kids...."S300". Ppl watching into sky observing bombers, and you hear older men saying: "If just Russians gave us S300 on time, eh"...

Well S-300PMU-2 are still around

victor1985 wrote:let's suppose a invisible aircraft like f22 will aproach to a s300. as long as i know the rcs (wich i learned yesterday that stand for "radar cross section") is low on f22 and has the shape that reflect the waves in other directions than back to radar. i dont see how the s300 or even something newer like s400 will catch that f22. dont tell me its all based on that small signal that f22 will return back to radar for sure. but there is the problem that the signal is weak and you cannot make difference from him to noise around.

GarryB wrote:Very simply any air defence can be overwhelmed with raw numbers... the problem for the US and NATO however  is that Russia is both enormous and very heavily defended and also able to fight back.

GarryB wrote: the S-400 system is a layered defence with TOR or Pantsir-SM close in defences and hundreds of kms of airspace patrolled by armed aircraft and of course sensors and other SAMs of all types all looking for threats.

jhelb wrote:

GarryB wrote:Very simply any air defence can be overwhelmed with raw numbers... the problem for the US and NATO however  is that Russia is both enormous and very heavily defended and also able to fight back.

GarryB wrote: the S-400 system is a layered defence with TOR or Pantsir-SM close in defences and hundreds of kms of airspace patrolled by armed aircraft and of course sensors and other SAMs of all types all looking for threats.

GarryB, what about all the decoys or Penetration aid (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penetration_aid) that the US will put in its ICBMs/SLBMs?

How will S 400 intercept such warheads that are accompanied with many decoys?

max steel wrote:But SLBMs are interceptable , let me find earlier post on it. Thats why actually Russia went for a whole new slbm Bulava replacing previous ones to go past/evade american missile defenses.


Now I guess US Ground Based Interceptors aka Ground Missile Defense are useless too many articles already proved it.
 


Ohk so when Russia will launch S-500 only then they can intercept all american icbms as well as hypersonic gliders.

max steel wrote:can s-400 shoot down BM's?

GarryB wrote:Yes, it can shoot down Ballistic Missiles... but it is limited to targets travelling at 4.8km/s or slower so it is a limited capability...  

(ie 4.8km/s is 15 times the speed of sound at sea level... (about 320m/s))