1)How it will counter if these f-16 carry HARM , each F-16 can carry 4 HARMs , if these were 30 F-16 they could carry a total of 120 HARMs , that is 120 missiles moving at speed > mach 2 ?
Even if the S-400 battery was shut down at the time the Pantsir systems colocated with the battery can deal with 4 HARM speed threats each at one time... that means with 8 vehicles that is 32 targets that can be destroyed simultaneously and if they are detected and fired upon at max range because of the high speed of both weapons the Pantsir should get at least three volleys of missiles off before the HARMs get within 10km.
The S-400 battery wont be asleep however and the 450km range big missile can shoot down F-16s well outside the effective or even ballistic range of any model HARM.
So F-16s will be getting shot down well before they can even launch a weapon.
2)What is the minimum engagement altitude for the S-400. I do not think that Almaz-Antey has ever released a minimum engagement altitude for the S-400,but would expect it to be in the region of 10 m. ( If they fire HARM at ultra low altitude ?)
HARM would have its max range reduced by 75% if it flys at 10m or lower and at such an altitude it would not get any signal from the S-400 target battery and have nothing to home in on.
It would also be dramatically slower and its rocket motor much less efficient at such altitudes even if it could operate at such altitudes (which I highly doubt.)
3) I have seen no reports that the S-400 has the equivalent of a US-style 'launch on remote' capability, so the engagement radar would probably still have to be used ?
S-400 uses a datalink and could be directed to targets its own radars cannot see but platforms closer to the target can... ie an Su-30 or Su-34 could pass target data for the missile to find its target... obviously it is intended for AWACS style aircraft to do that but ships and other aircraft would be just as able.
4)we may seen the system's 92N6 engagement radar being used in a fairly aggressive manner to illuminate Turkish aircraft operating in the area. So the Turks (with a bit of help from other NATO nations?) may be able to devise flight patterns that will explore the tracking capabilities of the 92N6 ?
What? Sounds like you are talking about a naked mad man standing next to a pool of water at midnight exploring the ripple reflections of moonlight on his ass... what do you think he can learn apart from the fact that his ass needs a good wash.
5)In the 1960s the S-75 (SA-2) radiated all of its secrets - when the US finally acquired a 'Fan Song' radar, its EW community was delighted to discover that the SA-2 emulator it had devised for EW development purposes had reproduced the features and technology of the Soviet original in all but a few minor respects .The US / NATO / Israeli EW operators had actually assigned individual identities to specific Fan Song installations based on the dents on their antennas! When they moved they could follow them individually.
Old systems were custom made and very expensive and mostly hardware limited in terms of performance. the S-400 is modern hardware that will still get upgrades but it will be totally modular and software driven.
By your argument why would NATO need to listen at all considering the S-300 of the 1980s was made with a lot of western electronic components, and more importantly a lot of countries that operated S-300 systems are now in bed with NATO so the whole system can be assumed to be totally compromised... yet in tests and exercises and training it still seems to be a capable system...
Let's think logically here, what has a longer engagement range, HARM or S-400? And rocket for rocket, which has more, Pantsir-S1 or F-16? I also doubt the feasibility of a 30-plane formation all at once.
More importantly... how suspicious would a 30 plane formation be to an S-400 battery?
Keeping in mind the naval component can also assist by engaging some targets too.
How exactly I'm supposed to quote non-existent members here in my post ? Thats why I said doubts because I follow other forums too and there they haven't granted me posting rights yet , so whenever I read something strange or challenging i usually ask/ confirm those same questions here?
Perhaps he felt you were not being totally honest and that you might use the answers here on the other forum to make it look like you have better knowledge than you actually do... if you had been totally open to begin with these ideas would never have formed...
I have come across a few people who would ask me questions in a wind up sort of a way to get me to argue with them because they were having the same argument on another forum and they were basically using their opponents arguments against me so I would in effect be arguing for them on the other forum. I find such people very annoying.