S-300P/400 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #3

Interesting part is in the 2nd pic. The price for s-300Pmu 1 is around 50 million $ and around 70 million for PMU 2 while naval Fort is 200 million $ for two sets (two ship) so 100 million. That's the price of a nato f-16 but can destroy many f-16. 

Countries buying s-400 should definitly get some s-300 which costs 4 times less but still very powerful and make a real air defence force. 

But it seem they don't produce s-300 anymore. Only the VM version.

After the production of the S-350 is in full swing Russia should sell some second-hand S-300 systems. Even cheaper for the customer.

That's what they are doing with syrian S-300 which are russian ones. S-400 is clearly too much expensive. They should offer packages like buy 1 S-400 and get 30% off on two second hand S-300. 

And PMU 2 uses the same missiles as S-400.

What I can't understand is why soviet didn't made a light destroyer or big frigate with S-300FM.

Was planned for the 90´s. Then Gorbi/Jelzin happened.

Countries buying s-400 should definitly get some s-300 which costs 4 times less but still very powerful and make a real air defence force.

As you later point out some of the big S-400 missiles are just evolved new production S-300s, so the missiles wont be so expensive.

The first S-300s entered service in the late 1970s and onwards, so many of them will have been used up in tests and training and also as targets, but the S-350 is supposed to replace the old S-300s while at the same time massively increasing the number of ready to fire missiles and the performance of those missiles.

Most countries don't really need S-400s, what they actually need is a proper modern IADS that they can integrate their older and existing current systems in to make them even more effective.

It is a bit like the difference between a mob of people and a trained and well equipped army...

The shitty Patriots failed to protect the Saudi's from ballistic missiles again! No wonder they thought of buying the S-400:

From back in June but a pretty good analysis of the many ways that the S-400 will impact on the US.

Generally, when discussing air-defense systems here, we are referring to Russian devices that have become famous in recent years, in particular the S-300 (and its variants) and the S-400. Their deployment in Syria has slowed down the ability of such advanced air forces as those of the United States and Israel to target the country, increasing as it does the embarrassing possibility of having their fourth- or fifth-generation fighters shot down.

Air-defense systems capable of bringing down fifth-generation aircraft would have a devastating effect on the marketability and sales of US military hardware, while simultaneously boosting the desirability and sales of Russian military hardware. As I have often pointed out in other analyses, Hollywood’s role in marketing to enemies and allies alike the belief that US military hardware is unbeatable (with allies being obliged to buy said hardware) is central to Washington’s strategies for war and power projection.

As clashes between countries in such global hot spots as the Middle East increase and intensify, Hollywood’s propaganda will increasingly struggle to convince the rest of the world of the continued efficacy and superiority of US weapons systems in the face of their unfolding shortcomings.

The US finds itself faced with a situation it has not found itself in over the last 50 years, namely, an environment where it does not expect to automatically enjoy air superiority. Whatever semblance of an air defense that may have hitherto been able to pose any conceivable threat to Uncle Sam’s war machine was rudely dismissed by a wave of cruise missiles. To give two prime examples that occurred in Syria in 2018, latest-generation missiles were intercepted and shot down by decades-old Russian and Syrian systems. While the S-400 system has never been employed in Syria, it is noteworthy that the Serbian S-125 systems succeeded in identifying and shooting down an American F-117 stealth aircraft during the war in the Balkans.

There is a more secret aspect of the S-400 that is little disclosed, either within Russia itself or without. It concerns the S-400’s ability to collect data through its radar systems. It is worth noting Department of Defense spokesman Eric Pahon’s alarm over Turkey’s planned purchase of the S-400: “We have been clear that purchasing the S-400 would create an unacceptable risk because its radar system could provide the Russian military sensitive information on the F-35. Those concerns cannot be mitigated. The S-400 is a system built in Russia to try to shoot down aircraft like the F-35, and it is inconceivable to imagine.

Certainly, in the event of an armed conflict, the S-400’s ability to shoot down fifth-generation aircraft is a huge concern for the United States and her allies who have invested so heavily in such aircraft. Similarly, a NATO country preferring Russian to American systems is cause for alarm. This is leaving aside the fact that the S-400 is spreading around the world, from China to Belarus, with dozens of countries waiting in line for the ability to seal their skies from the benevolent bombs of freedom. It is an excellent stick with which to keep a prowling Washington at bay.

But these concerns are nothing when compared to the most serious threat that the S-400 poses to the US arms industry, namely, their ability to collect data on US stealth systems.

Theoretically, the last advantage that the US maintains over her opponents is in stealth technology. The effectiveness of stealth has been debated for a long time, given that their costs may actually outweigh their purported benefits. But, reading between the lines, what emerges from US concerns over the S-400 suggests that Moscow is already capable of detecting US stealth systems by combining the radars of the S-400 with those of air-based assets, as has been the case in Syria (despite Washington’s denials).

The ability of the S-400 to collect data on both the F-35 and F-22 – the crown jewels of the US military-industrial complex – is a cause for sleepless nights for US military planners. What in particular causes them nightmares is that, for the S-400 to function in Turkey, it will have to be integrated into Turkey’s current “identification friend or foe” (IFF) systems, which in turn are part of NATO’s military tactical data-link network, known as Link 16.

This system will need to be installed on the S-400 in order to integrate it into Turkey’s defensive network, which could potentially pass information strictly reserved for the Russians that would increase the S-400’s ability to function properly in a system not designed to host such a weapon system.

The final risk is that if Turkey were to fly its F-35s near the S-400, the Link 16 system would reveal a lot of real-time information about the US stealth system. Over time, Moscow would be able to recreate the stealth profile of the F-35 and F-22, thereby making pointless Washington’s plans to spend 1.16 trillion dollars to produce 3,000 F-35s.

What must be remembered in our technological age is that once the F-35’s radar waveform has been identified, it will be possible to practice the military deception of recreating fictitious signals of the F-35 so as to mask one’s own aircraft with this shape and prevent the enemy’s IFF systems from being able to distinguish between friend or foe.

Of particular note is the active cooperation between China and Russia in air-defense systems. The S-400 in particular has already been operational in China for several years now, and it should be assumed that there would be active information sharing going on between Moscow and Beijing regarding stealth technology.

It turns out that the S-400 is a weapon system with multiple purposes that is even more lethal than previously imagined. It would therefore not be surprising that, were S-400s to be found in Cuba and Venezuela, Washington’s bellicose rhetoric against these two countries would come to an abrupt halt.

But what US military planners fear more than the S-400 embarrassing their much-vaunted F35 and F22 is the doubts they could raise about the efficacy of these stealth aircraft in the minds of allies and potential buyers. This lack of confidence would deal a mortal blow to the US arms industry, a threat far more real and devastating for them than a risk of conflict with Moscow or Beijing.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/06/15/why-s400-is-more-formidable-threat-us-arms-industry-than-you-think/

Coverage of the S-400 systems in Crimea and Syria

JohninMK wrote:Coverage of the S-400 systems in Crimea and Syria

They forgot the Iskanders in Armenia
The Iskanders and Bastions in Syria

And the S-400 range looks rather overestimated to state it bluntly.
Range of the Iskander is larger in reality.
The centrer of the upper Kalibr circle seems to be somewhere right up the coast of Romania.
And at the Kalibr range you'll likely encounter projection issues when you impose such large range circles onto standard maps of Europe.

To the bin, along with all other Maidan propaganda.

Better maps.

Hole wrote:Better maps.

Thank you.

Obviously Russia is now selling the S400 to Turkey. Its also selling it to some pretty shady 3rd world countries.
So, I'm wondering what safeguards does Russia have in place to stop one or more of these systems getting into the hands of say, American engineers. Engineers who might try and back engineer it. Or might assess it with a view to making it less effective?

Does each stystem get sent with Russian engineers to oversee this? Or is it more about processors shutting things down etc and advising of any tampering?

Firebird wrote:Obviously Russia is now selling the S400 to Turkey. Its also selling it to some pretty shady 3rd world countries.
So, I'm wondering what  safeguards does Russia have in place to stop one or more of these systems getting into the hands of say, American engineers. Engineers who might try and back engineer it. Or might assess it with a view to making it less effective?

Does each stystem get sent with Russian engineers to oversee this? Or is it more about processors shutting things down etc and advising of any tampering?

This has been debated ad nauseam. You could always do yourself a favor by looking at the old threads, there's been a plethora of posts on this subject. All you need to know is that Yeltsin sold parts of the S-300V system to the US so they could improve the embarrassingly poor performing PAC-2 SAM. The end result: the creation of the PAC-3 SAM (mid-2000's), which has overall inferior characteristics to S-300P circa 1979. Even with access to Slovakian S-300's they failed to both develop tactics to defeat it proper, as well as failed to produce an analog on par with a system from the late 1970s.

When you hear claims about the Federation being 30 years ahead of the US in SAM technology, it ain't exaggerated hyperbole, it's empirical fact!

Firebird wrote:Does each stystem get sent with Russian engineers to oversee this? Or is it more about processors shutting things down etc and advising of any tampering?

This has been discussed before, but to sum it all up:

They do not care. They offered to sell S-400 systems to the United States as well.

To quote Patric Lang's friend:

Any air defense engineer with a security clearance that isn't lying through his teeth will admit that Russia's air defense technology surpassed us in the 1950's and we've never been able to catch up. The systems thy have in place surrounding Moscow make our Patriot 3's look like fucking nerf guns.

You can read the full post here

Russia is selling these systems to India and China and already have these systems in service in their own country, so there are an enormous number of weak points where a CIA asshat with money could get all sorts of access to these systems.

If Russia keeps them all locked in a little room and never lets them out the Americans might have trouble learning about them but the facts of the matter are that no matter what Russia does the US could probably find out... even if it means finding the makers and developers and offering them a 20 million dollar immigration package with a house and a job teaching US engineers and a hot wife if you want one...

When it comes to technology the current state of the art is sitting on a lab bench... the stuff that has been in production and service for the last ten years is actually a bit old, and to fund getting the new ideas in to service you need to make and sell the old stuff... this is what they are doing.

More to the point Turkey is probably going to show off its S-400s, but they would be shooting themselves in the foot to give away any of its secrets that would undermine its performance... and to be honest Turkey are not idiots and amateurs... a joint venture between Turkey and Russia building new SAMs would be a good thing for both countries, and cooperating in fighter aircraft would also benefit both countries in the way that cooperation between Russia and India led to cooperation with Thales of France and a few other companies in the west with Russia that led to other sales and cooperation and improvements.

Obviously don't post secret stuff on the internet, but you really need proper tests and full analysis of a system and exactly how it works before you can begin to develop ways to defeat it... and remember these S-400s that Turkey has are on their own so any tactics the US might develop... Turkey knows will be handed over immediately to Israel... either on purpose or because the US would be riddled with Israel friendly spies.

The result would be that Israel and the US can now defeat a few Turkish S-400s but can they be sure that the Russians are idiots and operate their S-400s on their own.

Turkey likely wont even get a small fraction of all the systems the Russian S-400 comes with including jammers and decoys and probably TOR and S-350 and Pantsir-SM, as well as a range of mobile radar and other sensors that would operate together with it.

Look at the difference an IADS has made to Syria... Turkey wont have anything like the IADS that Russia uses with theirs, and the system they likely do use will be familiar to the US anyway no doubt.

I wouldn't worry at all... the US got an incomplete SA-12 system in the 1990s as mentioned... they are too arrogant to admit they can learn from someone else... how often does the US mention the F-35 is basically a Yak-41 with a lifting fan replacing the two lift jets? The main jet engine on the F-35 is a powerful afterburning turbofan... neither the british nor the americans had any experience in designing a thrust vectoring nozzle for such a powerful afterburning engine and they had to ask Yak for help. (no the engine on the Harrier does not have an afterburner of any kind).

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Firebird wrote:Obviously Russia is now selling the S400 to Turkey. Its also selling it to some pretty shady 3rd world countries.
So, I'm wondering what  safeguards does Russia have in place to stop one or more of these systems getting into the hands of say, American engineers. Engineers who might try and back engineer it. Or might assess it with a view to making it less effective?

Does each stystem get sent with Russian engineers to oversee this? Or is it more about processors shutting things down etc and advising of any tampering?

This has been debated ad nauseam. You could always do yourself a favor by looking at the old threads, there's been a plethora of posts on this subject. All you need to know is that Yeltsin sold parts of the S-300V system to the US so they could improve the embarrassingly poor performing PAC-2 SAM. The end result: the creation of the PAC-3 SAM (mid-2000's), which has overall inferior characteristics to S-300P circa 1979. Even with access to Slovakian S-300's they failed to both develop tactics to defeat it proper, as well as failed to produce an analog on par with a system from the late 1970s.

When you hear claims about the Federation being 30 years ahead of the US in SAM technology, it ain't exaggerated hyperbole, it's empirical fact!

Well I've been on the forum for probably close to 10 yrs, and followed the S400 threads closely. I recall lots of "oh it doesn't matter if its sold".
But I dont' recall any discussion on HOW someone would reverse engineer or assess it for ways to defeat it. I also know, its far better than rival systems.

But the question is.. what does Russia do to protect its intellectual property and associated data here?
Ofcourse metallurgy is very hard to back engineer. Computer systems are fairly hard to back engineer. But parts of it, in the wrong hands must have SOME benefit to enemies. I'm not saying Russia shouldn't sell S400. Just how is it constructed to make reverse engineering fruitless?

GarryB wrote:Russia is selling these systems to India and China and already have these systems in service in their own country, so there are an enormous number of weak points where a CIA asshat with money could get all sorts of access to these systems.

If Russia keeps them all locked in a little room and never lets them out the Americans might have trouble learning about them but the facts of the matter are that no matter what Russia does the US could probably find out... even if it means finding the makers and developers and offering them a 20 million dollar immigration package with a house and a job teaching US engineers and a hot wife if you want one...

When it comes to technology the current state of the art is sitting on a lab bench... the stuff that has been in production and service for the last ten years is actually a bit old, and to fund getting the new ideas in to service you need to make and sell the old stuff... this is what they are doing.

More to the point Turkey is probably going to show off its S-400s, but they would be shooting themselves in the foot to give away any of its secrets that would undermine its performance... and to be honest Turkey are not idiots and amateurs... a joint venture between Turkey and Russia building new SAMs would be a good thing for both countries, and cooperating in fighter aircraft would also benefit both countries in the way that cooperation between Russia and India led to cooperation with Thales of France and a few other companies in the west with Russia that led to other sales and cooperation and improvements.

Obviously don't post secret stuff on the internet, but you really need proper tests and full analysis of a system and exactly how it works before you can begin to develop ways to defeat it... and remember these S-400s that Turkey has are on their own so any tactics the US might develop... Turkey knows will be handed over immediately to Israel... either on purpose or because the US would be riddled with Israel friendly spies.

The result would be that Israel and the US can now defeat a few Turkish S-400s but can they be sure that the Russians are idiots and operate their S-400s on their own.

Turkey likely wont even get a small fraction of all the systems the Russian S-400 comes with including jammers and decoys and probably TOR and S-350 and Pantsir-SM, as well as a range of mobile radar and other sensors that would operate together with it.

Look at the difference an IADS has made to Syria... Turkey wont have anything like the IADS that Russia uses with theirs, and the system they likely do use will be familiar to the US anyway no doubt.

I wouldn't worry at all... the US got an incomplete SA-12 system in the 1990s as mentioned... they are too arrogant to admit they can learn from someone else... how often does the US mention the F-35 is basically a Yak-41 with a lifting fan replacing the two lift jets? The main jet engine on the F-35 is a powerful afterburning turbofan... neither the british nor the americans had any experience in designing a thrust vectoring nozzle for such a powerful afterburning engine and they had to ask Yak for help. (no the engine on the Harrier does not have an afterburner of any kind).

OK I angry with all that. Russia can protect its IP by dividing up the production process. It probably has dummy production processes and also dummy plans with "tags" that would identify the sources of leaks. (Usual stuff)
But my question is also about something slightly different.
Firstly, what makes S400 so good? Is it metallurgy in the engines? Is it the control systems that require electronics that are hard to hack/backengineer? Is it special exotic materials in the propulsion that no one else knows how to make?

If Russia stationed its own engineers on constant shifts with every unit, it could largely prevent any back engineering. Perhaps locks on the control systems and radar would help? I'm just trying to figure out how it all works.

Well I've been on the forum for probably close to 10 yrs, and followed the S400 threads closely. I recall lots of "oh it doesn't matter if its sold".
But I dont' recall any discussion on HOW someone would reverse engineer or assess it for ways to defeat it. I also know, its far better than rival systems.

To fully reverse engineer the system you need its software, or I should say softwares. They are probably developed in C or ada. With no transfert of technology in the contract you can't have the source codes which is what you need to make a copy. Reverse engineering such software would mean thousand of test including hundreds of missile launches to know what the software does when hardware is used and even then you won't have the same software because lot of things the software does are not seen by the operators. You will get a primitive software.

Then you need the hardware. More easy to copy but you need tens of different companies that can make the different parts identically to the russian ones. Those are not toys, every company will have to invest in machineries and high tech to do so. Not many companies will have money and will to invest millions to copy just one system.


Russia never gave neither the high tech production tools technology neither the softwares to anyone. That's why those s-300 copies China and Iran are producing are a joke. US won't do better.

Making a system by yourself is far better than copying a S-400. At least you will know everything about it and then upgrade it and create 2, 3, 4 generation of the system. That's how Russian managed to have a s-400. They started first with primitive technology then created s75 then s200 then s300...

But my question is also about something slightly different.
Firstly, what makes S400 so good? Is it metallurgy in the engines? Is it the control systems that require electronics that are hard to hack/backengineer? Is it special exotic materials in the propulsion that no one else knows how to make?

It is that soviet union analyzed the wars of vietnam and israeli-arab wars where its anti air systems were used. They found out what was bad about their systems and what was good. They then created the s-300.

Now the plane fly at the same speed, same altitudes and use almost the same weaponery as during the vietnam war. The only new thing that change is stealth. To counter that they created the s-400 and its command posts allowing it to be linked to much more radars and much more shorads like pantsirs to deal with stealth aircraft and overwhelming attacks.

vFirstly, what makes S400 so good? Is it metallurgy in the engines? Is it the control systems that require electronics that are hard to hack/backengineer? Is it special exotic materials in the propulsion that no one else knows how to make?

What makes the S-400 so good is that it was designed by intelligent people to defeat NATO... this isn't their first rodeo... their first weapons were fairly crude but usually effective enough... the other side used various countermeasures and tactics which were noted by the Soviets and they improved their designs because of those countermeasures and also because new targets had appeared.

This continual iteration of upgrades and new designs have led to the S-400 with the experience of NATO actions in Kosovo and Iraq and everywhere else that the US has tried to trample on small countries.

The difference is that Russia has all the pieces... for the US and NATO the games they have been playing have been against countries who might have 8 pawns and a king... and sometimes not much else. Russia has a full set of pieces and it knows how to play chess.

Obviously that means that just buying an S-400 system wont magically make you safe from anything the US could do to you... that would just be silly, but if you buy the S-400 and fully integrate it into your IADS and you use it together with other assets as a team instead of a group on individuals then you have a really good chance of doing enough damage to the US military to either make them stop... or most importantly not even try in the first place.

Look at Israel... they loved to fly over Syrian airspace and do as they pleased when they pleased... now they scurry amongst mountains in nearby countries lobbing rockets and bombs in the hope something gets through and they can claim to have penetrated the defences... absolutely pathetic considering this is the air force that has state of the art everything that bludgeons every country in the region to its submission using its air power.

If Russia stationed its own engineers on constant shifts with every unit, it could largely prevent any back engineering. Perhaps locks on the control systems and radar would help? I'm just trying to figure out how it all works.

Yeah, rather better to have those engineers looking at ways Israel is currently trying to counter the air defence systems in Syria right now and look at ways of closing those doors before they find them.... ie anti virus defence, anti jamming defence, decoys that work, and of course how to cope with local attempts to overwhelm the system...

Let the FSB come down hard on any traitors and make a public spectacle of them and shame them selling out their country, but having a full set of design specs wont stop it from working unless there are some pretty serious problems with the design... and I suspect there isn't by now.

The export versions wont be as potent as domestic systems and certainly will have a completely different set of codes and cyphers for every country that uses them.

It is not in Chinas interests for the US to look at their S-400s just as it wont be in the interests of Turkey for the US to look at theirs because as I mentioned they will almost certainly hand that information over to Israel... and Turkey wont want that.

Besides if having plans and secrets makes something useless look at the MiG-25P.... they were already advanced in developing the MiG-31 and weren't going to bother upgrading the MiG-25 until Belenko defected and then the Soviets got the MiG-25PD (P meaning interceptor and PD meaning upgraded interceptor), and it also happened with the MiG-31, where details of the aircraft were leaked to the west which resulted in a significant upgrade of the aircraft which radically improved the aircraft each time.

It is not something you want to happen but it is not the end of the world either.

Some American experts claim the T-34 is based on the Walter Christie tank... except that the Soviets bought Christies tank designs but that series was the BT series of tanks and Christies tank was the BT-1... by the BT-7 it was pretty much a different tank... the only recognisable part was the suspension that needed several upgrades because of the weight increases... a suspension that was also used on the T-34 but it was hardly a Christie designed tank.

The US military weren't interested in Christies designs and didn't buy any AFAIK.

If the T-34 is a Christie design because it used his suspension with several modifications over a series of other tanks, then an Abrams tank started out being british with a british 105mm rifled gun and british armour, to being a british west german tank with british armour and a german 120mm smoothbore gun... the armour went from being chobham armour to dorchester armour both paid for by the Iranian order they cancelled which gave them the Challenger tank.

Very simply anything can be defeated and sticking with something long after it has matured and become a little out of date can be painful.  The Polikarpov fighters were state of the art when introduced but technology improved rapidly in the late 30s and early 40s and it rapidly became obsolete... what they should have done is build less Polikarpovs and T-26 light tanks and looked at new designs of the time and made more of those like the Yak-1 and T-34.

Of course it is bloody easy for me to say that sitting on my arse on the other side of the planet with the history of the time not being much of a mystery like it was back then for them.

They started first with primitive technology then created s75 then s200 then s300...

Exactly and most importantly they sent it out to their allies who tried them against the US and her allies and they looked at all the methods and tactics to defeat these systems and when developing new systems took those tactics into account.

Best example is the SA-6 in the middle east... Israel had some really problems with this system even though there were several systems using continuous wave guidance... in the end they took advantage of the fact that the TELs didn't have their own radar... when attacking a battery take out the radar vehicle with an ARM and the TELs are sitting ducks and can be cleaned up by F-16s with dumb bombs... the replacement for the KUB was the BUK, where each TEL has its own tracking radar and optical guidance and can shoot down ARMs... they didn't just design it to carry more missiles and reach further... they looked at what made it vulnerable and they fixed it... the S-400 is a very capable system because they have a long history of getting their air defences tested by the US and NATO who have enormous budgets and lots of smart people trying to work out how to defeat enemy air defences.

Firebird wrote:Obviously Russia is now selling the S400 to Turkey. Its also selling it to some pretty shady 3rd world countries.
So, I'm wondering what  safeguards does Russia have in place to stop one or more of these systems getting into the hands of say, American engineers. Engineers who might try and back engineer it. Or might assess it with a view to making it less effective?

Does each stystem get sent with Russian engineers to oversee this? Or is it more about processors shutting things down etc and advising of any tampering?

The export systems differ from their own systems. Soviets had 3 types of quality categories...friends (everyone), good friends (Warsaw Pact) and the best category for themself.

That's why soviet weapon technology was so many times underrated and western countries living in a illusory bubble of technologic supremacy. After the collaps of USSR many were shocked of real capabilities of soviet army. West-german pilots after 1990 flew the Mig-29 and loved the aircraft. German MiG-29 (9-12A) "Fulcrum-A" the oldest version for countries of Warsaw Pact, they serviced after upgrades to NATO-standard till 2004 in the "Luftwaffe".

Turkish S-400 systems will of course use the same missiles like Russia, but the system as a whole is a downgraded version! Maybe if USA will reverse engineer the turkish S-400 (that means "destroying" the complete turkish system!), they will never get the 100% Russian systems have. And reverse engineering is a really hard task, because you have the components, but you know nothing about the process of creation (the real secret!). And I duobt really Turkey will share everything with USA now by the way...the Russians said they would sell the system even to the USA for the right price ;D

So everything cool!

The other aspect is that question what is an S-400 battery?

You have TELs and command vehicles and all sorts of support vehicles, but there are a variety of different radar vehicles too, not to mention other vehicles including Pantsir or TOR batteries and jammer and decoy units that all operate with the system... different customers pay different prices and get different toysets.

Like I said, they wont be getting the full equipment set that Russia gets, and even the stuff they get will be dialled back slightly... and that is very easy as the range for locks and detection will come down to algorithms which will be different for each customer... Pay 5 billion and you will lock targets at 400km, pay 6 billion and you might lock targets at 450km, and the types of targets you can detect is expanded...

GarryB wrote:You have TELs and command vehicles and all sorts of support vehicles, but there are a variety of different radar vehicles too, not to mention other vehicles including Pantsir or TOR batteries and jammer and decoy units that all operate with the system... different customers pay different prices and get different toysets.

The missiles of the S 400 system (40N6E, 9M96 etc) are resistant to jamming. Isn't it ?

How are missiles made resistant to jamming ?

Via SouthFront.

How are missiles made resistant to jamming ?

Well first of all you need to make your signals unique and identifiable... so the missiles can tell what is a command signal, what is a real radar return from their on board ARH seeker, but also what is enemy generated and to ignore enemy generated signals.

More importantly when spurious signals are detected they need to be located and marked on the system and then actively attacked... perhaps even home on jam missiles used to shoot down active jammer sources... and often that can benefit from multispectral systems...

For instance the Kh-58 anti radiation missile called AS-11 by NATO has in its newest version two IR ports under its nose so even if the target radar is turned off when the incoming missile is detected it can continue to guide itself towards the radar antenna... which has just had enormous amounts of electricity pumped through it so even though it is no longer emitting radar energy it will still also be giving off a lot of IR energy while it cools down... which actually gives it a more precise target to aim at than the radio waves.

The main problem with jammers is distance... if you want to jam radars the size and power as used with the S-400 system you need an enormously powerful jammer and it needs to be rather close to the battery to be effective... which pretty much makes it a sitting duck.

Even with the S-300 the solution is the same and it has the same problem... getting things close enough to stop them being effective get shot down and stop being effective. They are too expensive and big to have in enormous numbers to overwhelm the system.