Ministry of Defense: the creation of anti-aircraft missile system S-500 is on schedule
Now we know what has been tested few days ago
Completion date development work to create anti-aircraft missile system S-500 is scheduled for 2017 and currently do not move, Deputy Minister of Defence of the Russian Federation Yuri Borisov.
and some nice news
C-500 has a range of 600 kilometers and will be able to detect and simultaneously hit up to 10 ballistic supersonic targets flying at a speed of up to 7 kilometers per second, as well as be able to defeat warheads of hypersonic missiles.
That speed suggests s500 is designed to cope against ICBM's warheads. Basically you don't even need anything that can defeat even faster targets as 7 km/s is about as fast as one can go even with fastest warheads hurling down from LEO.
Which brings me to pose the question: is s-500 then part of a-235? Especially if s500 is a mobile system - does one even need ANYTHING else for ABM role next to such a system?
eridan wrote:That speed suggests s500 is designed to cope against ICBM's warheads. Basically you don't even need anything that can defeat even faster targets as 7 km/s is about as fast as one can go even with fastest warheads hurling down from LEO.
Which brings me to pose the question: is s-500 then part of a-235? Especially if s500 is a mobile system - does one even need ANYTHING else for ABM role next to such a system?
What do you mean part of it? S-500 is one system and A-225 is another one. Both will serve the same purpose in form of Russian national defense system (anti-ICBM) but S-500 will have
another important role to play - to shoot down hypersonic Mach 20, 20km-80km altitude cruise missiles which will come in form of much higher threat in the near future.
now here are some interesting things about S-500 from RT
The country’s latest state-of-the-art air defense system currently at the research and development stage – the S500 – will also appear in 2017, the deputy defense minister told RSN radio. It is an advanced version of its predecessor – the S400 and is designed to lock on to and intercept multiple ballistic missiles in seconds. It possesses the ability to operate at an altitude of up to 124 miles.
Quite true.... if the S-400 has a big 2,500km range AESA then that alone could be directed at a cloud of robot unmanned aircraft and fry them with an enormous amount of EM energy.
regarding the difference between A235 and S-500... the A235 is an evolution of the Moscow ABM system, and despite the photo of the truck mounted missiles it probably wont be mobile.
The previous system had a truck like that and it backed up to a missile silo, elevated the missile to vertical and then lowered the missile down into the silo for launch.
the S-500 will be like the S-300 in that it is a mobile TEL able to stop and launch missiles from the truck.
Performance figures will be quite different too... the A235 can probably reach up much higher... being a larger weapon.
With the ABM treaty gone the Russians could build an ABM system based on the A235 in every major Russian city and port.
S-500 will be mobile and will be able to be deployed to fill gaps when needed... even protect allies...
GarryB wrote:Quite true.... if the S-400 has a big 2,500km range AESA then that alone could be directed at a cloud of robot unmanned aircraft and fry them with an enormous amount of EM energy.
regarding the difference between A235 and S-500... the A235 is an evolution of the Moscow ABM system, and despite the photo of the truck mounted missiles it probably wont be mobile.
The previous system had a truck like that and it backed up to a missile silo, elevated the missile to vertical and then lowered the missile down into the silo for launch.
the S-500 will be like the S-300 in that it is a mobile TEL able to stop and launch missiles from the truck.
Performance figures will be quite different too... the A235 can probably reach up much higher... being a larger weapon.
With the ABM treaty gone the Russians could build an ABM system based on the A235 in every major Russian city and port.
S-500 will be mobile and will be able to be deployed to fill gaps when needed... even protect allies...
Wasn't already a vehicle posted that is based on S-300 high coverage radar that is an EMP weapon with 300km range that can turn off aircrafts electronics?
GarryB wrote:Quite true.... if the S-400 has a big 2,500km range AESA then that alone could be directed at a cloud of robot unmanned aircraft and fry them with an enormous amount of EM energy.
If what you say is true, then it means the likes of S-400 is far less susceptible to swarm tactics than we were usually led to believe. However, with that being said Russian aerospace defense doctrine is to always have 'insurance' and not one to take chances, even if the S-400 has immense ECM weapon capability to defeat swarming/saturation attacks their still will be medium range, SHORAD units to defend S-400 units.
max steel wrote:How can Russia take down usa and others ICBMs if US can't ? I mean they don't have any reliable defence to take down russian nukes ?
No, but retaliation with their nuclear arsenal is still a threat. Russian IADS is the best in the world but not for so many ICBM's and only a few systems are designed to even be capable to intercept ICBM's.
For an example let us consider if Israel or US fire 2-3 nukes towards Moscow so can Russiaintercept them down in Israel/US airspace or in international airspace .
max steel wrote:For an example let us consider if Israel or US fire 2-3 nukes towards Moscow so can Russiaintercept them down in Israel/US airspace or in international airspace .
MOSCOW, Jun 9 — RIA Novosti. Troops EKR held in Kazakhstan's successful missile launch system missile defense, told reporters in the management of the press service and information of the defense Ministry. "On Tuesday, June 9, joint combat crew of ground Sary-Shagan (strategic rocket forces) troops aerospace defense (ASD) and industry representatives in 11 hours 32 minutes (MSK) successfully conducted a test launch of the missile near the Russian system of missile defence (BMD)", — stated in the message.
When S-500 will come in service can it shoot down hypersonic gliders and submarine launched tridents ?
If russia has defenses to shoot down icbms and usa doesnt posses such systems( their Ground Missile Defence Interceptors their only answer to icbms are not reliable ) then why usa resorts to muscle flexing ore often than russians . I've shared an article describing gmd interceptors unreliability .
Last edited by max steel on Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
max steel wrote:When S-500 will come in service can it shoot down hyperdonic gliders and submarine launched tridents ?
If russia has defenses to shoot down icbms and usa doesnt posses such systems( their Ground Missile Defence Interceptors their only answer to icbms are not reliable ) then why usa resorts to muscle flexing ore often than russians . I've shared an article describing gmd interceptors unreliability .
The US isn't close to have HSV's in service and as such there is little reason to ask. However, I can tell you with certainty that the S-500 will have no trouble engaging a target with the HSV-specific flight path.
Tridents are old as **** and in no way maneuverable. You could probably shoot one down with an Igla.
Both countries have their defenses, the difference is Russia isn't stupid enough to flaunt theirs while in reality, they are failures. THAAD will have no effect against any modern ICBM in Russia's inventory, same goes for the GMDI which are basically proven failures. - Intercepting non-maneuverable BM's that are completely known to be launched is nothing special! failing to do so is pathetic at best.
SM-3 is honesty the greatest threat, but I doubt it will be all that reliable against ICBM's in a realistic scenario. They aren't satellites after all...
max steel wrote:When S-500 will come in service can it shoot down hyperdonic gliders and submarine launched tridents ?
If russia has defenses to shoot down icbms and usa doesnt posses such systems( their Ground Missile Defence Interceptors their only answer to icbms are not reliable ) then why usa resorts to muscle flexing ore often than russians . I've shared an article describing gmd interceptors unreliability .
S-500 will deal with targets with max speed 21 Mach Hypersonic speed range lies between Mach 5 and Mach 10 ,so yes S-500 can deal with hypersonic gliders.
The main difference is that the US systems based in Europe or the Arctic ocean is near the launch positions of Russian Missiles and therefore will engage individual missiles and warhead buses before warheads are deployed.
The Russian systems are in Russia... so are deployed around the target and therefore have to deal with warheads and decoys... potentially thousands instead of hundreds.
Being able to base S-500s in say Canada would make their potential capability orders of magnitude better... obviously not an issue however.
S-500 should be able to intercept 7km/s targets, which means most SLBMs and ICBMs.
AFAIK the only operational and fully tested ABM system in the world currently operates around Moscow, as it has done for decades.
GarryB wrote:The main difference is that the US systems based in Europe or the Arctic ocean is near the launch positions of Russian Missiles and therefore will engage individual missiles and warhead buses before warheads are deployed.
The Russian systems are in Russia... so are deployed around the target and therefore have to deal with warheads and decoys... potentially thousands instead of hundreds.
Being able to base S-500s in say Canada would make their potential capability orders of magnitude better... obviously not an issue however.
S-500 should be able to intercept 7km/s targets, which means most SLBMs and ICBMs.
AFAIK the only operational and fully tested ABM system in the world currently operates around Moscow, as it has done for decades.
Any future conflict ,Russia will first destroy these ABM system in europe before launching her nuclear delivery systems.
max steel wrote:When S-500 will come in service can it shoot down hyperdonic gliders and submarine launched tridents ?
If russia has defenses to shoot down icbms and usa doesnt posses such systems( their Ground Missile Defence Interceptors their only answer to icbms are not reliable ) then why usa resorts to muscle flexing ore often than russians . I've shared an article describing gmd interceptors unreliability .
S-500 is designed with specialy hypersonic Mach 20-25 at 30-100 km altitude in mind among other.
Mike E wrote:
max steel wrote:When S-500 will come in service can it shoot down hyperdonic gliders and submarine launched tridents ?
If russia has defenses to shoot down icbms and usa doesnt posses such systems( their Ground Missile Defence Interceptors their only answer to icbms are not reliable ) then why usa resorts to muscle flexing ore often than russians . I've shared an article describing gmd interceptors unreliability .
The US isn't close to have HSV's in service and as such there is little reason to ask. However, I can tell you with certainty that the S-500 will have no trouble engaging a target with the HSV-specific flight path.
Funny thing is that while western countries possess great deal of cruise missiles their defenses against it is almost soely based on aviation component
Thats why panic broke out when Russia started fielding Kh-101, R-500 cruise missiles. Defenses against it is extremely expensive
and ... going west
Russia to Deploy S-400 Air Defense Systems Near Western Borders by End 201
and regiment (armed with 3 batteries) of S-400 + Pancir-S1 battery
Western military district before the end of 2015 will receive a 30-400 and the "armor"
Mike E wrote: The US isn't close to have HSV's in service and as such there is little reason to ask. However, I can tell you with certainty that the S-500 will have no trouble engaging a target with the HSV-specific flight path.
Tridents are old as **** and in no way maneuverable. You could probably shoot one down with an Igla.
Both countries have their defenses, the difference is Russia isn't stupid enough to flaunt theirs while in reality, they are failures. THAAD will have no effect against any modern ICBM in Russia's inventory, same goes for the GMDI which are basically proven failures. - Intercepting non-maneuverable BM's that are completely known to be launched is nothing special! failing to do so is pathetic at best.
SM-3 is honesty the greatest threat, but I doubt it will be all that reliable against ICBM's in a realistic scenario. They aren't satellites after all...
1)Well US tested its Darpa Glider Vehicle and it attained Mach 20 speed both the time in two tests but it eventually failed . So they are pretty much near in making a functional Hypersonic Glider Vehicle . Meanwhile Chinese Glider attained mach 10 speed , though Chinese won't attack russians and their glider successfully performed extreme maneuvers in the latest test . Now S-500 can hit targets upto 7km/s which roughly means Mach 20.57 . So any ICBM above Mach 20 can go past russian defense ? Btw How fast an American nuke delievery vehicle can go ? Top speed ?
2)Trident SLBM's can deliever multiple warheads . You can target it only via S-500 ? I mean S-400 , or Naval SAM's or A-235 isn't successful in neutralising it ? How Trident differs from Bulava ?
3) SM-3 can shoot down only Ballistic Missiles ( non-maneuverable only ) . It's latest version SM-6 is also same . They can shoot down non-maneuverable ( predicted flight path) SRBM's , MRBM's , IRBM's .See the image below . But not Iksander's .
(I've a pdf on Aegis BMD , if anyone is interested just ping me .)
GarryB wrote:
The main difference is that the US systems based in Europe or the Arctic ocean is near the launch positions of Russian Missiles and therefore will engage individual missiles and warhead buses before warheads are deployed. The Russian systems are in Russia... so are deployed around the target and therefore have to deal with warheads and decoys... potentially thousands instead of hundreds.Being able to base S-500s in say Canada would make their potential capability orders of magnitude better... obviously not an issue however.S-500 should be able to intercept 7km/s targets, which means most SLBMs and ICBMs.AFAIK the only operational and fully tested ABM system in the world currently operates around Moscow, as it has done for decades.
Well Russia can easily deploy defenses on it's Artic Base near north pole which will help russia to target american nukes at intermediate stage perhaps . Garry 7km/s means Mach 20.5 . So Trident SLBM's or any american ICBM's coming with greater speed ( more than mach 20 ) can't be intercepted ? As I asked above Btw How fast an American nuke can go( via SLBM or ICBM or HGV ) ? It's top speed ?
Viktor wrote:
S-500 is designed specially with hypersonic Mach 20-25 at 30-100 km altitude in mind among other.
ah! thanks for the clarification , i thought it can't intercept beyond 7km/s . Btw an ICBM can attain maximum speed = 11.5 Km/s ( which is also called as Escape Velocity isn't it ? )
Now S-500 can hit targets upto 7km/s which roughly means Mach 20.57 . So any ICBM above Mach 20 can go past russian defense ? Btw How fast an American nuke delievery vehicle can go ? Top speed ?
there are very few ICBMs and no SLBMs whose warheads enter the earths atmosphere at more than Mach 20 and the vast majority rapidly decellerate as they enter the atmosphereand would become vulnerable.
the Early model S-500 is designed to engage 7km/s targets... newer models will no doubt be designed to engage any actual threat the US or China manages to put into service.
2)Trident SLBM's can deliever multiple warheads . You can target it only via S-500 ? I mean S-400 , or Naval SAM's or A-235 isn't successful in neutralising it ? How Trident differs from Bulava ?
Trident should be interceptable by A-135 and A-235 and likely also S-400 as well.
Well Russia can easily deploy defenses on it's Artic Base near north pole which will help russia to target american nukes at intermediate stage perhaps . Garry 7km/s means Mach 20.5 . So Trident SLBM's or any american ICBM's coming with greater speed ( more than mach 20 ) can't be intercepted ? As I asked above Btw How fast an American nuke can go( via SLBM or ICBM or HGV ) ? It's top speed ?
The advantage will always be with the attacker as there will likely be rather more ICBMs and SLBMs than S-500s or SM-6s.
the whole point of weapons of mass destruction is that they not be stoppable... once one side... Russia or the US believe they could stop enough of the enemies weapons to make it survivable the likelyhood of WWIII suddenly becomes MUCH more likely... that is a bad thing.
Back in 1972 everyone realised that ABMs were bad because they undermined MAD and MAD is the only think that kept either side from starting WWIII.
Today of course we are all dumb fucks thanks to our pointless copy and paste media that writes what the government wants them to write and they want to spend money on an ABM system they will tell the American people will keep them safe... it wont. It will actually make them much much less safe... especially when Russia withdraws from INF and new START treaties and starts producing nukes by the thousand with the support of their new breeder reactors...
Btw an ICBM can attain maximum speed = 11.5 Km/s ( which is also called as Escape Velocity isn't it ? )
If it did it would not return to earth and it will either enter earths orbit or leave earth for good.
Most ICBMs do not hit the ground at anything like their top speed and most ICBMs attain a reentry speed of about 7km/s... recognise that speed? Wonder why the intercept speed of the S-500 was set to 7km/s?
S-500 is designed specially with hypersonic Mach 20-25 at 30-100 km altitude in mind among other.
ah! thanks for the clarification , i thought it can't intercept beyond 7km/s . Btw an ICBM can attain maximum speed = 11.5 Km/s ( which is also called as Escape Velocity isn't it ? )
For instance, check this out
http://www.fighter-planes.com/jetmach1.htm
speed of sound changes with altitude meaning 7000km/sec at 18km altitude is not as same as on the ground level. Meaning 7000km/sec at 30km altitude is approx. Mach 25.
Russia already have in service anti ICBM defenses..
A- 135 and A-235 can do it..
Russia also is not only working with S-500.. but with Electromagnetic weapons/counter electronic weapons , that can disable /shutdown/Burn any ICBM before enters in Russia.. that will be a really game changer thing. also can be used against US satellites.. which hover at 30km altitude. But so far apparently the system is still under development.. If Russia leave the space treaty as they should do.. it will be even easier.. they just move their already in service Electromagnetic warfare and deploy it on orbit in space and will blind any ICBM guidance system ,so it will lose communication and will be blinded.. and could end missing completely its target by hundreds of km or simply to not detonate if its electronics are burned.
i cannot advertise enough Russia electronic warfare system... If what they claim is half truth.. or even 10%.. as good as they say.. it will truly revolutionize future wars.. Imagine a land based huge electromagnetic gun ,that aim at ICBM and shut them down/fry its electronics before it even get close to Russia? Such a gun will totally make Obsolete any kind of modern warfare that NATO use . Is mind blowing only the idea that Russia is even developing something to shut down in space satellites using electronic warfare.
Im already amazed at the videos of helicopters deflecting projectiles is crazy good to be true just using counter electronics.. if such things are possible at lower level.. it have to be possible at larger distance.. an ICBM is just a huge rocket grenade with lots of modern sensors and electronics and huge engine and and multi nuclear warhead system. But here is the thing.. it use electricity to operate.. without a battery and electronics it cannot work.. If you can induce somehow a very powerful magnetic field around an ICBM.. by law of physics that electricity will not work at all. The electrons flowing through circuits will simply behave is a different way..and even provoke a short circuit.. because magnetism generate an electric field. This is Basic Physics.. but to create practical weapons with that that operates at very large distance is not a small thing..
it was Tesla who told ,that if people could control the magnetic field of earth ,they could split the earth in many parts. So anyone who could master electromagnetism could easily induce a lethal electric charge like a lighting at long distance..in any flying thing.. plane or missile.. and destroy it.. a weapon like that will have no problem in dealing with Massive waves of Missiles attacks .. they simply will stop working.. as soon cross an invisible magnetic shield..Something traditional air defenses cant do.
Imagine Russian borders armed with just Counter Electronic field stations.. (instead of S-300s or S-400s or even S-500s ) that automatically shutdown anything flying across Russian borders.. and that can be disabled in time of peace or enable in time of war. that create a magnetic field around a large city.. ..without human interference. No cruise missiles will pass ,neither ICBMs. unless they developed without electronics at all.. and using a totally different field like photons ,instead of electrons for transmission of energy.
I really hope Russia success in this amazing field of physics. Such weapons are at a whole new level in technology , only seen in movies.. even if all that Russia defense industry manage with their electronics weapons is to interrupt communications between remote controlled weapons ,guided missiles ,it will be really useful to block the guidance of any long range weapon like cruise missiles and ICBM.. extremely useful . It will make Obsolete any weapons that is fired beyond visual range. and force battles to be done at visual distance. This will also end the advantage of stealth technology if missiles of a plane cannot hit anything beyond visual range. it will force Air combats to dogfights with cannons.. and wars fought at old school artillery like world war 1.
Garry someone mentioned it that A-135 and A-235 are mot meant to intercept icbm's and only with S-500 in service Russia will become first ever country to intercept both ICBMs and Hypersonic gliders? I know american Ground Base Interceptors are a joke even proved also.
So is it true currently russia is defenceless against icbms ?
ICBMs travel at 7.2 km/s ? S-500 is meant to hit targets with speed upto 7.2 km/s ?
Can an icbm travel with maximum velocity= earth's escape velocity of 11.2km/s ?
Garry someone mentioned it that A-135 and A-235 are mot meant to intercept icbm's
They were based around Moscow... what were they supposed to intercept?
Recon balloons?
and only with S-500 in service Russia will become first ever country to intercept both ICBMs and Hypersonic gliders? I know american Ground Base Interceptors are a joke even proved also.
The US had an ABM system around an ICBM field... it was open for a day and then closed.
The only operational ABM system ever developed and deployed and upgraded and tested to this day is the system around Moscow.
So is it true currently russia is defenceless against icbms ?
Every "country" is defenceless against ICBMs. Moscow has protection from a limited attack.
ICBMs travel at 7.2 km/s ? S-500 is meant to hit targets with speed upto 7.2 km/s ?
Do you think that is an accident?
Can an icbm travel with maximum velocity= earth's escape velocity of 11.2km/s ?
An ICBM that achieves earths escape velocity leaves earths orbit and orbits the sun... ie it becomes a space craft, not an ICBM.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Such a gun will totally make Obsolete any kind of 
a weapon like that will have no problem in dealing with Massive waves of Missiles attacks .. they simply will stop working.. as soon cross an invisible magnetic shield..Something traditional air defenses cant do.