Talking bollocks thread #3

@secretprojects

From what I can tell use of higher temperature turbines is the way to go.  Hence the effort to develop advance ceramic blades and
other components.   All engines are heat engines and increasing the temperature relative to the ambient is the way to increase their
efficiency (in the absence of staging such as used in gas power plants).    A higher temperature turbine can have a reduced size and
still give the same thrust.  

So I supposed that the bypass ratio can be increased in the same engine dimensions.    But design work has to done to be able to
shut down the bypass blades when they are not useful.   I have not heard of such designs so maybe they are not practical.

kvs wrote:From what I can tell use of higher temperature turbines is the way to go.  Hence the effort to develop advance ceramic blades and
other components.   All engines are heat engines and increasing the temperature relative to the ambient is the way to increase their
efficiency (in the absence of staging such as used in gas power plants).    A higher temperature turbine can have a reduced size and
still give the same thrust.  

So I supposed that the bypass ratio can be increased in the same engine dimensions.    But design work has to done to be able to
shut down the bypass blades when they are not useful.   I have not heard of such designs so maybe they are not practical.

There were constant claims on keypublishing that russia was always behind the US in terms of temperature of their jet engines(comparing the temperatures of the F119 and AL-41F), and that the Izd.30 is allegedly 200-300 degrees celsius cooler than the F135. Of course, since the izd.30 and AL-41FN is classified, I dont know how they came to that conclusion.

secretprojects wrote:
You are missing the point. The AL-41F is still just a progressively tweaked AL-31F sharing the same basic cycle, stages, etc. Izdeliye 30 is the first 'new' engine.

A low bypass ratio is essential for highest performance in air-to-air combat, especially supersonic, as well as supercruise. The equations for this are pretty clear and were explored during the FX (F-15) era.  That's one reason AL-31F and RD-33 used lower bypass ratios than the F100, being more comparable to the F404 - this increases thrust to weight ratio at the expense of subsonic efficiency. A higher bypass ratio boosts subsonic cruise range. To go forward you need to look at variable bypass technologies to try to combine the best parts of each, which is where the three stream engine work in the US comes in.

And you are missing mine.

Izdeliye 30 would be the new gen one and it would be installed on Su-57 from 2022, it would means that only an handful of Su-57 would have the Al-41, still no need to wait to start production until it would be ready as the two are designed to be swapped also at air base level.
So, probably only one OCU squadron or regiment would be equipped with it and they would be replaced with the definitive one a.s.a.p.

You are saying however something completely false: F-100-PW-229 has a lower bypass ratio (0,34:1 to 0,56:1 and 0:49:1 respectively) of both AL-31F and RD-33 while the Al-41 actually increased such value while adopting a larger engine core.
At the contrary the F404 started with 0,34;1 and F414 lowered this already low value to a meagre 0,25:1.
So actually russian engines has both a way greater thrust to weight than a WAY larger bypass ratio of the PW-229 AND the F404/414, thus completely denying your baseless affirmations.
Between the american engines in the legacy fleet only the F110 retained an high bypass ratio, all the rest have gone down the sinkhole.

New generation ones? F-119 has a bypass ratio of 0,30:1 i.e. between the F404 and the F414 while the F-135 has one of 0,57:1 i.e. practically the same one of Al-31 (0,56) and Al-41 (0,59).
So I guess Saturn get it right from the very beginning.

marcellogo wrote:
And thank God, although being perfectly capable of get the Su-57 well into such flying regime it would NOT be optimized for supercruise in the sense the F-119 is: it will still remain a turbofan with an healthy bypass ratio, not a "leaky turbojet" in disguise like the one actually propelling the F-22A and incapable to be installed in anything else or even to operate efficiently in any other flying regime than that...

Well that is the point, what kind of engine izd. 30 is?

According to Marchukov, it will have BOTH the highest specific thrust AND preserve the fuel consumption of the AL-31F. There are three options as far as I can see it to achieve that:

> Relatively high bypass ratio like the AL-31F, in that case how do they surpass F119's specific thrust, which is simply huge?
> Low bypass ratio like the F119, for supersonic cruise. It has been said many times by official and other serious sources that the izd. 30 is created to be a supersonic cruising engine. But then, how to match AL-31F's SFC?

So these two options demand Russia to be quite significantly ahead (of the F119 at least) in key technological parameters (OPR, TIT) which are VERY difficult to improve, I cannot compare to F135 since it is not a supercruising engine but leaving the F119 that far behind technology wise  would get US planers apoplectic. I wish I could read some expert's opinion on this, but it is also IMHO quite unlikely because of the technological jump they would need to accomplish in so little time.

> My favourite option is that izd. 30 is a continuation of izd. 20 and hence a two-stream VCE. Technology was developed quite a few years ago and improving materials, control and aero design would result in a superior motorization for a proper 5G plane, that is, one that can both supercruise really fast and be economical in subsonic flight. The technological parameters would not need to be so extreme and even maybe below F135 actually but still the superior layout would more than compensate for it.

In any case, US is now forced to move, because only with the few details that have been revealed in the public sphere it seems the F-22 has been kinematically surpassed and of course that means the F-35 will be slaughtered in that regard. How soon they can deploy the adaptive engines will determine for how long they need to live with that new and probably unexpected situation.

kvs wrote:
From what I can tell use of higher temperature turbines is the way to go.  Hence the effort to develop advance ceramic blades and
other components.   All engines are heat engines and increasing the temperature relative to the ambient is the way to increase their
efficiency (in the absence of staging such as used in gas power plants).    A higher temperature turbine can have a reduced size and
still give the same thrust.  

So I supposed that the bypass ratio can be increased in the same engine dimensions.    But design work has to done to be able to
shut down the bypass blades when they are not useful.   I have not heard of such designs so maybe they are not practical.

Progress is pursued in every possible development vector, 3D aero design, temperature tolerance of materials, reduction of weight and number of the stages etc., since a 1% improvement in overall efficiency is already really hard to get. That is why the layout is being so actively explored now, because it is simply the only way double digit percentage gains can be achieved. It will also have many beneficial side effects like reducing drag, improving thermal management and others even crazier like creation of ramjet-type engines based on them.

secretprojects wrote:
The second stage engines will be ready in a couple of years. That is I think the major reason why we didn't see a big order of the Su-57 any sooner.

Welcome, nice to see you here. Reading people like flateric and other knowledgeable guys it seems the program got started, well, because they needed to get it going no matter under what difficult conditions. So probably if they had decided to commission it by 2015 like originally claimed, it would have indeed been a half cooked plane, but probably the results with Su-35S and good progress with the Su-57 and its systems made them switch from low risk approach of minimums to a more ambitious one where they bridge some years with 4++ models while they mature the second stage design with the new engines but also actuators, avionics and probably some other systems



There is nothing better than time to improve technology, so they being able to commission Su-57 later means good savings from not having to buy a very expensive plane earlier, and needing to retrofit way fewer of them to reach second stage. Also less information is revealed to potential rivals, while the platform itself keeps moving relatively fast because all of the new systems being integrated. I find many reasons to praise the overall program management by Sukhoi under difficult conditions and the very wise layout and design philosophy decisions they took early on. The big question mark about the plane is of course the avionics + systems performance that can make the difference between a good plane or an excellent one, but I think the details about them will remain unknown for many years.

thegopnik wrote:

No way did you just create an account here just to tell me that, or are you actually planning on having an account here? Either way nice having you here rather if it will be short term or not but I still have good reasons to suspect you as such and I was already done seething  about it. Moderators or admins here can feel free to move this politcal board shit to another thread because I am about to speak my mind to the point it might escalate instead of keeping it brief here.

I'm still very interested in Soviet era aviation (MiG-23 for example) so it's quite likely I might find some interesting discussions. I have account on Key, Sinodefence, F-16[dot]net, China Defence and others and visit semi-regularly - I actually spend more time visiting Russian language sites than English ones for Soviet era stuff.

thegopnik wrote:If I was to rate non-bias forums with non-bias moderators this forum and space battle forum(the war room) are on my top list to join. My account could have lasted way longer at space battle forum but arguements with Space X fans and other political shit threads got me banned because moderators and admins are majorly left wing supporters(like Quora) that arguing with them and other users will give you the,"arguing in bad faith" accusation with a temperary ban.

Criticism on you and your moderators: Example Papadragon was currently free to speak his mind on shitting on Roscosmos multiple times on this forum and AFAIK moderators and alot of users are pissed about it but they did not ban his account your forum on the otherhand for example:

I have no idea who this is, I assume this is a spacebattles reference.

thegopnik wrote:Dino(he has a bias even though I am cool with him) he was accused of other users on key aero for taking chinas military side too much. Got into an arguement with Pegasus in your forum regarding japanese or chinese aircrafts(if i remember correctly) than he got banned even though I dont see how Pegasus was being a troll or asshole like ultimatewarrior in this forum(which I am surprised he lasted this long here with other users in question) I would welcome him here since his user account is mig29smt at india defense forum he and stealthflanker(Ronny) over there.

Also him being a moderator at sinodefense is no surprise either so at that point I am wondering why you have not listed any of your moderators having a chinese background.

I banned pegasus for being annoying, he wouldn't follow the rules even after repeatedly asking. Deino (Andreas Rupprecht, perhaps you'd read some of his many well-regarded books)  had nothing to do with it. I've seen him in person, he is 100% NOT Chinese, he is German, just interested in Chinese aviation and writes about it.

thegopnik wrote:
Flateric reminds me too much of Rubick(who is estonian) at spacebattleforum(basically an asshole by nature how I saw him treat other users there besides me)

Grigori can be less tolerant than me for sure, but he knows his stuff on Russian aerospace etc.

thegopnik wrote:as you remind me too much of dangman4ever in that same forum.

Not me - I'm either overscan, secretprojects or (on Key) aerospacetech.

thegopnik wrote:Also when I started to question your forum having any relation to F-16.net or keyaero I was technically under your radar when I brought up news sources of a internal hypersonic missile for the Su-57 or a 100km missile(october 2022 testing) for the ka-52 which you immediately claim as fake and when I further argue with you on this I get banned.

You were banned for behaving like an idiot, no conspiracy theory needed. None of the forums you mention have any connection to me, or to each other. Key Publishing was around even before I started my forum in December 2005 and is simply a forum for a UK Aviation magazine and book publisher. I'm just a random aviation enthusiast from the UK. I have no idea who owns F-16.net.

thegopnik wrote:When keyaero has undergone a transformation although the previous archive forum threads where accessible my photonic integrated radar thread got deleted and I saw a user called keystrokeaero(Gee I wonder who that is) browsing my radar thread at your forum. Besides these few examples(which I have way more) I dont see why glownigger cannot be admins or moderators at forums because at eagle.ru someone speaking with Garrya has a blurred image ID that has shown he works at Lockheed Martin specializing in satellite shit and a image of his laptop browsing eagle.ru forum and a name like secretprojects might encourage people to spill classified info of military projects which I am very sure is your job to see where that said user posted such information. Military related topic forums attract military personnel which attracts possibility of information be spilled, therefore is like a honeypot for intelligence agencies to see.

Not sure how to answer this. You know eagle.ru forums are a Russian Games publisher's forum, right?  

I'm just a random aircraft nut. I chose "secretprojects.co.uk" because I wanted to have a forum about never-built aircraft projects directly inspired by the Midland Publishing "German Secret Projects, British Secret Projects, Russian Secret Projects" series and because it sounded cool.

Sure, by its nature my forum attracts some engineers both current and retired  - but no SPF staff are employed in the aviation industry except Flateric. And I'm the only person who bans users.

When I first started the forum I'd get a kick out of seeing the number of hits from Lockheed-Martin, Boeing DoD or other networks at times - when RQ-170 went public I got a big burst of hits from LM networks as employees not briefed in to the program visited to see what their company was up to. I've only ever had 3 contacts in 15 years about the contents of the forum, all from book publishers relating to copyright.

thegopnik wrote: I have criticism for the Su-57 as much as I do for the F-35 but If I posted something like this on F-16.net or your forum I would definetly get banned. Post this here I might get into an arguement with LMFS or probably GarryB. Post this at spacebattle I will get f-16.net level criticism but the admins and moderators will not give a shit since the ones monitoring the war room are more concerned with bad behavior therefore i can argue with 10-20 users until I drop dead. I might consider creating a new account at spacebattle(changing my IP or mac address) but I feel good chilling here, at quora, and some times india defense forum.

I have no problem with people criticising the F-35. I don't like it much myself. If you are banned from Secret Projects Forum it will be because of one of these:

1) You broke the rules of the forum
2) Your posts constantly stir up controversy which disturbs the smooth running of the forum
3) Your posts are consistently low/no value and /or really annoy me

In your case, it was mostly your baseless and idiotic accusation that I was a member of some secret pro-US forum cabal that got you banned.

Get a room you two....  we don't want to read your BS lovers squabbles here.  

FWIW, banning people is a bad idea.  If posters continue to post BS, they will get a reputation for being an idiot and they will wither on the vine.  Too often these days, censorship is invoked to delete ideas and views that those in power dislike.  They dress it up of course with pleasant sounding niceties (anti-hate speech, combatting "disinfo") but in reality its all about silencing those who dissent from the orthodox narratives.

Paradoxically these days, it seems that it is the "free West" who are by far the biggest exponents of censorship, and that is not really surprising given that our societies are entirely controlled by privately-owned elite-capital entities run by our privileged elites, and these people consider effective democracy and free speech to be an existential threat to their continued control.  Big Tech censorship of non-liberal viewpoints is an outstanding example.

.............. Can someone create an account besides me to message overscan at secretprojects.uk. Because some user introduction by another certain user here sounds a little too generic here. I guess its a coincidence that supposedly the admin from another forum to speak about a 3 stream engine compared to a certain user talking about here not too long ago if anyone catches my drift. Not only that but especially the introduction of himself and flateric and someone immediately praising both those users than a response immediately comes after that .........

overscan wrote:I banned pegasus for being annoying, he wouldn't follow the rules even after repeatedly asking. Deino (Andreas Rupprecht, perhaps you'd read some of his many well-regarded books)  had nothing to do with it. I've seen him in person, he is 100% NOT Chinese, he is German, just interested in Chinese aviation and writes about it.

Yeah yeah I consider Ronny annoying as much as he considers me annoying and if I was moderator or admin I would not ban him at all. The last conversation Pegasus had with Deino was his different interests and I have watched him at india defense forum argue with stealthflanker there(who claims he is ronny, mig-31bm, garrya, kimleeryo, moon_light, eloise at other forums) and both are considered atleast knowledgeable users regarding f-16s and mig-29s. Considering if this is your new created account or not by another user as I am accusing in the above text your forum is North Korea at best.

overscan wrote:You were banned for behaving like an idiot, no conspiracy theory needed. None of the forums you mention have any connection to me, or to each other. Key Publishing was around even before I started my forum in December 2005 and is simply a forum for a UK Aviation magazine and book publisher. I'm just a random aviation enthusiast from the UK. I have no idea who owns F-16.net.

Well this idiot(geez your keen on setting rules but don't follow them yourself with insults here   ) still got you worked up by just posting news information. If you consider people with opposing ideas as idiots and ban them that just shows the reflection of that forum. Although I do not know why you and flateric got worked up about their hypersonic missiles because the U.S. not too long ago started to created ARMs that are only slightly better than what the Russians have presented since 10+years ago so I do not follow why you and flateric immediately throw doubts about new hypersonic missile projects they create.

overscan wrote:1) You broke the rules of the forum
2) Your posts constantly stir up controversy which disturbs the smooth running of the forum
3) Your posts are consistently low/no value and /or really annoy me

In your case, it was mostly your baseless and idiotic accusation that I was a member of some secret pro-US forum cabal that got you banned.

Christ if your complaining about me you have not seen the worst here yet. 2 and 3 (don't know about 1 AFAIK) it sounds more like an echo chamber than a forum and I am not someone to kiss ass to moderators or admins who have different opinions than mine https://forums.spacebattles.com/forums/the-war-room.23/ you can find my banned ass here which I already described why and I have gotten into many arguments far worse than yours or flaterics bitching about my different opinions regarding two missile projects in the war room. but when I strayed away to the politics section that's where my account got banned.

big gazza wrote:Get a room you two....  we don't want to read your BS lovers squabbles here.

I think its only going to continue at this rate and when me an another user get heated we each want to have the last word. I already gave a warning to this thread when I responded back to him

This is not the forum and not the thread for this discussion guys...

Cheers, Garry.

I was going to respond to your points but it's clear that my assessment of conspiracy thinking was accurate, so I'm not sure how I can convince you who I am, or that there isn't a secret CIA cabal of pro-US forums out to suppress the truth about the F-35 and belittle Russian technology. I'll try to stick to useful contributions in future.

I guess the forum software is so crappy that choosing a set of posts to be moved to another section without dragging unrelated ones is
impossible or too tedious. Gotta love that wonderful software engineering. By clowns who do not know what an algorithm is. I have
to deal with this brain dead "IP" in various contexts and have zero tolerance for it. To think that governments hire these incompetents
to write all sorts of critical code and to design work related web pages. Then people have to live with the broken garbage on a daily
basis.

Properly written forum software would let you highlight any subset of posts you wanted and then click to reassign them to another
thread target.   It looks like you are only given the option of cutting out chunks of several posts and then have to tediously edit
this chunk.   I may be wrong but I doubt pasting over post content as if you are dealing with a combined document is a
preferred method of removing OT post content.  

Even if the forum stores all posts as continuous stream, individual posts can trivially be separated with tags or symbols to allow
parsing into discrete elements.  Software that cannot handle trivial set operations in any sort of management context is not software
but garbage.

F-22 uses older 5W t/r modules while N036 uses between 10/15W on quad pack modules. Overall, N036 has similar KW output as Irbis-E, making it the most powerful radar for fighter jet. Part 2.

I never understood the hype for Russian air defenses , they are pretty limited to protect
any area anywhere.. those s-300s and s-400s failed to protect syria and armenia from drones attacks
and others on their land.. Israel alone did about 2 thousands strikes on syria ,with russian military  helping syria with pantsirs ,tors ,s-300s and s-400s.  Those s-300s and s-400s have been largely
ineffective is sealing the airspace of syria ,and also failed in protecting armenia that was attacked directly its main land..

the future of air defense belong to energy weapons or electromagnetic railguns but also next gen
anti air magnetic propulsion kinetic artillery.

this is what russia needs to target drones ,cruise missiles and NATO planes with heavy jamming capabilities.



i warned years ago ,that russia was incorrectly training their forces for nato strikes ,they visualize
nato charging Russian territory with f-16s and f-35's and dozens of cruise missiles at same time.

but thats not how nato train to attack russia.. they train with swarm of autonomous drones with artificial intelligence that can't be jammed doing the charge ,
and a single nato bomber can launch hundreds of drones in just one s-400 defended zone. so 10 bombers means 1 thousands of mini drones overwhelming russian defenses.. combined with decoys,
so those s-300s and s-400s are pretty outdated for the job ,im afraid. same with tors and pantsirs outdated for modern wars as we saw in syria. it will be a total destruction of russia air defenses.
This doesn't means that s-400s and s-300s will be useless completely ,they can snipe planes from far distances ,but russia don't have an effective area of denial defense for the first wave of attacks that will be lead by swarm of drones and glide bombs that caused a lot of damage in syria.. sadly.

Genius this gun has an effective range of 5-6 km.

Laser have an optical horizon of 10 or so km.

Railguns need a shit ton of energy and their rounds are limited in manoevrability.

And all of them need radars to see UAV or other targets further than 10-15km anyway.

Any system is limited against low flying and low rcs targets. The issue is detect them on time. Downing tgem is easy.

Until now only russian system proved to be capable to deal with such tatgets.

Air defence can't close an airspace. They protect you until you bomb the enemy airbases. If you have only AD you loose no matter what.

Isos wrote:Genius this gun has an effective range of 5-6 km.

Laser have an optical horizon of 10 or so km. .

indeed have short range. but they are very cheap and you can deploy far more units of them ,than you can of tors and pantsirs.. and if you mount those defenses on warships ,you will push back those planes , farther of your borders..  10 converttes armed with anti air magnetic driven area artillery can cover about 10x 6km  = 60km..at very least.. but if you spread them with 10km distance between them, then you will have 120km of rock solid impenetrable air defense. and only use s-300s and s-400s for sniping ,but not for stopping swarm of drones.. they are not ideal for that job.. neither pantsirs or tors.. this is not mentioning the economic cost  ,since like i saw 1 american b1 bomber can launch a hundred of mini drones.. this is how nato trains to fight russia, with saturation attacks..

Russia will need at least 1 thousand missiles interceptor ,1-2x missiles per target ,to stop a first wave
of NATO saturation attacks. and they can pull dozen of waves like that..

this is what nato and israel did in syria to destroy those pantsirs.. and this is what turkey also did..
and this is what arerbaijan also did.. if anyone thinks that russia air defenses can effectively block
nato swarm drones attacks is because is not paying attention of the conflicts and how many air defenses russia lost in the last 5 years.  Tors ,pantsirs, s-300s all destroyed.. trying to deal with swarm of drones..


take a look at how Russia military "train"



notice how they need 2 missiles, to just shoot down a soviet era missile. while
anti air artillery salvos are cheap munition.. you can fire thousands of them for the cost
of 1 interceptor missile. and this is a "Training" for them. This is completely unrealistic scenario , because if NATO
attacks russia will not be with 1 anti ship missile.. and russia big exercises best i have seen
is russia military fighting versus waves of 50-60 drones.. and about the same in enemy planes.  

Russia do not have a true area of denial defense ,and also even if they were crazy enough to deploy
all their air defenses in one place ,to multiply their chances ,this will be incredibly inefficient to use
s-300s and s-400s versus loitering munition drones or swarm of drones . is not economically practical..

the future of air defense will be rail guns ,lazer guns ,computer guided anti air magnetic artillery  and lethal electromagnetic weapons.. in this later russia have some progress.. but based on how they did in armenia ,that got their helicopter destroyed ,and could not defend armenia s-300 in armenia territory , it will be clear they are not there yet.. Those s-300s and s400s will be pieces of museum
in the next 5 to 10 years ,with advancement of rail guns.. and anti air artillery .

railguns range can go as high a 1,000km.. and this is what americans are working. The ones they ahve today reach 300 km distance ,so this are true scary weapons. because you can attack any nation or any combat plane from very far distances and there will be no trace of who did the attack .since those hypersonic shells have next to none signature on radars ,will not be detected by radars in most cases.. so the enemy will not see what hit them. A long range rail gun can be used to assasinate a county leader on his presidential plane.. russia better be careful of those presidential flights to europe.. a simple warship or cargo ship armed with a rail gun ,can shot down any plane withing a radius of 300m to 1km and do it secretly..  so far, not impressed with those s-400s or s-300s ,they have been useless in syria and in armenia ,have changed nothing ,and have not created any denial of zone. .don't understand the hype for them.

Someone need to show the russian military what germany is doing for short range defense..
is far superior to anything russia have. this is how true modern air defenses should be.
this is how true area denial should be.. cheap ,powerful and extremely effective vs swarm of drones.
but also an effective

iskander and hypersonic tsirkon killer.


sadly russia military is sleeping , and if they don't change their defense tactics ,it will be a disaster
when they need to face a true NATO swarm of drone attack.. what they can do.  

The russian base in syria will not have a chance of an attack like this ,of a thousands kamikazi  drones with artificial intelligence




US is also testing very high altitude stealth drones with a very small radar detection that one reach the max altitude will glide down towards their s-400 target , that don't glide in a predictable flight path .. this will be another very serious problem for russia air defenses. russia need to go back to the drawing board and create modern anti air artillery combined with rail guns and lasers,this the most efficient way to deal with future wars that will be 100% lead by swarm of drones and highly maneuverable targets. Also russia need long range rail guns mounted on their warship or land.. those s-300s ,pantsirs and tors will not have a chance to stop an rail gun attack , venezuela was attacked 2 weeks ago by a rail gun and their s-300s ,pantsir and tors defenses totally failed to protect their
refinery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGISIerJ5dI



the ugly truth of putin's army air defenses.. and people still believe
Putin was the "big winner" of this armenia conflict.



This was truly painful to watch ,how russian best air defenses in service completely smashed
by a third world country like azerbaijan.. in such a small conflict of armenia ,and very likely
it was Russian officers the ones killed operating their tor defenses , since armenia did not have plenty of experience using them. and they hide their deaths by "Accidents" on military bases..

Russia will need a ridiculous high number of tors and pantsir defenses like 500x tors/pantsirs  in order to stop a swarm of drones ,like the ones a major power like israel ,france or uk can produce.
and a far more to fight a true NATO attack on russia territory.

Im afraid the Russian military will do absolutely nothing to change completely their air defense tactics..and their military hardware until shoigu removed or they get s-400s easily destroyed by a third world country like turkey or azerbaijan ,which ever come first. because the sad truth is they are completely inadequate to fight swarm of drones attacks..  Russia will need to go back to the drawing board or buy germany anti air artillery ,lots of them ,as many as they can build. also take to a whole new level their electronic warfare.. because so far the performance of  russia defending armenia and syria have been largely not very great.. but more close to mediocre. if nato and israel ,was very serious of destroying kaliningrad air defenses there .which are even stronger than crimea. they could truly pull that out with thousands of swarm of drones ,and loitering munition they can easily pull from poland.

who really won in the armenian conflict and who really lost?
the big loser was not armenia.. but the russian military air defenses instead,
they were destroyed left right and center iskander launchers destroyed, tors ,pantsirs and s-300s,
their performance was completely inadequate for the job. and azerbaijan is a third world nation ,not a major power ,they got only a few hundred of drones.  and it it was russia who setup armenia air defenses and not only soviet era defenses destroyed but also russia best tor and pantsir defenses too.. and s-300s favorit destroyed too. So it was russia military the real big loser in this conflict.
this defeat of russia technology , could only be a positive thing ,if they fire shoigu from his job and putin too , and they realize their air defenses are not acceptable for the job and start inmediately working in advanced anti air artillery .,rail guns and land laser defenses.. can s-300 and s-400 shot down any drone ?  for sure it can ,but their performance is very bad as we saw in syria and armenia ,versus groups of coordinated surprise drones and missile attacks at same time. So it will will be funny that after russia invested so much money in pantsir and tors..and s-300s and also s-400s, they end ditching them and selling them to other nations and start working on something else.  s-400s will still be useful but only practical versus long range attacks on combat planes ,stealth planes and and large expensive targets like intel spy planes.  S-400s should be seen as sniper rifles..they work well at range but not ideal for close combat and russia have a big major security hole in the short and medium air defenses and their electronic warfare doesn't appear to be good enough to deny an air space area to an enemy that is armed by nato or israel.

definitely putin will need to stop wasting the billions of euros he spend in total distractions and celebrations like olympics and and celebrations of soviet past victories and seriously increase the budget of russia defense industry in
new air defenses research weapons program.. because i do see this performance of russia in protecting armenia main land, from not very good to abysmally bad as was the armenian conflict , and he only managed to minimize the bad publicity ,because aliev accepted a cease of fire. because if he goes full scale all or nothing ,russia will have lost a lot more air defenses and more soldiers killed in armenia than in syria conflict ,and even their s-400s destroyed too ,by cheap drones as a final insult.     The russian military should be dismayed by now ,how bad was their military performance versus major swarm of drones attacks. the good news is that russia do have capabilities to correct this mistake.. the bad news is that russia it is still ruled by slow learning people ,that don't adapt very fast.. and i was warning about this many years ago ,russia is not training its military correctly to deal with up to a thousands of missiles and drones attacks with decoys,because this is exactly what they have been training for a very long time. the only deterrence russia to stop nato from attacking russia are their nuclear weapons ,their submarine force and their hypersonic missiles. because if all depended on russia air defenses..russia will be doomed already.

One place you can bet your life the drone strategy will try to be replicated will be Donbass.

calripson wrote:One place you can bet your life the drone strategy will try to be replicated will be Donbass.

Sure, and with the kind of airspace control that Russia can have there, it is guaranteed to fail.

LMFS wrote:

calripson wrote:One place you can bet your life the drone strategy will try to be replicated will be Donbass.

Sure, and with the kind of airspace control that Russia can have there, it is guaranteed to fail.

It failed in Syria and Libya too. Even in NK it should have failed if Armenis knew how to fight and used their sukhoi or iskanders to target real targets of high value.

Drones are good against guerillas and even then they are limited. They sure have their use but if you face an army with a real air force they won't help.

@Vann7
Railguns need very high power supply thus its employment as a towed/SP system for army is doubtful in the near future.

That's why US Navy is testing it on a deck ,need a decent amount of deck space as well as a ton of space below decks and the weapon needs a new launcher cores every 400 shots and barrels every thousand. It consumes 9kw hours per shot ,so their deck options would be the 3 Zumwalt destroyers and aircraft carriers.

And they didn't retire the Aegis