S-300P/S-400 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #4

Well it looks that is not just israel ,the king in bypassing russian air defenses..

but also Ukraine too.. since those toscka missiles are now targeting russian cities , with impunity.

You wonder why so many people have a problem with you Vann, let me explain it... it is because of what you say and how you think.

Israel has not bypassed any of Russias air defences... they have never hit a single Russian or Russian asset in Syria.

The intel Il-20 that was shot down was shot down by Syrian air defence forces by accident.

You can't become king of something you have never done.

Second, the Ukraine has launched some ineffective pin prick attacks on Russia, while Russia is slaughtering thousands of their soldiers a week.

The concept of a surprise attack is an unexpected attack that was not anticipated... it might work once, but there is often a cost, and very quickly the enemy will take steps to prevent it happening again... it is certainly nothing to be proud of because once you do it you normally cannot repeat it anyway.

And thirdly you are a child... an infant, a baby... I bet you refuse to play chess because you have a tantrum with every piece you lose.

Not suggesting you should ignore losses in war, but you have to be able to accept losses when they occur... you keep telling us what you would do if you were in charge, and while thankfully this can never happen, by your own tantrums you would not last long.

The Orcs are bastards but they are not stupid... they wont attack where Russia is strong, they look for weak spots and they have the west desperately trying to help them.

Very occasionally they will get lucky.

That is when your nappy need changing because you lose it... which is why I call you a baby.

Shit happens... man up and deal with it.

If some super weapon is tested in combat, like the latest model T-90 and somehow it gets immobilised and has to be destroyed to prevent it being captured by the enemy THAT IS NOT A FAILURE. You don't scrap the design and start again from scratch like a baby with a temper.

You investigate what happened.

Anyone who knows anything about tank design knows that no tank can have 360 degree protection from everything... the weight penalties of having the frontal armour on the sides and rear and belly and roof makes it impossible, so all tanks are always going to have vulnerable areas that the enemy can exploit and it does not take a rocket scientist to realise that for instance an M1A2 Abrams with ammo in its rear turret bustle is vulnerable to even the oldest model RPG-7 if you can hit it. Tracks and wheels are also vulnerable and gas turbine engines produce enormous amounts of heat so any sort of IR guided missile will connect with an Abrams for a mobility kill 99 times out of 100... with a relatively small HEAT warhead.... you could design an 82mm mortar round for the job... an attacking force of Abrams could be destroyed by a single 82mm Vasilesk auto mortar.... change the elevation as you fire to give them slightly different trajectories so they each hit different vehicles... you could fire them from behind a row of hills or trees or buildings... it is a mortar with a range of 4 km...

The border with Ukraine is large and their artillery is largely mobile and they will be using camouflage techniques to make them look like something else like ambulances and school buses.

Even when missiles are shot down the debris can be dangerous... I seem to remember in Desert Storm or a later conflict with Iraq that the incoming Scuds were getting grazed by Patriots that couldn't cope with the flight speed of the upgraded Scuds so the patriots were shredding the rear engine sections of the Scuds... but being ballistic rockets their engines had already shut down and they were falling towards their targets and in at least one case the interception of a scud changed its trajectory and it hit a barracks full of US Marines... 28 Marines were killed and over 260 were injured by a Scud missile that would likely have landed in open ground had it not been intercepted by several Patriots.

Their problem was that the Patriots hit the Scuds but didn't destroy them by setting off their warheads... essentially they knocked them off course and they hit a different piece of ground.

That would be good with Iskander because Iskander would have hit a target and after interception it likely would have missed, but Iskander are faster than improved scuds and they manouver to evade interception so Patriot probably would not have gotten anywhere near an Iskander.

With the Scuds they had enlarged fuel tanks to make them fly further and faster but were not strengthened so as they were coming in many were already breaking apart and the warhead is small compared with the rest of the missile, so the Patriots tended to hit the engines and fuel tanks and let the warheads fall on the ground... the lack of accuracy means missing it might save lives and hitting it might cost lives.

The Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and in terms of weapons was better equipped than HATO is... the Russians are killing a BUK or OSA every day or every other day.... every week or so an S-300 is taken out... HATO has no equivalents of those in service in these numbers... the panic from Finland and Sweden to join HATO was the fact that the Ukrainians are fighting the way they planned to deal wiht the Russians and even with HATO support they are getting slaughtered by a small force of Russian soldiers that are doing their best not to hurt the local civilians or soldiers that surrender... there is no reason to think they would bother with such nicities fighting Finland or Sweden.

There was mention of that sort of datalinking with A-100s and upgraded A-50s but obviously very little detail.

The talk about the MiG-29K includes full communication with the ships and other aircraft it operates so essentially a MiG-35 flying out to intercept a contact can use its radar and IRST and helmet mounted cueing systems to get locks on targets whose tracking information can be shared with the ships and other aircraft operating with it.

That should mean a target 230km from a Russian surface fleet equipped with S-400 missiles could use 250km or 400km range missiles to engage the target if the MiG tracks it and passes on target data for the interception... that would be air and surface targets of course... it would be a serious force multiplier as a flight of four MiGs each tracking multiple targets at once would enable the engagement of a large number of threats using ship based weapons right down to sea level... eliminating the problems of the radar horizon for the ships and making them rather more powerful and useful.

AWACS platforms operating closer to the ships would also share target data with the ships for 360 degree views for low flying threats approaching from any direction... likely incorporating radar in different frequency bands and also thermal and IR frequency systems too.

I would be surprised if the Su-35 didn't do that too with land and sea based assets.

This is interesting too... old S-300 missiles could be used against ground targets in the Ukraine if they wanted to... they use track via missile guidance and are therefore capable of very high precision against all target types including ground targets, for which they could be launched on a ballistic trajectory to maximise range... their 150kg HE frag warhead would be equivalent to a small aerial bomb and rather useful against most light targets... they probably have tens of thousands of them.

In fact I would say modifying them for carriage by air and they would make a rather efficient air launched weapon too... take out the solid rocket fuel and put retractable wings and make it a glide bomb type weapon that is much lighter than the original weapon... perhaps a weapon for heavy drones to use against distant point targets... in fact leaving the solid rocket fuel onboard and they could be very long range anti radiation missiles with very high speed and enormous range... with a surface launch of 200km being launched at 700km/h at 12km altitude they could probably reach targets 600km away, which would make them ideal for rapid response against enemy artillery radar and SAMs because one drone could cover a radius of 600km each... the problem would be that S-300 missiles are almost 2 tons each... so maybe using them from a modified transport plane or something.

https://iz.ru/1395601/2022-09-15/rossiiskie-zenitchiki-s-pomoshchiu-s-300-otbili-ataku-ukrainskikh-voennykh

The Russian military shot down a rocket fired by Ukrainian troops at a peaceful city. The speed of the rocket of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is 2 thousand m / s.

"It was detected at a range of 70 km, shelled at 50 km," said the commander of the division with the call sign "Lightning".

Atmosphere wrote:What is unique about the Yenisei radar station⁠⁠

During an inspection of the enterprises of the Almaz-Antey concern, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu asked a question about the radar, which has an antenna array layout that is uncharacteristic of the 96L6 all-altitude detectors. For the average observer, the hardware design of this radar does not have any special features. However, we are talking about a unique development of the concern.

This is the 96L6-TsP radar complex from the S-350 air defense system for processing ballistic targets, capable of interfacing with the S-400 air defense system through the Polyana-D4M1 automated system. Unlike other multifunctional radars, including the program review radar “Ginger” (part of the S-300V4 systems), the 96L6-TsP radar is represented by two separate canvases of active phased arrays - receiving and emitting based on gallium arsenide microwave transistors and attenuators.

Such a modular arrangement provides a much smaller error and greater accuracy (in range and azimuth-angle displacement) of tracking small-sized ballistic targets against the background of active noise and barrage electronic interference emanating from electronic warfare systems located on ballistic objects. Also, three more passive remote posts 96L6-VP are associated with this radar module. They allow, in triangulation mode, to determine the coordinates of radio-emitting and radio-contrast air targets, further increasing the accuracy of target designation for 9M96DM anti-aircraft missiles.

The 96L6-VP passive modules, synchronized with the 96L6-TsP antenna post, have another important technical feature - placement on “elbow-shaped” truss towers that elevate six-sided interferometric electronic intelligence modules (with viewing sectors of 60 degrees for each) to a height of 15 - 20 m . This provides the S-350 or S-400 anti-aircraft missile batteries with the possibility of covert combat duty (without turning on the active modes of the central radar post 96L6-TsP, as well as the multifunctional radar 50N6A) in the forest landscape. At the same time, three 96L6-VP passive modules distributed on the ground will provide virtually error-free direction finding and accurate determination of the coordinates of operating radar altimeters of stealth cruise missiles (including SCALP-EG), as well as airborne radars and electronic warfare systems of enemy tactical aviation within the radio horizon.

Then, according to the target designation of posts 96L6-VP, anti-aircraft guided missiles of such types as 9M96DM (from the S-350 Vityaz and S-400 air defense systems), 40N6 of the S-400 complexes, and possibly 9M317MA from the ammunition of the military Buk- M3A".

Also, during a visit to the production facilities of the Almaz-Antey East Kazakhstan region, Sergei Shoigu could see the promising multifunctional Yenisei radar complex based on a noise-resistant active phased array antenna . This complex was initially adapted in software and hardware for integration into mixed anti-aircraft missile regiments and brigades based on the S-400, S-350 Vityaz air defense missile systems, as well as the promising S-500 Triumfator long-range anti-aircraft missile/anti-missile systems . The radar can be used together with the already known 96L6 all-altitude detectors, as well as the 48YA6-K1 Podlet-K1 low-altitude detectors. Nevertheless, this product has a number of tactical and technical advantages in comparison with the VVO 96L6.

First of all, it is the highest energy potential . Being a deeply improved structural hybrid of the RLM-S radars (centimeter X-band modules from the multi-element 55Zh6M radar "Sky-M"), as well as 96L6, the Yenisei radar is represented by a multi-element AFAR based on more than 2500 - 3000 powerful low-noise microwave transistors . Their heat-resistant LTCC ceramic substrate allows operation at 1.25 to 1.35 times higher energy levels.

As a result, the detection range of targets with an effective reflective surface is 5 square meters. m at altitudes of 15 - 20 thousand m can reach 550 - 600 km; ballistic targets with an image intensifier of 0.05 sq. m are detected at a distance of up to 200 km. Ultra-small targets with an effective reflective surface of 0.01 square meters. m are detected at a distance of about 150 km, which exceeds the performance of the standard 96L6 all-altitude detector by approximately 2 times.

The most important technical advantage of the Yenisei radar is the ability to track high-speed exo-atmospheric objects with speeds of up to 4800 m/s (with the prospect of increasing to 7000 m/s) at altitudes of 100 - 120 km , which opens up the possibility for the S-400 and S- systems 500 has a huge modernization potential in terms of the development and integration of new anti-aircraft interceptor missiles into ammunition. They gain the ability to intercept ballistic missile warheads beyond the Karman line (above 100 km).

Do you have a source, or this is some blog post from a user using a computer with vodka in hand? the Nebo-M radar has a nigher performance than the target tracking claims of the newer Yenisei radar which doesn't sound right to me. also it intercepts ICBM targets at speeds of 7km/s why is it given the same speed limit of the S-400 tracking speeds? I don't even think they want to disclose information on the Yenisei radar if they cant even disclose what new avionics the Su-57 will receive in 2025.

Let me counter your question with another question:

How do you know it didn't engage? What type of drone was it? Was it a large drone or a small RC drone?

It's easy to assume things but if you are only getting part of the info, you come to your own conclusion.

If it was such a failure on russias end, how come the radar still intact and obviously working?

If it was such a failure on russias end, how come the radar still intact and obviously working?

More importantly if it is a systemic failure, where are the hundreds of other videos of superior western SEAD... in fact they call them DEAD (no longer suppression of enemy air defence systems, they consider it destruction of enemy air defences... they are so amazing they expect to wipe out Russian IADS in the first few days of the conflict as their air power run rampant slaughtering Russian forces).

They must have enormous volumes of video showing system after system being wiped out by superior western drones and long range attack weapons.

The most important fact of course is that weapons always work, so nothing can possibly be 100% effective because it is paper rock scissors because no matter what you have the enemy will have a counter to that to make it all useless.

So you relied on a telegram post regarding it?