Is Russia safe from F-22 and Β-2?

Syria has S300 but range is only 150-200 kms.

Victor please , try to participate in a serious way : Syria has NOT any S-300 of any type ,the latest SAM it will receive is BUK-M2E ,in observance to has signed a contract still not implemented (at now only some evaluations units of this system are present in Syria ).

victor7 wrote: Syria announced an intention to buy the S-300P in 1991 and now seems to possess the system. During the Syrian revolution, Russia supplied the Syrian military with an array of S-300 missiles and sent Russian technical advisors with the missiles to provide the technical support for Syrian military to operate the missiles


The above is from Wikipedia.

There is a lot of good information in Wikipedia, but also a serious amount of inaccuracies and outright lies/false information. There are no reliable sources confirming S-300 in Syria claims, if such a deal was to be made you should expect a lot of noice and protesting from Israel as happened with the S-300 deal to Iran and Yahkont sales to Syria.

In the case of Syria (for example), would these foxhounds if available be vulnerable to F22s and F35s.

First of all lets eliminate the F-35 it is simply not ready for service yet.

With the F-22 a foreign deployment of F-22s would not go unnoticed and whereever they are based becomes a target for Syrian Scuds and Scud modifications.

Basing F-22s would be considered an act of war by Syria as soon as the first explosions occur, so any tankers belonging to NATO would be on the hit list along with any airborne early warning aircraft.

Ground based radar would be used, and I think probably a press release stating that any attack on Syria would lead to a direct attack on Israel and western assets in the region (ie oil assets and US bases) would be targeted if Syria was attacked by an outside threat would be sufficient to prevent the US risking an attack.

If they do attack then launching Scuds at nuclear facilities in Israel and US oil interests in Jordan and Iraq would be priority one.

The Israeli airforce would kill the Syrian Air Force, though with Mig-31s they would certainly have plenty of losses themselves.

The biggest problem with the Arabs vs the west and the Arabs vs Israel is their division...

The point is that the USAF will not deploy the F-22s anywhere.

Mindstorm wrote:

Syria has S300 but range is only 150-200 kms.

Victor please , try to participate in a serious way : Syria has NOT any S-300 of any type ,the latest SAM it will receive is BUK-M2E ,in observance to has signed a contract still not implemented (at now only some evaluations units of this system are present in Syria ).

Syria has S300 or not does not matter, the question is how to defend a territory using a combination of S300 and Foxhounds. The attackers being F22s and F35s using stealth cruise missiles.

The whole concept of stealth aircraft was intended to defeat the combination of S-300 and Foxhound... both of which are late 1970s designs originally.

It is like saying "How do you use an M47 US tank to defeat a T-90AM"

In a conventional air attack both the Foxhound and S-300 can engage conventional enemy aircraft at extended ranges and cruise missiles at medium ranges.

Make them stealthy and the effective ranges shrink dramatically to the point where they are not much use.

But then you could say the value of having such systems drives up the cost of the attack.

The 120 cruise missiles used in Libya were not stealthy uber cruise missiles, and the aircraft used in the attack would all have been vulnerable to S-300s and Foxhounds.

The solution to evade S-300 most of the time is to fly very low... where MANPADS become a threat.

The point is that the cost of a regime change has skyrocketed when the opposition starts using air defence systems developed in the 1970s and 1980s by the Soviets.

Make them stealthy and the effective ranges shrink dramatically to the point where they are not much use.

This means Russia is vulnerable to salvos of stealthy cruise missile attacks in combination with F22s acting as some sort of jammer initially. May be IR type missiles might be able to locate these stealth cruisers and real late stage CIWS should fire like mad once JASSMs are optically visible.

Btw, does US have the capability to monitor a area say 10km x 10km in the real time via satellite. I know they can do that via spec ops planted in the area. But purely satellite ability is the question. Because that would further erode the advantages of mobile SAMs.

the question is how to defend a territory using a combination of S300 and Foxhounds.The attackers being F22s and F35s using stealth cruise missiles.

Victor i truly don't understand what is your fixation with F-22 and F-35 m which are obviously among the less worrying menaces for Russia in an eventual conflict against USA .

1) F-22 and F-35 DON'T carry in theirs internal weapon bay any type of long range (stealthy or not) cruise missiles , therefore if you want at any cost to employ those two aircraft (...i don't know why, but those seem to me the typical symptomes of the infamous F-16 . net disease) at least try to maintain integer their distinctive CONOPS and capabilities.
If instead you want to talk of a BY FAR much efficient and truly dangerous massive stand-off cruise missile attack ,obviously those two aircraft have literally zero strategic value and what become critically important is the efficiency of the opposing IAD's layers capable to credibly deal with that menace

2) The corollary to what up said is that the employment of stand-off cruise missiles and ballistic missiles attacks can render any critical not hardened asset, such as C4, radar stations and ....airfields of an enemy devoid of a very extensive ,dense and multilayered IAD ,COMPLETELY WORTHLESS and incapable even only to come into play in the conflict's operations (from that derive the very strong emphasis putted by Russians in the anti-ballistic and anti-cruise missile performances of almost any of its domestic SAM systems).
Destroy Elmendorf Air Base with almost any assets and aircraft here present (only to respond to your question on F-22s) become a truly trivial task employing real strategically useful capabilities between military great power .such as stand-off cruise missile attacks and even more ballistic missiles attacks.
Several groups of mobile Klub missile launchers form well within Russian Federation territory under the protection several layers and several hundreds of Kilometers of national IAD and Aior Forces, exit for a pair of minutes from : multi-exit redeploying tunnels , abandoned hangars, old trains stock, a group of inflatable launchers etc..etc...shoot theirs missiles and quickly disperse or return to the tunnels for reload and prepare to attack another target . From this instant the only element capable to save thiosd assets from complete annihilation is the quality and extension of the multilayered IAD at its defense ...if present.

URSS/Russia invest in this type of multilayered Strategic IAD since '50 years ; the results are : Mig-31 the aircraft at world by far more optimized for the task, various type of mobile ground based long range EW assets like SPN-2/4 ,SPN-30/40, 1L245 series and various type of GPS jammers (any of which ,like you well know, with a level of jamming power radiated 6-7 times greater than the greater airborne one !!), Long range SAM ,such as S-300 family, with 360 degree engagement capabilities and impressive anti-low-altitude cruise missiles and anti-ballistic missile capabilities, Medium range SAMs such as BUK-M1/2 with very good cruise missile interception features, and point defense systems , such as Tunguska-M1, Tor-M1/2, Pantsyr-s1 and Igla/Igla-s MANPADS all with impressive anti missile/PGM capabilities .
Now i am curious to know what is the "made-in-USA" corresponding of a Tor-M1 or a SPN-40 or a Tunhuska-M1 or Pantsyrs-S1 and the extension and density of the IAD ..if the employment of a similar word wouldn't appear ironic in this instance...at defense of its widely spread and insulated airbases and command centers , capable to save all those assets from similar decapitating attacks conducted safely from thousands of kilometers of distance under full protection of the enemy entire Air Force and National IAD

JASSM with range of 370Kms can be launched by F35.
JASSM-ER/XR can be launched from 500 to 900 to 1600 from the target even by a legacy bird.

The challenge for Russian AD and RuAF is the

"ability to detect, track and kill stealth aircrafts and missiles at longer ranges than 60km by S400 and that too in a hostile full power jamming assault on own assets."

F22 is a game changer and only lion in the jungle until Pakfa comes out in 2015.

Btw, thanks for the informative reply. So you think that Russian Federation will be able to "hold off" and "repel" a full scale USAF assault......successfully.

If someone asks me, I would say ICBMs are currently the main and probably the ONLY source of threat that Russia can pose to US/NATO and that is why Medvedev came on tv to warn about ABM plans in Poland and Czech. Once ABM is in full swing, then Russia's ability to counter strike will diminish by alot and that is why Russian high command is really worried. Strategic Rocket Forces (i.e. missiles research) has been probably the only area in Russian Defense that was not brutally neglected in the 1990s and hence Russian lead in air to air missiles, Topols etc.

This means Russia is vulnerable

THAT IS THE KEY.

Russia is vulnerable.

There is not sense in trying to be invulnerable because such a state does not exist.

Russia is vulnerable to stealth cruise missiles.

NATO and the US is vulnerable to stealth cruise missiles.

Russia is vulnerable to submarine launched ballistic missiles.

The US is vulnerable to submarine launched ballistic missiles.

It is the same with ICBMs.

It is the same with suicide bombers.

This means Russia is vulnerable to salvos of stealthy cruise missile attacks in combination with F22s acting as some sort of jammer initially.

If an F-22 wan'ts to give away its position by being a jammer then that is their mistake.

Btw, does US have the capability to monitor a area say 10km x 10km in the real time via satellite. I know they can do that via spec ops planted in the area. But purely satellite ability is the question. Because that would further erode the advantages of mobile SAMs.

The US has shown zero capability to hit scud launcher vehicles before they launch, their performance against mobile SAMs is worse.

Russia is too far north.

Satellites can't hover like you see in the movies, unless it is in a geostationary orbit very high up and near the equator, a satellite comes over every 90 minutes or so and can see one spot on the ground for between 2 and 6 minutes depending on its flight path in relation to the spot on the ground.

Most Russian SAMs are mobile to some degree, and some, like Pantsir-S1 can fire while moving... the thing is that the Russians would never just sit and take a US or NATO attack... odds are they would strike back... and NATO and the US's ability to stop a stealth cruise missile attack is worse than Russias.

The advantage of mobile SAMs over static SAMs is proven in Libya and any conflict before it.

MANPADS are effective because they are mobile and concealable.

They force the enemy to fly higher... that is their goal and a sign of their success.

It is normally the cost of the rest of the required system that prevents most non colonial/non imperialist countries from defending themselves against Team America World Lynch mob.

They force the enemy to fly higher... that is their goal and a sign of their success.

Just read that JDAMs and JSOWs can be launched by planes flying at 33-40,000 feet. I think that's what was happening in Libya and more so because both J's have gps/intertial/laser based targeting support and these can be updated while in flightalso.

Btw, thanks for the informative reply. So you think that Russian Federation will be able to "hold off" and "repel" a full scale USAF assault......successfully.

There wouldn't be an attack in the first place.

Very simply the F-22 is not for Russia, it is to pinch oil from Libya when Libya starts buying S-300s and Flankers.

If the F-22 ever crossed the Russian border in anger the result will very quickly become nuclear.

Putin himself has already said that current conventional military options are accurate enough to be comparable to nuclear attack in terms of decapitation, so any conventional attack by NATO on Russia would be considered a nuclear attack and be replied in kind.

Very simply the goal of any attack would be assumed to be aimed at taking out Russias nuclear deterrent capability before they could use it. The obvious response is to use it before you lose it.

F22 is a game changer and only lion in the jungle until Pakfa comes out in 2015.

Not even slightly. It is a very expensive conventional weapon that can only have one purpose against Russia and therefore can't be used... just like a Minuteman III.

Game changer is a stupid term, war is not a game. Most of the time it is murder for property or possessions. Recently it has been on moral grounds which is even worse.

Even if you consider war a game, what is a game changer? Does it suddenly become Soccer?

Will the F-22 suddenly allow the US to do what it wants? It does that anyway. Will it suddenly be able to invade countries and not lose all its fighters to enemy action? It is already doing that.

Will it make North Korea and Iran so scared they will work even harder on nuclear weapons to try to defend themselves? Probably.

Will it be invincible and make America never lose in combat ever again... I doubt it.

Will it help in Afghanistan and Iraq? Nope.

Will it cost the US taxpayers enormous amounts of money never go any where near Russia or China and currently be grounded because of problems with oxygen generation systems? Yup.

Once ABM is in full swing, then Russia's ability to counter strike will diminish by alot and that is why Russian high command is really worried.

The US ABM system is not really a threat as such, in its current form it is pathetic and can easily be fooled. The problem is that being sea based with potentially thousands of missiles, and being unregulated and unlimited that eventually it might evolve into something that the US might think is more effective than it is. This makes it dangerous because the US might get to the point where it thinks in combination of a first strike with stealth and SLBMs located close to Russia that much of Russias nuclear capability could be neutralised to the point where the ABM shield could stop the remainder.

The problem is not that it will stop the Russian retaliation, but it will make the conflict more likely in the first place.

And the new Russian ICBMs should have no trouble evading US ABM systems for several decades to come, though if plans for the US ABM systems around the world go forward I can see Russia withdrawing from the New Start and INF treaties and putting nukes into large scale production.

Regarding the lack of Russias ability to invade the US... just shows what poppycock all that cold war crap about the threat of the Soviet Union was all about... nothing.

Russia used to be an imperial power but since WWII the only imperial powers are the west.

so because both J's have gps/intertial/laser based targeting support and these can be updated while in flightalso.

To hit their targets they need to get lower though...

JASSM with range of 370Kms can be launched by F35.

JASSM-ER/XR can be launched from 500 to 900 to 1600 from the target even by a legacy bird.

The challenge for Russian AD and RuAF is the

"ability to detect, track and kill stealth aircrafts and missiles at longer ranges than 60km by S400 and that too in a hostile full power jamming assault on own assets."

F22 is a game changer and only lion in the jungle until Pakfa comes out in 2015.

Victor7 please , please , do you realise that not reading what other people write (or ,for better say ,i hope for you that you don't read...because if you read the problem would be a much more serios problem of comprehension) damage ,not reinforce your line of reasoning ?

That is NOT F16 . net, here repeating 100 or 1000 times ridiculous,low level mantras devoid of any empirical grounding and founded on the basis of odd ideas and comical misunderstanding conceived by confused or fanatical amateurs will only render your position less and less credible.

JASSM with range of 370Kms can be launched by F35.

JASSM CANNOT be carried in the internal weapon bay of F-35 (and even less a F-22)
Only to be more clear, a supersonic B1B with a much greater range is ,for this specific role (practically the only with some weight in a conlict between world level powers) ,immensely more efficient than F-35.

Like you can see any line of argument , at the end of the day, return on the unique element having some weight in a conflict between advanced opponents : stand off cruise missile attacks.

In this optic ,Victor7, you can easily realise that the problem exist obviously NOT for the side owning a monstrous extensive and lutilayered IAD, which, to the contrary ,create billions of immense problems and strategic bonds for the enemy, but on the side lacking a similar IAD , because the same assets necessary for carry out attacks against the enemy would be easily and very quickly destroyed by the enemy employing the same stamd-off offensive means in a progressively faster demotion's chained process of its offensive military capabilities ,clear ?

ability to detect, track and kill stealth aircrafts and missiles at longer ranges than 60km by S400

I have understood perfectly ....and unfortunately .... from what come from this odd figure of 60 km for S-400 and F-22 , you have two possibilities at this point:

1) Elaborate your model of representation of the tracking sequence, avoiding to fall in the traps of involved parametrical figures.....completely out of line
2) Read what other ,nore informed people have written and ,hopefully, realize the laughable misunderstandings that had originated those odd numberes.

You can see from future air defense plans that Russia ,after introduction of the latest OLS , EW assets and above all the latest generation SAM systems is so sure to having fully responded,from its root, to actual menaces ,don't even consider LO/VLO aerodynamics targets still as a threat element against which shape the requirements of its future air defense systems ,and instead work intensively and has redirected all it s R&D work ,already since several years, toward the neutralization of future offensive means ,such as low orbit hypersonic weapons and space based tracking, offensive and defensive means.

Syria has S300 and Iran only a domestic version of HQ-9.

Syria and Iran have S-200 (SAM-5) not S-300. I know Iran produce Chinese HQ-2 (SAM-2) and domestic improved HAWK as well as Crotale and Rapier.

The challenge for Russian AD and RuAF is the

"ability to detect, track and kill stealth aircrafts and missiles at longer ranges than 60km by S400 and that too in a hostile full power jamming assault on own assets."

F22 is a game changer and only lion in the jungle until Pakfa comes out in 2015.

[quote]

In 1999 war in FRY, Serbs have no problem to see stealth B-2 and F-117 with their old metric wave radars and Russia have a lot of new metric wave radars as Nebo-U, Nebo-SV, Nebo-SVU and Nebo-M as well as a lot of other passive detecting systems, so Russian air force and air defense will not have such problem to see F-22 and F-35 on long distances. When they are spotted, they could send Su-35 fighters, which will intercept them using IRST and L-band wing radar. Su-35 and F-22 will end fighting in dogfights, where Su-35 is no worse than F-22, because Su-35 could easily detect and overcome AMRAAMs launched from F-22 or F-35.

In 1999 war in FRY, Serbs have no problem to see stealth B-2 and F-117 with their old metric wave radars

Shot down 1 F-117 by flight path information and then flooding the area matrix with missiles............and that proved the ability to see stealth for the end of time.
This impracticality scares me and hope RuAF does not think like that. Best counter point is 'if so, the why did not FRY shoot down more Stealths' and why did not they develop technologies to export to others who are on the list of 'bad guys' for the US.

This brings me to another crucial point. Not only Russia has to develop ways to see, track and kill stealth at longer distances, it also has to develop more robust defenses for the next layers of the IAD. End of it, the most vulnerable items like Tanks, BMDs, Troop trucks, Artillery, mobile AAA, Mobile C2s etc. need to be protected in order to do their jobs well. With laser/INS/GPS guided bombing taking place from 40K feet, there is a limit to how much Tor/Buks can do to protect columns on the move. Pantsirs seem nice but they are expensive. If MANPADS can't kill 40K birds then there has to be tech to kill off the JDAM/JSOW/SMACM and other launched. I am talking about end stage CIWS and cheap and small enough to be installed on each tank, BMD and offer protection of 1 km radius. At what speed do JDAMs fall? I bet several Machs, so there has to be a way to kill or deflect them before they hit the intended target. Be it Laser/Small Missile/CIWS or whatever. With this in place the overwhelming advantage of USAF to 'bomb at will' will be mostly gone. F22s can take out S-200/300/400 SAMs and then Tor/Buk and even Pantsirs. But ability to deny their weapons reaching moving troops and machines will force their hands out of the game. However, in next 5 years, US will be fielding robotic warriors good enough to put a dogged fight and meeting full or partial ground objectives.

Developing the end stage defenses will be a boost for the Russian defense industries. Nations will have to put $100M to buy a couple of Su-35s but for the same amount they can have enough goodies to protect a small coloum of thousand troops and dozen tanks moving into a area and getting the job done.

When they are spotted, they could send Su-35 fighters, which will intercept them using IRST and L-band wing radar. Su-35 and F-22 will end fighting in dogfights, where Su-35 is no worse than F-22, because Su-35 could easily detect and overcome AMRAAMs launched from F-22 or F-35.

In 1995, Pavel Grachev the Russian Defense Minister confidently quipped regarding attack on Grozny "Oh, it will take only two small brigades of VDV troops to finish off the rebels in 3 days at most". What actually happened is known to everyone and how much did it cost Russian in 2 Chechen wars? I can say easily $10B and probably much more in direct military costs. Do not mention the troops and civilians killed, there is no dearth of troops and civilians in Russia to be used as cannon fodder. Also, how many towns and villages blown into rubbles.

The above comment quoted is very much on those lines as made by the corrupt former defense minister. So for now, a squadron of F22s can eat up, digest and spit the bones out of............any legacy air force and that includes airforces with Su-35s fielding 60 Km IRST capability. There is a rumor that Russian and Chinese pilots carry some gadgets with them to see and track stealth. But that is only a rumor, not a fact and can't count on rumors to save the country from aggressors.

NEW TECH TO LOCATE MOBILE SAMs LIKE S300s.

ausairpower.net/sargmti-intro.html

The most revolutionary change which the wide deployment of SAR/GMTI capable radars will bring is the contraction of the targeting cycle. Targets can be detected, located, identified, engaged and damage assessed in a matter of minutes. The targeting cycle is then contracted down to a look-shoot-kill-look cycle, all under arbitrary weather conditions and at standoff ranges, if suitable munitions are used.

victor7 wrote:In 1999 war in FRY, Serbs have no problem to see stealth B-2 and F-117 with their old metric wave radars
Shot down 1 F-117 by flight path information and then flooding the area matrix with missiles............and that proved the ability to see stealth for the end of time.
This impracticality scares me and hope RuAF does not think like that. Best counter point is 'if so, the why did not FRY shoot down more Stealths' and why did not they develop technologies to export to others who are on the list of 'bad guys' for the US.

Serbs needed to see, track and guide old S-75 at F-117 to shoot it down.

They where not shooting missiles blinded. They see F-117 coming, they could track it and they could shoot it. End of story.

victor7 wrote:F22s can take out S-200/300/400 SAMs and then Tor/Buk and even Pantsirs. But ability to deny their weapons reaching moving troops and machines will force their hands out of the game. However, in next 5 years, US will be fielding robotic warriors good enough to put a dogged fight and meeting full or partial ground objectives.

F-22 has rather small combat radius. From what bases would US launched F-22/35 on attack missions to Russia. Georgia/Litva/Latvia/Finland??? LOL
Do you thing its employment would go unnoticed or its airstrips go unharmed?

You talk about F-22/35 like stealth is an ultimate weapon that can not be detected or seen by any means until its too late and swarms of missiles are flying left and right and there is nothing you could do but surrender keys of the Kremlin. LOL

You are using digits about its stealth like its a word of God when saying 0.000001 etc. In reality we can never be sure until some war erupts where those weapons will be used. Same has being said in the past about F-117 until Serbs took it down with 30 year old technology. So what now. Now is F-22 that has undetectable stealth. LOL Well if it not for Serbs, US would still spam about undetectable F-117.

In reality stealth has its advantages. For certain frequency reduces detection/tracking range. For others it does NOT. Thats why Russia uses all sorts of different methods to deal with the threat.

But you have some way of thinking that I do not understand. Russian equivalent of you could say. What the idea of the "west" with all those ships when Russia has build antiship missiles that fly several times faster than the speed of sound, communicate to each other, have artificial intelligence, can manoeuvre when incoming have largest warheads of all, can be fired from ships, subs, planes and in conjunction with EW from space, land, sea and air see all whats going on everywhere ... and press on with the story.

We did not know how invisible F-117 was until it got shot down. US than realized it can be seen and shoot down and pull it to the graveyard of history only to pop up with the next undetectable undestroyable ... LOL

btw JDAM does not go anywhere near speed of the sound not to mention few of them. Its speed is about 100m/s witch is sitting duck for systems like Tor-M1 witch was designed from the first place to be able to knock down MACH 2+ type missile and guess why that. Look at HARMs speed.

victor7 wrote:NEW TECH TO LOCATE MOBILE SAMs LIKE S300s.

ausairpower.net/sargmti-intro.html

The most revolutionary change which the wide deployment of SAR/GMTI capable radars will bring is the contraction of the targeting cycle. Targets can be detected, located, identified, engaged and damage assessed in a matter of minutes. The targeting cycle is then contracted down to a look-shoot-kill-look cycle, all under arbitrary weather conditions and at standoff ranges, if suitable munitions are used.

LOL. And Russia has satellites that can see everything and pick up radar signals and triangular its position right after ballistic missile comes in.

It would be very dangerous to fly JSTARS near Russian borders. This type of assets is very useful once you have air supremacy to locate and find and bomb ground targets. You do not wan to have this type of equipment flying in the same area with S-300/MIG-31/Su-35BM/PAK-FA

Do not even want to discuss "1 Glory" kill of F-117 which was a result of a shot gotten more lucky than the megamillion lottery ticket.

You talk about F-22/35 like stealth is an ultimate weapon that can not be detected or seen by any means until its too late and swarms of missiles are flying left and right and there is nothing you could do but surrender keys of the Kremlin. LOL

First find me a way to detect, track and kill F22s from 200km or better 400km, then come and talk about how big chunk of USAF it can gobble up within half an hour. That S400 can track subsonic stealth cruise missile at 60kms is somewhat of a relief. It can always find a way to kill it or go silent and scooter away a couple of miles to safety.

What the idea of the "west" with all those ships when Russia has build antiship missiles that fly several times faster than the speed of sound, communicate to each other, have artificial intelligence, can manoeuvre when incoming have largest warheads of all, can be fired from ships, subs, planes and in conjunction with EW from space, land, sea and air see all whats going on everywhere ... and press on with the story.

UK is soon launching Sea Ceptor missile by 2015 that would be an answer to Moskits and Yakhonts. Also, Type 45 destroyer has L-Band SMART-L radar and others which can require a salvo of 8-12 ASMs before the boat is hit. The problem with Russian mindset is they develop something and then sit and enjoy it over several days of vodka and go to sleep for a whole week. The west builds something and after a very short break, goes onto further improving and devicing mode.

btw JDAM does not go anywhere near speed of the sound not to mention few of them. Its speed is about 100m/s witch is sitting duck for systems like Tor-M1 witch was designed from the first place to be able to knock down MACH 2+ type missile and guess why that. Look at HARMs speed.

thanks for the info on terminal velocity of JDAMs. This means even a small CIWS type gun can kill these at a distance that exploding bomb does no harm.

Look at the article above from ausairpower. Killing off the weapons launched from birds at 40K feet is becoming real real requirement. Otherwise, in half an hour a whole moving coloum of 500 soldiers and two dozen tanks will be reduced to rubble.

LOL. And Russia has satellites that can see everything and pick up radar signals and triangular its position right after ballistic missile comes in.

All SATs military and civilian, Aircraft Carriers, F22-B2-F35-Pakfa bases, Submarines, shipyards, and many other items will be immediately targeted within half an hour of hostility break out between Russia and NATO. As to how many or what percent would be successful is the question.

I need a weapon system that can kill/deflect the JDAM/JSOW SDBs type items at a safe distance. F15/F111/F16 etc. can bomb all day and night and return home all depleted and tired........while the troops coloumn moves on to........GET THE JOB DONE

Do not even want to discuss "1 Glory" kill of F-117 which was a result of a shot gotten more lucky than the megamillion lottery ticket.

Luck? No it was a resourceful and smart SAM crew. At the end of the day, an ancient SAM with no network support downed something that was supposed to have avoided it with ease. The implications on F-22/35 attacks on Russia are well worth the thought imo.

Shot down 1 F-117 by flight path information and then flooding the area matrix with missiles

I realize that the degree of "corruption" in your mind ,likely originated by years after years of pantagruelic idiocies read over and over on low level open media, has left very deep scares in your mind ,but please try to concentrate ,ok ?

The battery Commanded by Zoltan Dani , downed one F-117 , very heavily damaged another F-117 deviating from its route to bomb the downed F-117 wreckages (it managed with a great amount of luck to complete an emergence landing), downed an F-16C and damaged beyond any repair an F/A-18 and an A-10 and forced several times the strike groups in its momentary area of operation to abort theirs mission ; all of that employing a single battery of the export version of ....SA-3 and as you well know an SA-3 can be shoot only on vs aircraft on which you have obtained a radar lock for fire solution.
Zoltan Dani, a passionate of Soviet Air Defense systems and tactic who loved to collect open and some slightly restricted publications on those subject, simply make some (almost home made !!) modifications to its SA-3 battery to render it more near to the original Soviet domestic version and employed some of the tactics the Soviet operators of its equipment had used with deadly efficiency against Israel in years of Attrition War ; so Z. Dani operated to render its battery almost a semi-mobile one moving frequently and at random pace for great distances for the whole NATO Air Campaign and employing (always in observance to '60 years Soviet Air defense doctrine) false SAM sites and Sokolov-type improvised radar decoys. Its performace is the living proof of the heavy weight of training an proficiency of the military operator on the final results achieved even when equipped with a strongly downgraded version of a system 30 year old.
The result of Zoltan Dani's efforts was that ,in spite that more than an hundreds HARM was shoot against its battery and numerous attempts to carry out SEAD-DEAD missions against its battery (the suppression of this "damned SA-3 battery coming from the hell itself" became a primary task for NATO's SEAD/DEAD assets) was attempted it don't suffered even only a single casualty or material loss in the entiure conflict !!!
Voctor7 the reality is much more simple : NATO attack in big coalitions using numerical and technical overwhelming forces and assets (naturally with linked costs and times of deployment totally incompatible with a large scale conflict against a world level opponent..) and often after some years of crippling embargo only immensely inferior third world opponents equiped with downgraded export version of weapons 15-30 years older than theirs ,therefore also their tactics and doctrine is shaped against this type of very unbalanced conflicts.
If you want i can explain what was the implications of this factor in the solutions adopted by Zoltan Dani.

why did not they develop technologies to export to others who are on the list of 'bad guys' for the US.

For the same exact reason for which Soviet avoided attentively to sell to Middle East clients likely to confront western opponents T-72s with a performance level matching even only that of the first version of T-72A , or up to '90 years MiG-29s with level even only matching that of first Soviet version or why URSS has never employed in any past war against inferior opponent any type of theirs most crucial or very advanced weaponry

If you search the nation of Image and Hollywood you must see on the other side ...on this side there was the country where image had zero value (rather it can be used to deceive the enemy... Maskirovko anyone? ) and only maximum overall efficiency had importance :
You can easily realise that those same NATO's Gulf War veteran that had confronted in GW1 Iraqi T-72, in an hypothetical conventional conflict in Europe against ,only to the appearance, identical Soviet T-72 would have discovered ,with horror, that them was practically invulnerable to all the anti-tank weapons present in NATO arsenal at the time directly on the battlefield ,only few second before being systematically massacrated . That was in an example of efficiency in typical Soviet mindset.

victor7 wrote:Do not even want to discuss "1 Glory" kill of F-117 which was a result of a shot gotten more lucky than the megamillion lottery ticket.

Its a story about undetectable aircraft being detectable, tracked and shoot down and eventually pulled out of service. Yes after one being shot but after its pieces being exported to Russia and China.

victor7 wrote:First find me a way to detect, track and kill F22s from 200km or better 400km, then come and talk about how big chunk of USAF it can gobble up within half an hour. That S400 can track subsonic stealth cruise missile at 60kms is somewhat of a relief. It can always find a way to kill it or go silent and scooter away a couple of miles to safety

You are being illogical. Let me put this question vise versa.
Can you prove me S-400 can not track F-22 at 400km or some other radar associated with S-400?

btw .. and S-300 and S-400 can track hypersonic targets like cruise missiles too.

victor7 wrote:UK is soon launching Sea Ceptor missile by 2015 that would be an answer to Moskits and Yakhonts. Also, Type 45 destroyer has L-Band SMART-L radar and others which can require a salvo of 8-12 ASMs before the boat is hit. The problem with Russian mindset is they develop something and then sit and enjoy it over several days of vodka and go to sleep for a whole week. The west builds something and after a very short break, goes onto further improving and devicing mode.

You completely missed the point of my saying. The point is that each side be it Russia, US, China has some card that can play batter than others but that still does not give them confidence going around the world and attacking major players. For a reason. So while you are saying F-22 can do wonders for US, any Russian can say Granit missile can make wonders for Russia.

btw ... few things to remember.

1. West in general is still no where near Russian air-defense systems and has still much catching up to do. Russians are not sitting around drinking votka as you said but building systems that are top tier. Do a little research and compare the systems and you will get the idea.
2. Sea Captor is the last missile you will want to defend with anything when facing Granit wolf pack. It just shows how little you know about Russian systems.

victor7 wrote:
thanks for the info on terminal velocity of JDAMs. This means even a small CIWS type gun can kill these at a distance that exploding bomb does no harm.

Yup. Sweden/US/Germany produces such systems for airfield/base protection but still they dont have anything on Tor-M1 level.

victor7 wrote:Look at the article above from ausairpower. Killing off the weapons launched from birds at 40K feet is becoming real real requirement. Otherwise, in half an hour a whole moving coloum of 500 soldiers and two dozen tanks will be reduced to rubble

You can destroy missiles or platforms and for each of them you have option using from small MANPAD to big one like S-300.

No big deal and dont see why this concerns you so much. Its not like that kind of threat did not exist from 40 years ago.

You can destroy missiles or platforms and for each of them you have option using from small MANPAD to big one like S-300.

The stage where legacy planes are hitting the small brigade size troop formations is after when major SAMs and air forces have been taken out. MANPADs can help only against 15K high frequent fliers.

Speaking from the perspective of nations like Iraq, Serbia and others.......In last 40 years, US via USAF has time and again proven its ability to gain total air supremacy and win 90% of the war from air alone. So either develop a capability to deny this total supremacy or develop a way to kill off the bombs and missiles that this supremacy launches. I believe later is more practical and cheaper method. The utility of MANPADs was a major lesson from the Serbian war. While manpad issue has been discussed in this thread in detail, but it would be awesome to have these hitting the 30K ceiling. Even if it means missile goes to 15K and then some sort of kinetic HE bullet is released that goes another 15K and explodes at or near something that is flying.

victor7 wrote:

I think you missed all points being put up in front of you.

Only toughest can go on. Im out.