Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Share
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1949
    Points : 2072
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:11 am

    sweetflowers365 wrote:Hi all,

    Do russian weapons have capability to destroy anti missile defense system ?

    Yes, easily.
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7264
    Points : 7564
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:30 am

    sweetflowers365 wrote:Hi all,

    Do russian weapons have capability to destroy anti missile defense system ?

    Most modern anti missile defense systems are based upon defeating usually missiles like Scuds or other IRBM's. Although, SM-3BII is supposed to be able to deal with shorter ICBM's theoretically. THAAD very similar. But, all of these systems are specific to the type of systems they are to be worked against, and in most tests, they already knew trajectory and where it was going to land, thus it was easier to shoot down. Also, there is a belief that the numbers are fabricated in terms of how effective they are. But that is up for debate.

    That being said, all such systems are usually a launcher platform, with radar systems to detect, track and guide missile to the target. These such systems are susceptible to anti radiation missiles, which usually fly lower, thus harder to detect and engage. So they would need to have secondary systems to protect such sites, but usually they don't or are maybe effective against some targets and not supersonic cruise missiles. There is a belief too that because Iskander flies at a quasi ballistic path, it is harder for such ABM systems to be able to engage it.

    So I would say yes. But that same thing can be said about any other country who has cruise missiles, and or smart munitions.

    sweetflowers365
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 3
    Points : 5
    Join date : 2014-07-30

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sweetflowers365 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:17 pm

    all these weapons can be made by Company , I am planning t build a system which can easily be build and destory tanks and aircraft, Like Tanks Have Iron shield, IF we can Fire Electricity on it with high voltage, will they kill the people inside tank with electricity current ?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16005
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:25 am

    The outside of the vehicle will act like a faraday cage which will protect those inside as long as they are not touching metal themselves... a bit like a person in a car being relatively safe from lightning.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10008
    Points : 10498
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:06 pm

    Missile defense deployment in Romania against European security — Russian Foreign Ministry

    US offial said that the interceptor missiles the USA is planning to deploy at the American airbase in Deveselu by the end of 2015 are among other things targeting potential threats from Russia.

    MOSCOW, December 17. /TASS/. Steps towards further militarisation of south-eastern Europe, including missile defense deployment in Romania, run counter to the interests of regional and European security and stability, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Wednesday.

    He commented on statements by Chairman of the US House Intelligence Committee Mike Rogers on the “great shield” in Deveselu, Romania.

    Rogers told Romanian Realitatea TV Channel that the interceptor missiles the USA is planning to deploy at the American airbase in Deveselu by the end of 2015 are among other things targeting potential threats from Russia.

    “Thus, the American legislator confirmed the validity of Moscow’s doubts that the ‘missile defense shield’ being created by the US is designed to be used for the purposes that Washington declared,” Lukashevich said.

    “The role assigned to Romania to service the regular American project is hardly as honourable as it is presented,” he said.

    “Bucharest’s involvement in another American project that was confirmed in the US Senate recent report on tortures in secret CIA prisons in other countries has put Romanian officials, who were forced to decline journalists’ questions, in a rather awkward position,” Lukashevich said.
    avatar
    Kyo
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 508
    Points : 557
    Join date : 2014-11-03
    Age : 68
    Location : Brasilia

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Kyo on Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:52 pm

    US missile defense system cannot intercept Russian strategic missiles: deputy PM

    “Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said

    MOSCOW, January 26. /TASS/. The American missile defense system is unable to counter Russia’s strategic missiles, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Monday.

    Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Rogozin said in a program on the Rossiya 1 TV channel.

    However, the deputy prime minister declined to specify any technical characteristics of Russia’s strategic missiles.
    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2845
    Points : 2976
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  kvs on Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:29 am

    Kyo wrote:US missile defense system cannot intercept Russian strategic missiles: deputy PM

    “Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said

    MOSCOW, January 26. /TASS/. The American missile defense system is unable to counter Russia’s strategic missiles, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Monday.

    Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Rogozin said in a program on the Rossiya 1 TV channel.

    However, the deputy prime minister declined to specify any technical characteristics of Russia’s strategic missiles.

    They have maneuverable warheads. There is no way to calculate their trajectory a priori and send the hypersonic interceptor.
    There are no hypersonic missile systems that can chase warheads. There are only warhead vs. warhead systems being deployed
    and designed.

    So Rogozin is not talking trash.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16005
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:11 am

    Interception is 4D maths.

    Very simply it is a question of getting your interceptor object to the 4D position of the target... the 4 dimensions are longitude, latitude, altitude, and time... if all four numbers are exactly the same for the interceptor and the incoming threat then you have a successful interception.

    With incoming ICBM warheads travelling at 6km/s however even a half a second early or late means a miss by 3km.

    the interceptor does not need to be faster than the incoming target but it does need to get to the interception point at the correct time... a 1 degree turn 10 seconds to interception will shift the interception point hundreds of kms with the interception system having a mere 10 seconds to detect the change in trajectory, recalculate the new interception point and redirect the interceptor to the new interception point and time... obviously you can see that a small turn and then another small turn in any direction will render an interceptor useless because after burning enormous amounts of energy and fuel to reach the initial interception point 10 seconds to impact it suddenly needs to be 10km to the left and you have 7 seconds to get there because the target that was 60km away when it started to turn is now 42km away and closing fast... even if you can turn your interceptor and reach the new interception point another turn of 2 degrees the other way will likely mean the interceptor has no chance of turning back and getting to the new interception point before the target has gone past it, which means it will have to over take the target to catch it... and it is unlikely to be moving fast enough, nor will it have any fuel left by now to reach the new interception point... so a new interceptor needs to be launched....


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3032
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:00 pm

    Pervius wrote:There is no reason for a nuclear war between US-Russia. If it came up for a vote today most Americans would elect Putin as US President.

    Both countries are facing huge population loss from Baby Boomer Generation which created nuclear arsenals....all dying off.

    If Russia and US can avert War both countries will finally see their economy come back after old people die off. We all just need to survive trying to provide for all the old people. Hence why Russia and US people are suffering in poverty. Too many old people to clothe/feed.

    1/3rd of US will be dead by 2020. Russia and US will have to join together to survive Chinese Century of domination. We both will be minority countries in the world soon.



    SORRY BUTH RUSSIAN POPULATION IS NOT DYING . IT'S A MYTH :
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/02/04/five-myths-about-russia/ study

    Russia's Baby Boom. Fertility Rate Far Higher Than in EU, Rising Quickly. : http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_opinion_society/2014/10/27/03-27-22pm/russias_baby_boom_fertility_rate_far_higher_eu_rising russia love


    Russia's Birth Rate Is Now Higher Than The United States' : http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/07/25/dying-russias-birth-rate-is-now-higher-than-the-united-states/ russia
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10008
    Points : 10498
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Tue Apr 07, 2015 10:02 pm

    Russia warned that it is ready to neutralize US anti-ballistic missile system
    Russian Aviaton » Tuesday April 7, 2015 16:09 MSK

    Russia is able to counter US anti-ballistic missile system, official representative of Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Alexander Lukashevich, said. Despite having such capabilities, Moscow would rather not use it, the representative added, RBC reports.

    «In order to keep the strategic balance, we have capabilities to counter US anti-ballistic missile system, but we are not going to use it unnecessarily,» the official said. «But just to let members of this system know: Russia has all the capabilities needed to neutralize such threats,» Lukashevich warned countries, which are going to place elements of US anti-ballistic missile system in their territory.

    Over the last few years Moscow has been protesting against deployment of US anti-ballistic missile systems in Europe close to the borders of Russian Federation. Russia also took countermeasures and placed missile early-warning systems in the most western region of the country – Kaliningrad Region.

    Last month Bloomberg reported with reference to some officials that USA might try to pressure Moscow (in light of Ukrainian crisis) by means of expanding its military presence in the Eastern Europe and Scandinavia: deploying air defense and anti-ballistic missile systems, military units of the army as well as surveillance units. In January NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced establishment of the alliance’s command centers in six countries: Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

    Last September after verbal confrontation between Russia and USA the countries started massive maneuvers. Russia held military exercise aimed at practicing the interaction between Topol missile systems and aviation, while NATO involved thousands of service members in massive maneuvers held in the Western part of Ukraine.
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3032
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Now can these SM intercept Russian irbms , mrbms & srbms ?

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 15, 2015 3:47 pm

    Does Russia posses any IRBM, SRBM and MRBM which they are planning to target Europe with . I think thats why europeans are going with aegis anti ball missile defence .

    If russia has to attack usa it will use icbms or slbms . So this SM class of missiles are basically to form a shield in europe .

    Now can these SM intercept Russian irbms , mrbms & srbms ?
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7264
    Points : 7564
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Apr 15, 2015 3:58 pm

    IRBM's like Iskander and Tochka U. Tochka's may be able to be intercepted as they are nothing advanced but Iskander is two systems really: a quasi ballistic missile and other ones are cruise missiles. The quasi ballistic missile flies at a different path than a typical BM and thus harder to track and engage. It also is manouverable and may posses decoys of some sort. The cruise missile would possible be used to strike abm systems.

    But Iskander is indeed in western Russia, Belarus and Kaliningrad.
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3032
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 15, 2015 4:16 pm

    Can I know what all cruise missiles can be used to neutralize ussa abm in europe both on land and water ( aegis bmd ) ?
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10008
    Points : 10498
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:23 pm

    NATO not going to cancel deployment of US missile defense system in Europe — Russian envoy
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3032
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:44 pm

    If they don't cancel it russia must pull out from INF Treaty . enough is enough .

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3345
    Points : 3465
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Apr 16, 2015 12:35 am

    max steel wrote:Can I know what all cruise missiles can be used to neutralize ussa abm in europe both on land and water ( aegis bmd ) ?

    Iskander cruise missile version is made for that.. also Kalibrs/Club missiles land attack version.
    This ones have up to 3500km range.. or 2600km depending the source. Enough to hit any military base in europe from Russia.  There are also nuclear cruise missiles with 5,000km range
    forgot the model..

    About US vs Russia defense..
    As far i have read ,based on their own simulation videos ,Sm-3 is not a missile interceptor.. but more like a space orbit mine..  that is transported by a missile carrier to the place where NATO expect the missile to pass.. when launched from Russia. Because is very limited its propulsion system.. is just a mine with very rigid mobility by boosters it cannot be used to chase anything.
    is a mine you place in front of a predicted trajectory of a passing missile in very high altitude exosphere space orbit. So Sm-3 will have problems to intercept a missile that do maneuvers
    and cannot be used in anything but gravity zero space.

    So the system of defense, SM-3. is only useful only against missiles with a linear trajectory.
    but if it change the course , when the mine is placed , it will fail since cannot chase. is not a missile.

    So we can say US navy is more advanced that Russia navy when it comes to high altitude ballistic missiles defense.Russia navy have nothing of that. All Russian defenses are in Land.
    S-400 no idea of its range but if it is true can do 180km altitude.. it could do the same and be used as a mid course interceptor.

    S-500 will apparently be an all altitude interceptor. So essentially will do it all in just one missile. Can intercept either Planes ,or ICBM. Americans in the other hand.. needs no less than 3 system of defenses or possibly 4 to cover the entire range of territory defend against air or space attacks.

    S-400's and others systems will do the job of space interception. So which is more advanced..
    thats impossible to know.. unless they tested..in real war conditions , But all the info i have seen suggest US is not really satisfied with their missile interceptors on land. while Russia it is.

    The next article will show you how complicate is interception of ICBMs..  Is not an easy thing
    at all.. and the best way to intercept them it seems to be before they are in their final trajectory.. ie. .mid course.. because in the final path ,they drop decoys and many other things ,
    that really complicates interception.. this is true for both , for Russia and US.

    http://www.crazedfanboy.com/roth/missiledefense.html

    So to play safe.. Russia will need to deploy missiles capable of Mid course interception ,that is real missiles.. (not space mines like SM-3) at borders of Russia. to counter any nuclear attack before it enters in Russia space . Because im afraid the interception of nuclear missiles in the final stage is next to impossible from land..  This is why i think Russia should really push
    for militarization of Space.. why Russia needs to deploy satellite interceptors or a space station
    with anti ICBM defenses.. or perhaps laser defenses. .that will truly take things in security to a new level.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3345
    Points : 3465
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:11 am

    GarryB wrote:Interception is 4D maths.

    Is even more complex..

    Is more like Physics and Differential equations.. with 8-10 unknown variables.. or
    "10D maths" if you like.. Gravity ,Acceleration,speed ,Atmospheric pressure ,Position initial ,
    Position at expected interception ,Mass, Time ,altitude ,range ,etc etc..  then you need to do this for the interceptor and also for the missile.  Then you will end with a very long differential
    equation ..   With computers it can be done fast .. but any unexpected thing can screw the whole thing. Like bad weather , rain ,snow. Why is never perfect any system of defense.. and the rating is never 100% .  Decoys also makes things more complex.. is indeed a real science how to design Ballistic defenses system. According to Russia.. US spend like 15 years of trial and error their THAAD until it had an acceptable performance. But this was of course testing it
    against their own technology.. under ideal conditions. like 3-4 warheads.. and knowing when the attack will happen ,last i read.

    A nuclear warhead can help ,but it can be a problem if you have a continuous attack.
    could end blinding your own radars ,your own defenses.  Ideally Russia should have Space
    Station like the ISS ,but completely made by Russia , and covering the entire Russia federation territory and monitoring any launch of anything. armed with interceptors. for early course intercept..and mid course intercept. that will really takes things to a new level.

    Firebird
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 932
    Points : 964
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Firebird on Thu Apr 16, 2015 10:45 am

    I think Russia has superior tech in nuclear terms - both deployment and S-500 etc.
    It also has aspects like underground bases to a higher level than the US.

    The problem Russia has is that NATO is at its borders. Europe, Mexico, Canada etc can be used as buffers for Uncle Sham. They can attempt to shoot down Russian missiles as they leave Russian borders (ie before they have split into MIRVS etc). America can also attempt saturation attacks via subs, planes, cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles near Russian borders.

    Russia can hope to use Cuba, Venezuela, its Far East, the N Pole route. But its having to send its missiles greater distances. And it has to send up a smaller number of carrier missiles ie stage 1 which only split up just before reaching America.

    Look how close Moscow, St P and much of Russia is to NATO. Look how far America is from Russia.
    THIS is why America thinks it can shit stir in Europe.

    Historically the balance of power has been acceptable, because long range ie ICBM missiles were impossible for the US(or Russia) to shoot down. But with ABM advances, I wonder what will happen.

    And I dont believe for a millisecond that America doesnt have loads of nukes in states bordering Russia.

    Clearly lasers, space based ABMs, bases on Russian borders are clear threats. America is also toadeying up to Cuba, and causing shit in Venezuela and other pro Russia states. Not to mention orthodox/Russian places such as Romania and the Eastern former Ukraine.

    Russia needs to alter the balance back in its favour geographically. Because superior tech can only get you so far.

    It should place "non nuclear" bases (haha) in Cuba, Venezueala and other Central Am/Carribean places. It should pressure Cz, Pol and Romania against hosting bases esp ABMs there. Perhaps space based interceptors are needed too. I would let Lvov separate from the Ukraine but keep Russian bases on its territory.

    I think Russia sat back a little with the Ukraine. It cannot afford to sit back with nuclear geopolitics.
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3032
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Thu Apr 16, 2015 11:31 am

    US cant keep its nuclear weapons in europe as it violates npt . But still they have  2 ,000 ,000,000 $ bombers in Germany . You cant militarize space as it violates anoyhrr treaty . US is signatory to both of them and till now they itted to it . Laser based weapons currently are limited . Nato basing missile shield is a problem because usa is saving its ass by sabotaging europeans .

    As I said Russia must pull out from INF treaty the moment usa places its shield .

    What about SM-6 ? Is it also similar to SM-3 ? Btw do all ballistic missiles have predicted trajectory ?

    par far
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1239
    Points : 1390
    Join date : 2014-06-26

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  par far on Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:09 pm

    Firebird wrote:I think Russia has superior tech in nuclear terms - both deployment and S-500 etc.
    It also has aspects like underground bases to a higher level than the US.

    The problem Russia has is that NATO is at its borders. Europe, Mexico, Canada etc can be used as buffers for Uncle Sham. They can attempt to shoot down Russian missiles as they leave Russian borders (ie before they have split into MIRVS etc). America can also attempt saturation attacks via subs, planes, cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles near Russian borders.

    Russia can hope to use Cuba, Venezuela, its Far East, the N Pole route. But its having to send its missiles greater distances. And it has to send up a smaller number of carrier missiles ie stage 1 which only split up just before reaching America.

    Look how close Moscow, St P and much of Russia is to NATO. Look how far America is from Russia.
    THIS is why America thinks it can shit stir in Europe.

    Historically the balance of power has been acceptable, because long range ie ICBM missiles were impossible for the US(or Russia) to shoot down. But with ABM advances, I wonder what will happen.

    And I dont believe for a millisecond that America doesnt have loads of nukes in states bordering Russia.

    Clearly lasers, space based ABMs, bases on Russian borders are clear threats. America is also toadeying up to Cuba, and causing shit in Venezuela and other pro Russia states. Not to mention orthodox/Russian places such as Romania and the Eastern former Ukraine.

    Russia needs to alter the balance back in its favour geographically. Because superior tech can only get you so far.

    It should place "non nuclear" bases (haha) in Cuba, Venezueala and other Central Am/Carribean places. It should pressure Cz, Pol and Romania against hosting bases esp ABMs there. Perhaps space based interceptors are needed too. I would let Lvov separate from the Ukraine but keep Russian bases on its territory.

    I think Russia sat back a little with the Ukraine. It cannot afford to sit back with nuclear geopolitics.


    Very well said, Russia has to be ready to respond if necessary.
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7264
    Points : 7564
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:39 pm

    max steel wrote:US cant keep its nuclear weapons in europe as it violates npt . But still they have  2 ,000 ,000,000 $ bombers in Germany . You cant militarize space as it violates anoyhrr treaty . US is signatory to both of them and till now they itted to it . Laser based weapons currently are limited . Nato basing missile shield is a problem because usa is saving its ass by sabotaging europeans .

    As I said Russia must pull out from INF treaty the moment usa places its shield .

    What about SM-6 ? Is it also similar to SM-3 ? Btw do all ballistic missiles have predicted trajectory ?

    Most do, but the ballistic flight path these days can change with manouverable missiles and warheads. As well, some have the the ability to fly a somewhat ballistic path like Iskander, making it very hard to engage. Decoys and what not make them also nearly impossible to take down.

    It is well thought that in turn to a nuclear exchange, Russia would launch their old and outdated missiles to saturate the defense systems, then launch the real stuff.

    Also, as Austin pointed out, the success rate is poor on these abm systems and are not geared to combat other types of missiles like cruise missiles.
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5673
    Points : 6324
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Now can these SM intercept Russian irbms , mrbms & srbms ?

    Post  Viktor on Thu Apr 16, 2015 9:30 pm

    It does not matter is SM-3 better or S-500 as long as S-500 does for what it was designed for and it was designed to shoot down any ICBM/SLBM and hypersonic cruise missiles

    flying up to 100km altitude at the speeds of Mach 20.

    Pancir-S1/TOR-M2 combo will eat every cruise missile on their path and thats what matters. S-400 will shoot E-3 and E-8 at 400km distance and thats what matters etc ...

    integration is important, new satellite targeting networks etc. Once up and running with Russian global promt strike up and running by 2021 under the guidance of Russian aerospace

    defense forces branch all illusions will be shattered.

    Remember also that Russian factories are chewing 1.5k cruise missiles per year Very Happy

    New train, mobile ICBM are being introduced as well as new bomber but also the most secretive branch of all - ASAT.

    US while ahead still has many years to spend developing things on which we are discussing right now as being done deal (and it isnt) and they have huuuge military to support at the

    times while money is slowly being dried out.


    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 10008
    Points : 10498
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:37 pm

    Dmitry Peskov: Russia will take measures if Ukraine deploys elements of foreign ballistic missile defense systems in its territory
    Russian Aviaton » Thursday June 25, 2015 14:01 MSK

    Russia will take measures aimed at assuring the national security if Ukraine deploys elements of US ballistic missile defense systems in its territory, TASS reports with reference to Russian President’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov.

    “If Ukraine wants to deploy elements of US ballistic missile defense systems in its territory, this will cause a negative reaction, because this move is posing a threat to the security of our country,” the Kremlin’s representative said, adding that he didn’t study the details of such statements made by Ukrainian representatives.

    “This will force Russia to take countermeasures in order to assure its national security,” he noted. At that Peskov noted that these speculations are of eventual nature.

    Earlier the Secretary of National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDCU), Alexander Turchinov, said that he leaves open the possibility of holding consultations related to installation of components of ballistic missile defense systems in the country’s territory in order “to protect the country from Russia nuclear threat”.

    “We are reconstructing our nuclear shield without violating international agreements; its primary objective is to protect the country from Russia nuclear threat,” he said.

    Once again Turchinov accused Russia of deploying nuclear missiles in Crimea. He believes that in this situation “joint efforts of all the leading countries are required”. “This should be a combination of economic, political and military actions. In particular, we need to strengthen the common system, designed for protecting against nuclear threats, and deploy additional elements of ballistic missile defense systems,” the NSDCU secretary said.

    Moreover, Turchinov urged the western countries to block the way through Bosporus for Russian vessels and disconnect Russia from SWIFT system.


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 706
    Points : 880
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  ahmedfire on Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:46 pm

    Russia should destroy any future US ABM in Ukraine,there is no second choice .
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16005
    Points : 16662
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:33 pm

    If any part of a US ABM system appeared in the Ukraine I am pretty sure the first thing the Russians will do is pull out of the new START treaty and start increasing production of ICBM warheads to a level they feel would be uninterceptible... probably about 3,000.

    I suspect they might also tear up the INF treaty and start putting IRBMs on their European borders... they already have SAMs able to deal with this class of missile so if the US did the same it would not matter that much...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue May 23, 2017 9:08 am