Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues
The knowledge here is amazing. Next you will be saying that because of the rivet location it came down the left hand production lineKhepesh wrote:Based on the road wheels it is from factory 112 at Nizhny Novgorod and built in either 1944 or 45. The video of this is a bit clearer but it is still a little difficult to be 100%. Gun being fired externally by lanyard in case of breach explosion or failure of recoil system due to age of tank.
TheArmenian wrote:More flip-flop action:
TheArmenian wrote:Fire from Flip-flop
miketheterrible wrote:A lot of Yemen's missiles pass through Patriot systems. Those things have a poor record.
That is simply what, a modified S-75 missiles for ballistic use? Seems to work quite well in its roll.
I am also interested to know success stories of the Burkan 1 in use.
miketheterrible wrote:Ill define it as how many patriot failed to intercept. And no, it doesn't have a high success rate. Yemeni BM's still get through regardless whatever that is claimed.
Also, please, don't be retarded. Buk isn't meant to engage BM. S-300V's are.
GarryB wrote:Actually the current model BUK has a rather good performance against ballistic missiles... its accuracy and performance is rather improved over earlier models...
Personally I would rate even 1980s Soviet SAMs as a better defence against BMs than anything in the west... simply because missiles and systems at different levels have some capability against BMs... unlike the US systems where only the PAC-3 model of patriot has ATBM capability along of course with THAAD... but how many do they even deploy...
Does Patriot have any confirmed kills against enemy aircraft?
I know it got a couple of allied aircraft...
Militarov wrote:miketheterrible wrote:Ill define it as how many patriot failed to intercept. And no, it doesn't have a high success rate. Yemeni BM's still get through regardless whatever that is claimed.
Also, please, don't be retarded. Buk isn't meant to engage BM. S-300V's are.
Can you like stop calling people retarded when you know nothing about the matter? If you keep doing so i will block you.
Late derivates of Buk have good ABM capabilities aganist threatre BMs or tactical BMs, whichever term you prefer. Actually M3 outperforms S-300P in every aspect there is. However that is not the inteded role of the system, it can be used aganist such targets.
Also i see you once calling someone retarded again i will block you as i am not here to be bullied by highschool kids and wikipedia warriors, ty in advance.
Militarov wrote:GarryB wrote:Actually the current model BUK has a rather good performance against ballistic missiles... its accuracy and performance is rather improved over earlier models...
Personally I would rate even 1980s Soviet SAMs as a better defence against BMs than anything in the west... simply because missiles and systems at different levels have some capability against BMs... unlike the US systems where only the PAC-3 model of patriot has ATBM capability along of course with THAAD... but how many do they even deploy...
Does Patriot have any confirmed kills against enemy aircraft?
I know it got a couple of allied aircraft...
US never deployed it inside combat zone for the purpose or air defence actually, Israelis did (their fronts are tiny so...) and from what i am aware only manned aircraft kill was one Su-24. Its the only one being ever engaded too from what i am aware. They however did shoot down many UAVs with it though last decade.
Thing with Patriot is that it was forced into ABM role while not really being suitable for it, it was wrong from the start to expect from initial Patriot variants to cope all that well aganist tactical balistic missiles.
People however forget that often missiles are being "let go", as path indicates it wont hit anything. So many of those were claimed as "they failed to intercept", which was the case with the Saudis more than once. But success rate of such intercept is always and with every system not all that bright. Israelis claim slightly over 50% success rate of their Patriots aganist BM which in my eyes is good. If we take in count we were told realistic kill ratio for SA-6 with 2 missiles aganist incoming (this is important - incoming) high subsonic/low-supersonic aircraft is 0,5-0,6.
Late derivates of Buk have good ABM capabilities aganist threatre BMs or tactical BMs, whichever term you prefer. Actually M3 outperforms S-300P in every aspect there is. However that is not the inteded role of the system, it can be used aganist such targets.
US never deployed it inside combat zone for the purpose or air defence actually, Israelis did (their fronts are tiny so...) and from what i am aware only manned aircraft kill was one Su-24. Its the only one being ever engaded too from what i am aware. They however did shoot down many UAVs with it though last decade.
Thing with Patriot is that it was forced into ABM role while not really being suitable for it, it was wrong from the start to expect from initial Patriot variants to cope all that well aganist tactical balistic missiles.
I highly doubt such systems capabilities unless it is aimed entirely at short range BM's then maybe. S-300V is far more refined for that roll.
GarryB wrote:Just like western navies lack of CIWS because they underestimate the anti ship missile, their SAMs lack performance against ballistic threats too... like I said... only THAAD and PAC-3 Patriot were developed for use against BMs....
TheArmenian wrote:The smell of flipflop-powder
Home
FAQ
Register
Log in
JohninMK