Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Share
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Vladimir79 on Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:19 pm

    nemrod wrote:Around one year ago the stat of the art's nato airforce undetook exercises in order to evaluate Sam 10.
    Sam 10 belonged to Slovakia against other nato's airfleets. In order I think to prepare a syria -and next Iran-'s attack -but canceled now-. Sam 10 underwent several nato jammers, aerial attacks
    The result of this exercise, demonstrated how hard it is Sa-10. Without huge losses -as there was during Vietnam's war, and Korea's war- it is nearly impossible to bypass the radar's Sa-10. With personnal highly trained, and very comptetent Sa-10 has great chances to inflict sever blows to nato's airforces.

    This was a blow to the israelis's propaganda that claimed they -supposed- bypassed the Sa-10 complex in a so-called exercises where they would successufly jammed S-300.

    http://www.kamov.net/general-aviation/trial-mace-xiii-exercise-in-slovakia/


    The only aircraft that flew unmolested was Rafale B. Spectra kept screwing the wave forms with false returns.


    _________________
    The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye.  -- Vasily Margelov

    Austin

    Posts : 6333
    Points : 6733
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Austin on Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:37 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:The only aircraft that flew unmolested was Rafale B. Spectra kept screwing the wave forms with false returns.

    Likely the Rafale Spectra uses some kind of DRFM based jammers that reads the waves and creates false returns and shadow objects in real time.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1389
    Points : 1390
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:52 pm

    OK, now the only question is which version of the SA-10 (S-300) did the Slovaks have?? scratch
    avatar
    gaurav

    Posts : 357
    Points : 353
    Join date : 2013-02-19
    Age : 37
    Location : Blr

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  gaurav on Sat Apr 13, 2013 5:33 pm

    OK, now the only question is which version of the SA-10 (S-300) did the Slovaks have??

    I think that version did not have electronic counter or electronic counter-counter measures.

    We do know that Almaz would not have given any top of the line product for export that too in close vicinity of so many rich countries "at that time" UK, France , Germany Swiss etc.(All part of NATO) .

    What kind of EW measures S-300 had at that time remains a question?

    There was a recent BLEEDING-EDGE air defense exercise in Kalingrad .
    The expanse of Exercise was from Kaliningrad to Murmansk..! Shocked

    The latest MIG-31BM(I mean 5-6 MIG 31 BM fighters) fresh (out of completing their trials) were pitted against jamming resistant S-300.(There was no S-400 ) taking part. Smile
    I guess SU27 were also in "SEAD" support of MIG 31.Really complex scenario here Cool

    These exercises were so classified that no results , scenarios are given in Media.
    Some link is here .. but not in -depth details

    S-300 exercise in 2013


    February 18 (RIA Novosti) - Modernized S-300 surface-to-air missiles will shoot down “enemy” fighters
    in an exercise in Russia’s Western Military District, the district's press service said on Monday.
    The joint tactical exercise involving aviation, antiaircraft and radiotechnical forces, encompasses
    an area from Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad to central Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod and from
    Murmansk in the north to Belgorod in the south, the Western Military District said.

    Well I think(not sure though) that all the HELL-HEAVEN combined Electronic counter measures of MIG-31 would not
    stand a chance against the "DRUG RESISTANT" S-300's. Razz


    I would like to conclude(although not for sure) the Slovakian S-300 were several generations behind the
    present day S-300.

    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  nemrod on Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:36 pm

    gaurav wrote:

    I think that version did not have electronic counter or electronic counter-counter measures.....
    I would like to conclude(although not for sure) the Slovakian S-300 were several generations behind the
    present day S-300.

    Turkish F-4E, French Mirage, Rafale, Germany's Learjet Dannemark' F-16' , DA-20 from Norway, E-3 sentry AWACS, were engaged in Mace.
    Whatever the version SA-10, I think Nato did this exercise enough realistic to fight the Syria's air defense SA-10/12.

    This exercise was done in order to check the Israelis claims. SA-10/12 could be neutralize, yes or no ?
    The Israel's purpose is to push USA and Nato in a war against Syria, and Iran. However US and european military staff were reluctants, if not skeptical about the israeli claims, if not blusters

    The conclusion was clear, SA-10/12 with a very well trained staff could easily inflict a sever blow to any agressor.
    By the statement Nato demonstrated that presently it would be a suicide if Nato undertake an attack against Syria.

    As I said since the beginning, if Russia gives the green light, Nato could easily overthrow Assad's regime. But Russia this time has changed, Mr Putin, is not Yestlsin neither Gorbi, furthermore there is another actor that enter in the global chessboard China.
    Indeed, 15 years ago Beijin was insignificant, this time Russia+China can easily stop US agression, either in Korea, in Iran, and obviously in Syria.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2187
    Points : 3077
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Apr 14, 2013 2:04 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:OK, now the only question is which version of the S-300 did the Slovaks have?? scratch

    S-300PMU-1... circa 2001


    _________________
    The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye.  -- Vasily Margelov
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1389
    Points : 1390
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sun Apr 14, 2013 3:00 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:OK, now the only question is which version of the S-300 did the Slovaks have?? scratch

    S-300PMU-1... circa 2001
    Really the PMU-1, i thought it would be the PMU.

    ___
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1973
    Points : 2138
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Cyberspec on Sat May 25, 2013 11:53 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:The only aircraft that flew unmolested was Rafale B. Spectra kept screwing the wave forms with false returns.

    I just noticed this thread so I'm replying a little late, but is there a link with more info on this exercise?

    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 581
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  SOC on Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:41 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:OK, now the only question is which version of the S-300 did the Slovaks have?? scratch

    S-300PMU-1... circa 2001

    S-300PMU, it's the export variant of the S-300PS.

    They were actually Czechoslovakian missiles, which went to Slovakia after the break-up.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  nemrod on Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:15 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:
    Vladimir79 wrote:The only aircraft that flew unmolested was Rafale B. Spectra kept screwing the wave forms with false returns.

    I just noticed this thread so I'm replying a little late, but is there a link with more info on this exercise?

    I did not find untill now, just what I wrote.


    Austin

    Posts : 6333
    Points : 6733
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    ΕCM vs S-300/400

    Post  Austin on Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:56 am

    As far as SAGG verus ARH debate goes all things being equal , ARH would allow more missile to be in air quckly once the radar gets activated and is good for targets that tries to stay low or goes low in blind zone of main radar.

    As far as DRFM goes I read recently French Rafale SPECTRA played havoc with the radar of old S-300P in an execise with a Warsaw pact country think it was crotia ?

    Djoka

    Posts : 13
    Points : 13
    Join date : 2013-01-21

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Djoka on Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:32 am

    Austin wrote:As far as SAGG verus ARH debate goes all things being equal , ARH would allow more missile to be in air quckly once the radar gets activated and is good for targets that tries to stay low or goes low in blind zone of main radar.

    As far as DRFM goes I read recently French Rafale SPECTRA played havoc with the radar of old S-300P in an execise with a Warsaw pact country think it was crotia ?
    Croatia was never a warsaw pact country,and it never recived an s-300 system.Its now a nato country.You probbabaly read some nato fan boy dreams,anyway isn't it a little strange to you,that everybody is asking Russia NOT to send even old versions of s-300 to Syria.I mean if what you read was true why is US and Israel panicking about possible s-300 shipments to Syria?
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Viktor on Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:57 am

    Austin wrote:As far as SAGG verus ARH debate goes all things being equal , ARH would allow more missile to be in air quckly once the radar gets activated and is good for targets that tries to stay low or goes low in blind zone of main radar.

    As far as DRFM goes I read recently French Rafale SPECTRA played havoc with the radar of old S-300P in an execise with a Warsaw pact country think it was crotia ?

    It was not Croatia (Croatia does not have functional S-300 and it never had). I think you where referring to Slovakia.

    Trial MACE XIII exercise in Slovakia

    Where one battery of S-300PMU (export variant of S-300PS which are being removed from Russian service (by 2015 all of them will be gone))

    where pitted against:

    - Turkish F-4E fitted with Elta EL/L-8222 electronic countermeasures pod
    - Mirage-2000D
    - Rafale
    - Danish F-16AM
    - Nato E-3A
    - French E-3F
    - Norway Falcon-20
    - Slovakian MIG-29AS
    - Learjet 35A D-CARL fitted with two Cassidian EW pods, again operating from Sliac

    Here is a pictures from the aircraft involved LINK

    So isnt that interesting? All this ECM against one battery of export variant of oldest S-300.

    And still it managed to do this.

    NATO concluded that the S-300PMU with a professionally trained crew is capable of effective operations in a complex ECM/ESM environment, with a high level of success.

    By the time exercise ended S-300 had fired all its missiles and only French Rafale managed to avoid destruction.

    Still here is a link how it was done in 1982 in Russia.

    LINK

    So it should not be of any surprise US decided to make stealth fighters because ECM where simply loosing its efficiency and with each new SAM more and more
    fighters needed to be involved in the operation to make it successful making whole operation more complex with many things that could go wrong. Remember that S-300 does not use AESA and still it managed to achieve unprecedented level of ECM resistance.

    Still when talking about export variant of oldest Russian S-300 version with crews not on the same educational level in comparison with Russian colleagues we
    are missing the main point and that is Russian way of designing AD network observed no where in the world that gives it unsurpassed flexibility and strength.

    SOC wrote:
    Austin wrote:Vityaz is most certainly PESA atleast on the pictures they showed , And the two planer antenna is I would suspect one for IFF and one for Height Finding.

    You usually don't need a separate height finder, those are typically reserved for EW functions to augment 2D surveillance radars (height being the missing D).  You'd find subarrays on a PESA like this for things like sidelobe reduction, IFF functions, precision missile tracking, missile uplinks, etc.

    Russian territorial PVO EW radar are all 3D but Army PVO uses mostly 2D+1 radar system because of mobility request and because of that physical restrictions but
    that all changes with NEBO-M which will go to territorial PVO and Army PVO and is full 3D radar.


    Djoka wrote:Croatia was never a warsaw pact country,and it never recived an s-300 system.Its now a nato country.You probbabaly read some nato fan boy dreams,anyway isn't it a little strange to you,that everybody is asking Russia NOT to send even old versions of s-300 to Syria.I mean if what you read was true why is US and Israel panicking about possible s-300 shipments to Syria?

    Croatia was supposed to have S-300 missile system and parts of it where delivered but not the most important thing - radar sets.
    Croatia paid 200 million $ to arms dealer who did not delivered the system in full - it only has missiles and trucks.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3222
    Points : 3308
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  medo on Mon Jul 01, 2013 8:05 pm

    As I know, Slovakia have older Soviet/WP time S-300 from the eighties and inherit them after Czechoslovakia break up.

    More interesting should be Greek experiences, because they have S-300PMU1 originally bought by Cyprus. Greek is interesting, because they have comparable Russian and western complexes as Tor-M1 and Crotale-NG and S-300PMU1 and Patriot PAC-2 / PAC-3. They could well compare their capabilities.

    About Vityaz, up to now we only see engagement radar, but not its search radar.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    French Rafale SPECTRA played havoc with the radar of old S-300P

    Post  TR1 on Tue Jul 02, 2013 1:34 am

    Good find on the USSR S-300 testing, thanks Victor.

    As a whole, even older S-300 worked against array of countermeasures. And this is without any sort of network like a better equipped operator possesses.
    Plus, we don't know the context of the Rafale success. Did it jam it every time? Was it "shot-down" ever?
    People try to paint things in best light, like Rafale "smashing" F-22. Well, it tied it in a few WVR encounters, and that's all we really know. Nothing magical.


    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  etaepsilonk on Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:42 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I have noticed the push to removing old S-300 systems. My guess is because they are already long compromised. Possibly in future Syria will get an export S-400 or S-300VM as an alternative.

    1.) Compromised? Actual exercises involving Slovakian S-300's (likely they've been taken apart and sorted with a fine-tooth comb) with NATO forces proven without a shadow of a doubt the S-300 family's extreme resistance to jamming and other forms of ECM, and the S-300's that were contracted to go to Syria were most likely better all around than Slovakian S-300's including jamming resistance.

    If I'm not wrong, Slovakian version was s-300ps.
    So, PMU2 should be two generations ahead of that, S-400- three.

    However, keep in mind that "resistance to jamming" is not a plain single value, but many factors, each affecting performance in a various ways.


    Last edited by etaepsilonk on Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:48 pm

    etaepsilonk wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I have noticed the push to removing old S-300 systems. My guess is because they are already long compromised. Possibly in future Syria will get an export S-400 or S-300VM as an alternative.

    1.) Compromised? Actual exercises involving Slovakian S-300's (likely they've been taken apart and sorted with a fine-tooth comb) with NATO forces proven without a shadow of a doubt the S-300 family's extreme resistance to jamming and other forms of ECM, and the S-300's that were contracted to go to Syria were most likely better all around than Slovakian S-300's including jamming resistance.

    If I'm not wrong, Slovakian version was s-300ps.
    So, PMU2 should be two generations ahead of that, S-400- three.

    However, keep in mind that "resistance to jamming" is not a plain single value.

    Exactly, and the version of S-300 that was under close NATO scrutiny and examination was proven to be extremely capable and resilient against NATO forces and their jamming tactics in NATO exercises, so despite getting to know the in's-and-out's of the system they were still helpless to stop it.

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    So, PMU2 should be two generations ahead of that, S-400- three.

    Post  etaepsilonk on Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:52 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    etaepsilonk wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I have noticed the push to removing old S-300 systems. My guess is because they are already long compromised. Possibly in future Syria will get an export S-400 or S-300VM as an alternative.

    1.) Compromised? Actual exercises involving Slovakian S-300's (likely they've been taken apart and sorted with a fine-tooth comb) with NATO forces proven without a shadow of a doubt the S-300 family's extreme resistance to jamming and other forms of ECM, and the S-300's that were contracted to go to Syria were most likely better all around than Slovakian S-300's including jamming resistance.

    If I'm not wrong, Slovakian version was s-300ps.
    So, PMU2 should be two generations ahead of that, S-400- three.

    However, keep in mind that "resistance to jamming" is not a plain single value.

    Exactly, and the version of S-300 that was under close NATO scrutiny and examination was proven to be extremely capable and resilient against NATO forces and their jamming tactics in NATO exercises, so despite getting to know the in's-and-out's of the system they were still helpless to stop it.  

    Under what conditions they were helpless? Smile
    Standoff mainlobe jamming should be very difficult to deal with, even with advanced radars.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Aircrafts ECMs: Radar jammers and deception capabilities

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 13, 2014 12:06 pm

    Standoff mainlobe jamming should be very difficult to deal with, even with advanced radars.

    For such an operation you would need enormous power... which means a very large aircraft... and the problem of fundamental physics... the closer you get your jammer to the source the more effective it becomes.

    trying to jam an S-300PMU1 from outside 150km will probably lack power to be effective... trying to do it from less than 150km will get you a missile up your ying yang....


    _________________
    “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

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  etaepsilonk on Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:44 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Standoff mainlobe jamming should be very difficult to deal with, even with advanced radars.

    For such an operation you would need enormous power... which means a very large aircraft... and the problem of fundamental physics... the closer you get your jammer to the source the more effective it becomes.

    trying to jam an S-300PMU1 from outside 150km will probably lack power to be effective... trying to do it from less than 150km will get you a missile up your ying yang....

    I'm not sure what you mean...

    As far as I know, it's the other way around, jammers become more effective with increased range, because radar signal becomes weaker.

    And, if you think about it, stealth coating also weakens the return signal, so stealth aircrafts, vehicles, ships are not only more difficult to detect, but they can use their ECM more effectively too.

    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Mike E on Wed Aug 13, 2014 5:51 pm

    etaepsilonk wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    Standoff mainlobe jamming should be very difficult to deal with, even with advanced radars.

    For such an operation you would need enormous power... which means a very large aircraft... and the problem of fundamental physics... the closer you get your jammer to the source the more effective it becomes.

    trying to jam an S-300PMU1 from outside 150km will probably lack power to be effective... trying to do it from less than 150km will get you a missile up your ying yang....

    I'm not sure what you mean...

    As far as I know, it's the other way around, jammers become more effective with increased range, because radar signal becomes weaker.

    And, if you think about it, stealth coating also weakens the return signal, so stealth aircrafts, vehicles, ships are not only more difficult to detect, but they can use their ECM more effectively too.

     - Don't forget that "jammers" act like radar systems themselves. So at longer range, the jamming signal should be weaker.

     - That makes no sense at all. RAM doesn't help ECM countermeasures in any way, all it does is absorb signals.

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  etaepsilonk on Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:00 pm

    Mike E wrote:
     - Don't forget that "jammers" act like radar systems themselves. So at longer range, the jamming signal should be weaker.

     - That makes no sense at all. RAM doesn't help ECM countermeasures in any way, all it does is absorb signals.

    Weaker radar return signal= easier to jam.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Mike E on Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:32 pm

    That's not what I'm saying... Jamming signals also weaken at long range, so it is an all around tradeoff. Also, in general, what makes an aircraft easy to jam is how advanced its radar system really is. With AESA now popping up in all sorts of jets, jamming just got that much harder...

    etaepsilonk

    Posts : 715
    Points : 697
    Join date : 2013-11-19

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  etaepsilonk on Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:47 pm

    Mike E wrote:That's not what I'm saying... Jamming signals also weaken at long range, so it is an all around tradeoff. Also, in general, what makes an aircraft easy to jam is how advanced its radar system really is. With AESA now popping up in all sorts of jets, jamming just got that much harder...

    What on earth are you talking about, what tradeoff?  Smile 
    Yes, jamming signals weaken over distance, but do you realize that at the same time radar signals must travel TWICE the distance?
    And that's not even taking into account RCS of illuminated objects, which never reflects energy waves 100 percent.



    You know what, maybe you should just (re)learn a thing or two about ECM in the first place.
    I'd suggest reading Tom Clacy's "Red storm rising". The chapter "Dance of the vampires" nicely provides a basic understanding on how jamming works. Good luck Smile
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Aug 13, 2014 8:06 pm

    etaepsilonk wrote:
    Mike E wrote:That's not what I'm saying... Jamming signals also weaken at long range, so it is an all around tradeoff. Also, in general, what makes an aircraft easy to jam is how advanced its radar system really is. With AESA now popping up in all sorts of jets, jamming just got that much harder...

    What on earth are you talking about, what tradeoff?  Smile 
    Yes, jamming signals weaken over distance, but do you realize that at the same time radar signals must travel TWICE the distance?
    And that's not even taking into account RCS of illuminated objects, which never reflects energy waves 100 percent.



    You know what, maybe you should just (re)learn a thing or two about ECM in the first place.
    I'd suggest reading Tom Clacy's "Red storm rising". The chapter "Dance of the vampires" nicely provides a basic understanding on how jamming works. Good luck Smile

    Learning something about reality by reading Tom Clancy's russophobic fantasies is like learning surgery by watching Scrubs.

    Sponsored content

    Re: ΕCMs against S-300 / S-400

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:41 am