Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues
Austin wrote:One question for SOC , During 1991 Gulf War there was not much success in finding Scud TEL , I think if i recollect not a single Scud TEL was destroyed on ground.
But what about Enduring Freedom , Iraq did launch Al-Samoud , Abdali BM which were intercepted by PAC-3 , but did USAF or Special ops managed to destroy any TEL of these BM on ground ?
Garry I would suggest lets not get into this US bashing game and stick to technical discussion , MIC all over the world are just like that US is no exception .....all MIC will exaggerate the threat and would then propose or built a system that would exaggerate its own capabilities.
The 48N6E2 missile of S-300PMU2 series is capable of intercepting target corresponding to a maximum speed of 7500 km/h or 2083 m/sec , that corresponds to a missile with a range of ~ 500 km.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-S-300PMU2-Favorit.html
Patriot PAC-3 can do much better at 3 km/sec
A more close rival of PAC-3 is the S-300V series smaller Gladiator missile that can intercept target travelling at 3 km/sec
US has more money then rest of the world combined so the MIC there will have more incentive ,
But what about Enduring Freedom , Iraq did launch Al-Samoud , Abdali BM which were intercepted by PAC-3 , but did USAF or Special ops managed to destroy any TEL of these BM on ground ?
GarryB wrote:MICs all around the world do want to do the same thing, but I think you will find that the Russian MIC has nothing like the clout in Russia that the US MIC has in the US
If we need to stick to the topic then that is S-400 and S-500 news... so I agree my comments about the PAC-3 are off topic... but whose fault is that?
http://www.roe.ru/cataloque/air_def/air_def_10-13.pdf
is S-300PMU1 and as you can see in the spec section the max target speed is 2.8km/s. The next entry in the catalogue is Favorite, or S-300PMU2, which also can intercept targets travelling at 2.8km/s.
No. The US spends more money on weapons than the rest of the world combined so their MIC is very well funded... but they just want more... like any profit motivated company.
The propaganda BS surrounding the performance of PAC-2 in Desert Storm pretty much made the US military look like fools afterwards when the facts came out. I would think that if the PAC-3 actually did a good job they would have problems convincing everyone of that.
I am sure even if it performed to a mediocre level it will be the best SAM in the world... on Discovery Channel.
All MIC have clout , during SU days when Defence Spending were high MIC has tremendous clout ...... similar for china now when spending is high their MIC too have great clout over CPC.
Sure , but we are comparing performance of rival system and not really trying to blame MIC of US , Europe or Russia.
In that case based just on raw target speed performance , S-300PMU2 can intercept MRBM with a range of ~ 700 km
Ofcourse they spend more is because they have more , their GDP is much greater then all world combined , though now most is on debt.
China has 2nd largest def spending and you see similar problem there as well.
If you read the link i gave above , most of the intercept were carried by PAC-2 GEM update missile , only two were intercepted by PAC-3.
Total 9 out of 12 BM were sucessfully intercepted , operating in a complex war environment ..... due credit to Patriot for being a pioneer in this game ...there may be others in the game including many US system but none has so far been combat proven ......Patriot improvement was always been by the word Trial By Fire.
I think PAC-2 GEM update gives it a capability broadly comparable to S-300PMU1 and 2 , it uses directional charge warhead and has ATBM capability plus has a range of 160 km.
I really dont know the average speed of S-300PMU1 and PMU2 , does any one know about it ?
medo wrote:As I know S-300V and S-300PMU2 could intercept ballistic missiles, which fly with speed of 3000m/s. If I'm correct, this is also the target speed for THAAD. I'm not sure with what speed of ballistic missiles patriot could deal, but I think it is lower.
GarryB wrote:As long as the INF treaty is in effect then the ability to intercept BMs with ranges between 500km and 5,000km can only be applied to conflicts with emerging BM makers like North Korea etc.
Having said that even the up to 500km range Iskander is designed to manouver during its flight to the target, so an intercept point is almost impossible to predict accurately.
I recollect during Gulf War SU did constant scanning using AWACS for any stray Cruise Missile entering its territory during the first gulf war.
Why can't it be more?NickM wrote:So what do you think is the peak velocity of the S-300, S-400, and S-350 missiles because it can't be more than the Patriot ?
Depends on which source you read, some give Mach numbers some give actual velocities, but hey, let's compare some numbers.NickM wrote:So what do you think is the peak velocity of the S-300, S-400, and S-350 missiles because it can't be more than the Patriot ?
Maybe that's why they couldn't hit a SCUD for a damn in 1991...TR1 wrote:Are American weapons blessed by god?
Since acceleration is the rate of change of velocity, it is possible by performing integration to obtain the velocity from the acceleration . But then the question arises , how do you calculate acceleration ? I recon the answer lies in Newton's 2nd law ..... F=maSOC wrote:Acceleration? Whatever. In the grand scheme of things, what acceleration does is eat up your minimum range fractionally faster. Velocity at burnout is what is normally going to drive your engagement kinematics, not how quickly you get to that point.
This is why doing math at 3AM is best left to people designated Not MeDeep Throat wrote:Since acceleration is the rate of change of velocity, it is possible by performing integration to obtain the velocity from the acceleration . But then the question arises , how do you calculate acceleration ? I recon the answer lies in Newton's 2nd law ..... F=ma
Consider a missile of mass "m" propelled by a rocket with constant thrust "F".
To produce the constant thrust , the rocket expels fuel at a constant rate ,m*, and the missile's mass decreases at this rate . The thrust F produces an acceleration ,a, according to F =ma , with m varying as m=Mo+Mt, where m<O.
Hence , F= (Mo+Mt)dv/dt
Therefore, ∆v = F/m *ln ( Mo / Mo + Mt)
We get , -F/m = U
The quantity -F/m is the thrust generated by burning rocket fuel at m kg/sec ( -F/w is generally used instead of -F/m , where w = mg the weight of fuel burnt per second .)
The resulting quantity , called specific impulse Isp is defined by
Isp = -F/w = U/g
This is actually pretty close to the example I give in class when covering Newton's Laws, explaining how F=ma is actually oversimplified in the real world. I explain the idea of a rocket with decreasing mass, and then you can see the lightbulbs go on when I tell them that their car does the same thing.
Again the Patriot is disadvantaged as because it is fired in a fixed direction there is a pretty good chance it will need to change direction straight after launch to head toward the target which increases drag and reduces the available energy for acceleration.Since acceleration is the rate of change of velocity, it is possible by performing integration to obtain the velocity from the acceleration . But then the question arises , how do you calculate acceleration ? I recon the answer lies in Newton's 2nd law ..... F=ma
Austin wrote:Anti-aircraft missile system S-400 Triumph vs. Patriot
https://topwar.ru/145430-zenitnyy-raketnyy-komples-s-400-triumf-protiv-patriot.html
Looks like the 1992 S-300PMU1 is superior in range and target speed compared to later Patriot ERINT
Gives a good idea how far ahead Russian AD systems were even in the early 90's
GarryB wrote:shows you about the real fog of war and that these smart weapons are not so smart....
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
