Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Share
    avatar
    Viktor

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 10, 2014 10:01 am

    Mike E wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Another confirmation that S-500 will enter mass production in 2016  thumbsup 

    S-500 will enter the army in 2016

    That is great news! Hopefully nothing slows that down!

    You asked once and from the link above

    Prospective AAMS is capable of hitting not only ballistic missiles, but also aerodynamic targets (aircraft, helicopters and other air targets), as well as cruise missiles.

    I have no idea in what way should this system be able to shoot down aerodynamic and ballistic targets at the same time considering that the altitude of interception of ballistic missiles should

    be well in the space. US/Israel strictly separated the two while Russia within the atmosphere uses the same missiles for the different roles. Now it seems that the same story is being

    written in space.  thumbsup

    eridan

    Posts : 144
    Points : 150
    Join date : 2012-12-13

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  eridan on Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:52 pm

    is it possible that s-500 is in fact s-300v replacement? A long range sam system for the Army?

    Because if it is more of a thaad equivalent for interception of large ballistic missiles then i don't see how that meshes with intercepting cruise missiles which are usually flying very low.
    avatar
    Viktor

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Viktor on Sun Aug 10, 2014 2:38 pm

    eridan wrote:is it possible that s-500 is in fact s-300v replacement?

    I think not. Its missiles might be based on S-300V missiles but until 2020 Russia intends to have 9 brigades of S-300V4 half of which will be newly produced so I dont think its a replacement from that and many others points of view.


    eridan wrote:i A long range sam system for the Army?

    Army has 350km range S-300V4 along with many others wonderful things and that makes them happy. It has been already said that S-500 will have anti ICBM capability and I dont think

    that anyone intends to fire ICBM on tanks  Very Happy 

    It has been said that S-500 will serve as a mobile anti-ABM (satellite, high flying hypersonic weapons) system within Russian forces and that inclines system towards territorial PVO.




    eridan wrote:Because if it is more of a thaad equivalent for interception of large ballistic missiles then i don't see how that meshes with intercepting cruise missiles which are usually flying very low.


    The thing that Russian generals keep repeating those words, puzzles me because I dont have a slightest clue about what it may look like or how they intend to solve problems associated

    with it. It will be interesting but as time passes it seems that Russia is in the process of constructing jet another anti-EVERYTHING system (more "everything" than the one before) but this

    one if proven to be true really surpasses all boundaries.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Sun Aug 10, 2014 6:18 pm

    It's not that, just that delays CAN happen. While I doubt they will, it is possible.

    eridan

    Posts : 144
    Points : 150
    Join date : 2012-12-13

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  eridan on Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:39 pm

    But what if s500 is a designation for the next version of s300v? or, hell, maybe it's designation for next version of s400? I mean, it makes little sense, granted, since s400 is itself new. But also claims for s500 are just too wild. i mean, one system against both icbm and cruise missiles? that's just silly.

    if it is a magical system against everything, it'd render s400, s350, s400v4, bukm3 and morfei obsolete. No need for all of them, why not have just one standardized system?

    Or what if s500 is a designation for a detection/command/control/guidance unitary system and not a SAM with its own missiles? So a system which then uses whichever missile subsystem is at hand?

    Or what if s500 is simply a next gen anti-irbm/icbm system like most normal sources indicate and all the additional claims of its additional capability are just uninformed hogwash?

    Of course, if true that vehicles planned for the battery are similar to s400 and if true there will be a modified big bird radar among them, then i guess it's also possible to somehow just merge bits and pieces of s500 and s400 into one system. Several different radars and several different missiles would certainly be able to cover both ballistic missile and cruise missile defence. But then one would really talk about s500 as expanded s400.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Aug 10, 2014 9:48 pm

    I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is. S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example). S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's. Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc. The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:13 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.
     - I have similar thoughts.... That being said, I believe that the S-500 can perform most of those tasks even though it will most likely stick to the ASAT/ICBM ABM role. Obviously, the S-500 won't be performing the tasks of the      Tor and pantsir etc. Though it should be able to compliment the S-300, S-350, and S-400 perfectly. 

     - Tor, Buk, Pantsir, Tunguska, Osa, Kub etc can focus on the low altitude and shorter ranged threats. Both the Pantsir and Tunguska will "focus" on the cruise missiles and smaller targets (as you know).

     - S-300 and S-350 will be used for the medium to long range targets that are beyond the range of the Tor etc.

     - S-400 will go for targets beyond the S-300 and S-350.

     - S-300V4 will focus on the smaller ballistic missiles up to the IRBM's.

     - S-500 will most likely be used for ballistic missiles all the way up to ICBM's, but can also supplement the S-400.

    I know you know all of this information, but I wanted to put it out there for others.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Aug 10, 2014 11:24 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.

    I mostly agree, but in all likeliness S-500 will have several different types of missiles. The main S-500 missile will likely be a 2 stage missile, but another missile could be designed with 3 or perhaps 4 stages mostly to be a ASAT weapon that's capable of destroying any satellite LEO or above, the same missile could be programmed to do the opposite and launch new generations of compact satellites in to LEO. We could quite possibly see another S-500 missile with (which could be made compatible with S-400 system) that's designed not to defeat ICBM's, but strategic bombers and cruise missile saturation attacks from 4000-6000 km's (guided by radar from naval assets such as Russia's next generation of destroyers) away from Russia's borders. The missile could be tipped with tactical nuclear warheads, and as a 4 stage missile it might be capable of getting a range of 4000 -6000 km's but it might be capable of increasing the range and speed by being able to fly high enough in initial stages to make it to the upper atmosphere so it could utilize orbital speed to rapidly and greatly increase speed and range.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:04 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I highly doubt S-500 will be a multipurpose one like S-300 or 400 is.  S-500 was specifically for dealing with Anti-ICBM style systems and other major high flying targets (sats as example).  S-400 is to compliment S-500 in dealing with jets, cruise missiles, IRBM's and the like. S-300V(4) is the Army equivelent meant to deal against IRBM's and MRBM's.  Cruise missiles can be dealt with by various systems from Tor, Buk, Pantsir, S-300 and S-400, Osa, etc.  The thing is, I doubt any of these systems can do a real good job besides Tor and Pantsir, as they are designed to deal more with short range aircrafts or PGM's to be specific.

    This is just my guess/observation though.

    I mostly agree, but in all likeliness S-500 will have several different types of missiles. The main S-500 missile will likely be a 2 stage missile, but another missile could be designed with 3 or perhaps 4 stages mostly to be a ASAT weapon that's capable of destroying any satellite LEO or above, the same missile could be programmed to do the opposite and launch new generations of compact satellites in to LEO. We could quite possibly see another S-500 missile with (which could be made compatible with S-400 system) that's designed not to defeat ICBM's, but strategic bombers and cruise missile saturation attacks from 4000-6000 km's (guided by radar from naval assets such as Russia's next generation of destroyers) away from Russia's borders. The missile could be tipped with tactical nuclear warheads, and as a 4 stage missile it might be capable of getting a range of 4000 -6000 km's but it might be capable of increasing the range and speed by being able to fly high enough in initial stages to make it to the upper atmosphere so it could utilize orbital speed to rapidly and greatly increase speed and range.

    That too... Russia will probably turn the S-500 "into a S-300" (as in have a whole family of missiles and variants).
    avatar
    Viktor

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Viktor on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:16 am

    Mike E wrote: - I have similar thoughts.... That being said, I believe that the S-500 can perform most of those tasks even though it will most likely stick to the ASAT/ICBM ABM role. Obviously, the S-500 won't be performing the tasks of the      Tor and pantsir etc. Though it should be able to compliment the S-300, S-350, and S-400 perfectly. 

     - Tor, Buk, Pantsir, Tunguska, Osa, Kub etc can focus on the low altitude and shorter ranged threats. Both the Pantsir and Tunguska will "focus" on the cruise missiles and smaller targets (as you know).

     - S-300 and S-350 will be used for the medium to long range targets that are beyond the range of the Tor etc.

     - S-400 will go for targets beyond the S-300 and S-350.

     - S-300V4 will focus on the smaller ballistic missiles up to the IRBM's.

     - S-500 will most likely be used for ballistic missiles all the way up to ICBM's, but can also supplement the S-400.

    I know you know all of this information, but I wanted to put it out there for others.

    Keep in mind several things.

    1. All those systems are devided in the territorial PVO (S-500, S-400, S-350, S-300, Pancir-S1) and Army PVO (S-300V4, BUK-M2, Tor-M2) in general

    2. All those things can shoot at just about anything meaning S-300 can effectively deal with low flying cruise missiles, ballistic missile, fighters, AWACS and guided weapons

       meaning layers are established but there is overlapping too involved (Pancir-S1 can shoot at planes, cruise missiles, guided weapons but soon at small range ballistic missiles too)

    3. Until 40N6 enters S-400, S-300V4 is the longest range Russian SAM system and just as same as S-400 and S-300Favorit is able to shoot down ICBM (with some difference more or less)

    4. The wording "focus" of BUK/TOR/Pancir on this or that etc is wrong here as all of them are controled by automated command post which calculate firing solutions and distribute

      targets for each firing unit. Those things are optimized according to algorithms calculated by Russian scientist.

    5. About the layers

    territorial PVO                                

    - S-500                                      
    - S-400                                      
    - S-300 Favorit                            
    - S-350                                      
    - Pancir-SM/S1                            
    - Morfei                                      
    - Verba/Igla/ZSU-23    


    Army PVO

    - S-300V4
    - BUK-M3/M2/M1  
    - Pancir-SM/S1 (likely)
    - Tor-M1/M2/M2U
    - Morfei (could be - Im counting on it Very Happy )
    - Pine (replacement for Strela-10M3)
    - Tunguska/Igla/ZSU-23

    so you see you have 5-6 layers, target will have to pass to successfully struck the goal. Territorial and Army PVO have they own AND separate radar/elint/ecm/eccm units which

    accompany them. Each of them was designed sparately taking into account their unique problems and conditions. Lately, work is underway to unite the two but each of the subsystems

    and them in general have their own command posts which have strict hierarchy, redudancy and ability to replace each other in case of destruction at the same time. In case of destruction

    of any of its part the whole structure automatically adjust itself according to optimal next solution.


    To ilustrate organizational structure of Russian Radio Troops  Very Happy  (and take not that this picture shows only 10 % of what should be in here to be complete)

    This picture ilustrates organizational structure of Russian Radio Troops for territorial PVO  (its a whole different story with Radio Troops of Army PVO)



    Last edited by Viktor on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:37 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 1:36 am

    I meant that as an "in general" kind of thing. Of course it can be broken down further, but that is the basic "idea".

     - Thanks for that info!

    Vann7

    Posts : 3471
    Points : 3583
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:55 am



    Anyone who use an S-500 to shoot down a $500k tomahack cruise missile should be fired from his job. Because
    the S-500 missile ,is like a space rocket and its cost should not be cheap. My estimate compared with how much brahmos cost 1.5 millions is from $10 -$20 millions per missile.

    That said Expensive missiles are for expensive targets.. not for drones drones or regular combat planes. or helicopters or cheap targets that any other weapon can do.. So the ideal target for an S-500 should be ICBM..like minutemans 2. Or perhaps B-2 bombers or F-22 or F-35 , if there is a war and you cannot wait for airforce and do not have an S-400/s-300 around. Or a Satellite.

    And no the S-500 is not like THAAD or SM-3.. Those systems are limited in their capabilities can only target ballistic missiles that its flight path is near the position of them. S-500 is like and any air or space altitude interceptor ,probably a hit to kill S-400 with significant larger range and more advanced detection and sensors in the warhead.
    is not limited like THAAD or SM-3 to be positioned in the right line of flight of the enemy targets . THAAD is ideal for defenses of bases when a missile is going directly to it. Because the S-500 is a real Sam it can operate anywhere at any direction and chase targets that its flight path is far away of the missile location.

    IF for example an SM-3 +THAAD is placed in Crimea .it will fail to hit any ballistic missile targeting Sochi that avoid Crimea airspace. The US anti ballistic Missiles defenses do not chase far from its zone ,they simply fly upwards and step in the middle of a ballistic missile flight path, while S-500 can chase targets any low or high altitude over long ranges up 600km . So S-500 is a complete defense System ,while SM-3 and Thaad are limited its operation of where they are positioned. That said in case of a nuclear war.. lets say that SM-3 and Thaad works 100% of the time and never fails and the same for S-500. Then US will be doomed because will not be able to defend all its territory.. with a defense that do not chase ballistic missiles away of its zone.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:06 am

    That is what we've been talking about. Russia has so many missiles that the S-500 won't have to attack "regular" targets.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:00 am

    Viktor wrote:territorial PVO                                

    - S-500                                      
    - S-400                                      
    - S-300 Favorit                            
    - S-350                                      
    - Pancir-SM/S1                            
    - Morfei                                      
    - Verba/Igla/ZSU-23    


    Army PVO

    - S-300V4
    - BUK-M3/M2/M1  
    - Pancir-SM/S1 (likely)
    - Tor-M1/M2/M2U
    - Morfei (could be - Im counting on it Very Happy )
    - Pine (replacement for Strela-10M3)
    - Tunguska/Igla/ZSU-23

    so you see you have 5-6 layers, target will have to pass to successfully struck the goal. Territorial and Army PVO have they own AND separate radar/elint/ecm/eccm units which

    Viktor, you forgot that PVO also has a number of interceptors (Mig-31's) under their control and that's the most outer layer of air defense, so theirs at least 8 layers of in PVO.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:16 am

    The more the merrier! - We were talking about ground defenses, but I guess we can add a little on air defenses.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  GarryB on Mon Aug 11, 2014 2:09 pm

    No one will use S-500s to shoot down UAVs, but irrespective of the monetary value if a cruise missile is detected closing in on a target and the target is valuable then S-500 might be the best option in some situations to engage the threat.

    With an IADS it is rather more likely that a cheaper closer shorter ranged missile could be used instead... which is what the IADS is for.

    Calling them layers can be confusing because although there are lots of different systems that are effective to different altitudes and different ranges and optimised to defend different objects a threat generally wont just have 6 specific layers to defeat to reach its target.

    a threat behind enemy lines might require an aircraft or long range missile to penetrate hundreds of layers of air defence systems just to get to the target area. Normally with large systems to big to move easily these are of generally known position and likely marked on maps so when planning attacks such systems can generally be evaded, or indeed targeted.

    With all the Soviet/Russian systems being mobile... including large powerful radars things become much harder for the attacker.


    _________________
    “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
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:45 pm

    Vann7 wrote:

    Anyone who use an S-500 to shoot down a $500k tomahack cruise missile should be fired from his job. Because
    the S-500 missile ,is like a space rocket and its cost should not be cheap. My estimate compared with how much brahmos cost 1.5 millions is from $10 -$20 millions per missile.

    You missed the point entirely, saturation attacks with nuclear tipped cruise missiles and clusters of strategic bombers can easily be just as much a problem as ICBM's, and unlike ICBM's America's B-1 lancer is not restricted by the START treaty, which can easily hold 20+ cruise missiles with over 2,400 km range, add that there's over 100 B-1 lancers and you can come to the conclusion that strategic cruise missiles easily become a national security risk on par with ICBM's. If you have 1000 nuclear cruise missiles fired towards Russia's borders in a surprise saturation attack than it would be smart to have S-500 missiles with tactical nuclear warheads capable of destroying saturated clusters of strategic cruise missiles (especially early enough when their still in proximity of their strategic bombers) 4,000-6,000 km's away from Russia's borders, because it's not enough to destroy the cruise missile you have to figure in radioactive fallout and pervasive winds, and how that might effect the Russian population.

    The farther away you can defeat nuclear cruise missiles, the better, and you can't rule out strategic missiles being fitted with MAWS suite, and programmed to detonate to take out strategic interceptors like Mig-31's, and instead of measuring the cost of one 1 S-500 missile to 1 cruise missile, you should measure the cost of human life and the cost of a major population center being irradiated and inhospitable for several decades and the lost income resulting from it.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    S-300 Long Range SAM system

    Post  sepheronx on Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:46 pm

    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.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:25 pm

    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.

    2.) If the Israeli's and the Turks want to host American strategic radars to spy on Russian airspace, then why should Russia capitulate and not deliver the S-300's? If Israel and Turkey want to become strategic assets for America's nuclear triad, then delivering the S-300's make's a lot of sense because you can't rule out strategic bombers being stationed in those 2 countries, and having long range air defense assets capable of swatting strategic bombers out the air could be a vital asset in undermining a saturated cruise missile attack from Russia's south-west, especially if Russia and Syria are working closely together in an integrated IAD fashion.

    3.) The S-300's were already ready to be delivered, and the S-400's and S-300VM's will take time to assemble...and the famous saying  goes "A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush".
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  medo on Mon Aug 11, 2014 9:04 pm

    Vann7 wrote:Anyone who use an S-500 to shoot down a $500k tomahack cruise missile should be fired from his job. Because
    the S-500 missile ,is like a space rocket and its cost should not be cheap. My estimate compared with how much brahmos cost 1.5 millions is from $10 -$20 millions per missile.

    I don't agree here. If Tomahawk cruise missile fly to Russia, than it most probably have nuclear warhead. So if no other SAM in IADS is in better position, than firing an S-500 missile against it is still OK as S-500 missile is still far cheaper than destroyed town.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1420
    Points : 1421
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Aug 11, 2014 9:12 pm

    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.
    Even if NATO had acquired some older versions of the S-300 (from Slovakia and Greece) and had them properly analyzed, the S-300 development is not static, it also has deferent flavors of Surveillance radars and Target tracking/missile guidance systems not to mention missiles (yes, i am still talking about the PMU1), so it still makes no sense to scrap them, especially now, when the West is attacking Russia economically.  Suspect 
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:46 pm

    medo wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:Anyone who use an S-500 to shoot down a $500k tomahack cruise missile should be fired from his job. Because
    the S-500 missile ,is like a space rocket and its cost should not be cheap. My estimate compared with how much brahmos cost 1.5 millions is from $10 -$20 millions per missile.

    I don't agree here. If Tomahawk cruise missile fly to Russia, than it most probably have nuclear warhead. So if no other SAM in IADS is in better position, than firing an S-500 missile against it is still OK as S-500 missile is still far cheaper than destroyed town.

    At that point smaller missiles could easily finish job, although I have to agree with what magnum (P.I.) said.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16741
    Points : 17349
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 12, 2014 8:52 am

    I don't agree here. If Tomahawk cruise missile fly to Russia, than it most probably have nuclear warhead. So if no other SAM in IADS is in better position, than firing an S-500 missile against it is still OK as S-500 missile is still far cheaper than destroyed town.

    Yes... it is not about trading dollar for dollar in missiles, the threat missiles are intended to hit targets and the dollar value of those targets needs to be taken into account... not firing a 1 million dollar S-500 because it is only a 1 million dollar Tomahawk and you don't want to trade dollar for dollar could result in that million dollar missile destroying Moscow or Leningrad and doing trillions of dollars damage.

    Obviously there wont be hundreds of thousands of S-500s made and important targets would include likely ICBMs and indeed in late model versions of the S-500 GPS satellites and other important satellites too.

    In many ways it is a bit like small arms fire and artillery... you see a suicide bomber from 2km distance running towards you... there might be a guy with an AK-74 1.8km away from you who could take him out with a round that costs a few cents, or you can get the sniper sitting next to you to take the shot with a 14.5mm HMG with a couple of hundred dollars worth of HMG rounds, or you could have a nearby METIS-M1 team fire a missile worth a few thousand dollars and destroy the suicide bomber and the car he is in.

    There would be a lot of factors involved including what the suicide bomber is doing... they might have noticed the nearby troops and they might be targeting them so launching a Metis would take too long to impact to be the option of choice. Equally they might not realise there are troops so close and they might be going for you... either way I would say a spray of small arms fire from the troops in close would be the cheapest and fastest response.

    Waiting for the vehicle to get closer will also reduce the shot to impact delay for the other weapons and make a kill more likely... but even at 1km a burst from 2-3 PKMs or PKPs could probably do the job too which would save the long range sniper ammo and short to medium range anti armour ammo for some something that requires that sort of munition.

    A good IADS means selection of the right system to engage. In previous wars they probably wouldn't have known what was happening but the small arms in close probably would have taken out the target anyway.


    _________________
    “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
    Sujoy

    Posts : 903
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Sujoy on Tue Aug 12, 2014 3:20 pm

    GarryB wrote:No one will use S-500s to shoot down UAVs

    Yes, that would be an overkill . However, if the UAV in question is a Global Hawk then why not .
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Mike E on Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:52 pm

    Even the Hawk "doesn't deserve" to be killed by a S-500. The S-400 would deliver for a lower cost...

    Sponsored content

    Re: S-300/400/500 News [Russian Strategic Air Defense] #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:15 am