How to disable S-300PMU system?

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.

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.

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

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..!

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.
I guess SU27 were also in "SEAD" support of MIG 31.Really complex scenario here

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.


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

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.

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

S-300PMU-1... circa 2001

Vladimir79 wrote:

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

S-300PMU-1... circa 2001

Really the PMU-1, i thought it would be the PMU.

___

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?

Vladimir79 wrote:

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

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.

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.

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 ?

Austin wrote: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?

Austin wrote: 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.

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.