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.
The Soviet leadership could on a whim close any design bureaus it wanted, or shift them from one type of work to another. Lavochkin went from designing fighter aircraft to spacecraft. Several other firms went from planes to missiles.
Even today the Russian military says it wants this and this and this and when the Russian MIC comes up with BMPTs and T-95s, and T-90AMs the military simply says it has changed its mind as to what it wants or what it can afford and cancels the T-95, and simply doesn't buy the BMPT and T-90AM to save its money for later purchases.
Mig has been showing the Mig-29SMT upgrade for 20 years and the Russian AF only got some because Algeria cancelled its order. The Su-27M has been floating around for just as long and only now with the Su-35BM model are they actually going to buy any.
The Su-25 was a private venture that the Russian military tested in Afghanistan and found them much more use than supersonic fighters normally used in the swing role in the FA, but the Russian AF still hasn't bought the Su-25T or Su-25TM upgraded models. They did go for a much cheaper and simpler SM upgrade version.
In comparison the US military gets C-17s whether it asks for them or not because they are made in states where there is high unemployment so congress keeps allocating money for them whether the pentagon asks for them or not.
Sure , but we are comparing performance of rival system and not really trying to blame MIC of US , Europe or Russia.
So we can talk about rival systems but can't criticise those systems or their reason for being?
Who made up that rule?
As I look across the top of the screen I see Russian Military Forum, Russian Armed Forces, Russian Air Force. and S-400/500 News. If you don't bring up Patriot I wont mention its faults.
I am not really very interested in US weapons... that is why I come here.
In that case based just on raw target speed performance , S-300PMU2 can intercept MRBM with a range of ~ 700 km
Which should be adequate for any modified Scud threat as well as cruise missiles and aerodynamic targets.
Ofcourse they spend more is because they have more , their GDP is much greater then all world combined , though now most is on debt.
They spend more because they have to maintain their global empire... if such things were cheap... everyone would have one.
China has 2nd largest def spending and you see similar problem there as well.
Is it still the second largest when taken in terms of per head of population?
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.
Sorry, I find reading about US weapons about as interesting as reading about local politics.
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.
For a custom ATBM system 9 out of 12 is a failure... imagine its performance against a mach 7 threat that manouvers like Iskander/Tender?
Is the F-22 junk because it has never been used in real combat?
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.
So it is 2012 and they have managed to make a S-300PMU1.5.
I really dont know the average speed of S-300PMU1 and PMU2 , does any one know about it ?
Average speed is a strange number that is not really useful most of the time. Average speed needs a range to be significant... ie average speed to 100km etc.