Syrian War: News #17

Vann7 wrote:

Isos wrote:

Guiding a missile and communicating is not the same ...

The crew can say to the ground there is a missile here but if the ground radar can't see it, it can't engage the missile.

I have never seen a report saying a-50 can guide s-400 semi active radar and provide the final illumination to destroy the target. Maybe you have some info about that that I haven't seen ?

Please stop arguing if you have no idea of what you are discussing at all..

What difference makes.. if you take an advance ground radar ,and modify it ,to mount it on TOP on an airplane?


Don't you see the huge radar in this picture ?



https://cdnfr1.img.sputniknews.com/images/103136/49/1031364988.jpg

Both will detect equally missiles.. or anything..that emit radio signals..

The BIG  Advantage the A-50 have over ground radars ,is that is looking downwards.. (instead of upwards like ground radars ) and if the plane fly high.. it can look ,detect and track and provide interception path of any plane or missile flying low ,behind mountains and hugging terrain. it doesn't need to "illuminate the target.." are you crazy?
you only do that with lazer..  all that it needs to do is a radio communication with the missile fired  ,to tell the missile
where the plane or the cruise missiles is located. even behind a large mountain.. A-50 is a flying Radar.

So it can be very useful ,very helpful to an S-400 system or Any air defense..because will see more closer to the ground ,while traddional Ground radars look upwards.. and depend on line of sight..but anything behind a hill or mountain will not be seen.. So an S-400 system is far from enough.. You need AWACS , you Need a strong Airforce too.. and short range defenses to protect the S-400s.. otherwise.. if you only use S-400s long range missiles ,for everything ,then it will an incredible waste of money ,to use it to targets at 30km.. not using it for long range targets.
For Cruise missiles is better to use Short Range air defense with very small ,quick turn +fast missiles.
TORS ,Pantsirs and Buks ,the all terrain version are the most ideal anti air defense against cruise missiles.. because they can be deployed close to the borders ..and target missiles at visual distance at the moment they will enter..from safe distance.

But the ultimate weapons as i said is Counter Electronic warfare..you simply turn off the missile and it will fall in sand.
This is assuming Russia was not lying ,when it was advertising non stop ,in SPutnik ,what their electronic warfare can do..  Laser weapons also can do the job  too ,but weather can be problematic its operations. also special forces using verba manpads can do it too... cheap and fast and stealthy. without revealing enemies at the borders of your location.

A-50 can guide planes ,missiles and drones to enemy positions ,and provide interception solution ,but also can even spot enemy positions using radio hardware. Unfortunately Russia don't have many of those planes i think.. but in
any case.. Syria battle field is the worse possible place in the world ,for Russia to fight with Syria surrounded by Terrorist sponsor nations ,including Turkey ,Jordan and Israel...and with NATO already flying freely their planes..
So such huge plane could be attacked by "ISIS drones" as Americans claims..  So is very risky...

here is another "flying" radar..



http://i.cdn.turner.com/ireport/sm/prod/2013/01/22/EM01363969/2361696/EM20130122130220DSC0010jpg-2361696_p9.jpg

Used to track low flying planes or anything flying low.. It have a giant parabolic antenna looking downwards..
to spy on low flying planes.. is also used to catch drug traffiqers.. on mono planes that fly low..
But Aerostats is not ideal for Syria , too many terrorist with such huge target..

But A-50-  Russia can use them ,either to provide targeting solution or provide real time positioning of the incoming missile or plane..so that Ground Air defenses can aim in that direction.. or counter electronic warfare shut it down.
This also will not Allow Israel airforce to penetrate Syria airspace flying low.. behind Mountains and valleys to
fly under the radar belly of Syrian air defenses.    

IF all you do for Air defense is just use an S-400 ,then you are doing something really wrong.. S-400s are supposed to be used in a network of air defenses.. with short and long defenses , with Air Force combat planes to push away any enemy invader.. and A-50 AWACS ,this is to extend the zone of air security far away of your country borders.. all the way to ground level. But as said Syria battle field is a very complex battle field , one where terrorist artillery provided by NATO and drones are at range of  Russia military base.. So Russia can't just sent their best awacs to a war zone ,that the airspace is close to contested at times ,with air battles from time to time.

A-50s cant provide POI data to SAM-s.

Also chance of anyone managing to use 48N6 aganist target 30km away is beyond slim. Also you should be aware that S-400 actually is capable of using 9M96E, which has 40km range.

Liana to my knowledge is not modified ground based radar either...

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Isos wrote:

Why do you think A-50 can't, ...A-50U is a radar... why do you think it can use radar reflected off cruise missiles to locate and track them, but can't reflect a radar beam to illuminate their position for attack?

Because if I'm not wrong A-50U uses L band and s-400 missiles don't. L-band is not known to be precise enough for semi active missile's use

Semi active radar seeker is coupled with one type of radar not all. But active radar can be guided by all if they have the good data link to send it coordonates.

Do you suggest that S-400 is not able to cooperate with A-50? So own AADs and AWACS cannot talk each other? Then why  Russians would build AWACS at first

Provide data, yes, but most likely via third party though command centers. Something here we called "Talas obaveštavanja", would rougly translate as "wave of information". Data is being transmitted from all recon platforms of all kinds and centralised on plansete and from there it goes to units.

Meanwhile the Alawite-dominated Regime Continues to Slaughter in the Eastern Guta


http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=86832

http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=87236

Militarov wrote:

A-50s cant provide POI data to SAM-s.

Also chance of anyone managing to use 48N6 aganist target 30km away is beyond slim. Also you should be aware that S-400 actually is capable of using 9M96E, which has 40km range.

Liana to my knowledge is not modified ground based radar either...

There is no reason for Russian AWACS to not provide with intelligence ,location of Enemy positions to Russian airforce
and Air defenses. Is not rocket science to get get the same targeting system on S-400 mounted on the A-50. American
AWACS do provide targeting to F-22 missiles.. so the stealth plane don't need to use their own radars.. So if you care to elaborate which law of Physics will break an A-50 to do the same radar functions of a ground radar.. Because this is old news that AWACS are Flying Radars  that are ideal to target low flying missiles.. I saw such reports in AUairpower
that release very detailed report by real pilots of how American and Russian combat planes ,missiles and air defenses
works..

http://www.ausairpower.net/editor.html

From there he have reports that explain how important are AWACS for US NAVY for detecting Russian low flying cruise missiles and to expand the detection range and provide early interception path. Since 2011 ,
i was reading DR KARLO reports of how US AWACS are key in the early detections of Russian cruise missiles for the protection of their aircraft carriers. Because they can expand the zone of the detection ,why called early warning..radars.

. So i really doubt Russia will not take advantage of this.. major advantage.. it will be foolish to not do it ,to network their AWACS with their air defenses.. --Just like Americans do it with their AWACS.--

Even Russian pilots train with Mig 31 to intercept cruise missiles with their plane radars..
So i don't see how an A-50 with a much bigger radar can't do better.. in the very early detection and targeting of Cruise missiles. That is to see much Farther and the S-400s radars can , if have terrains and hills covering their line of sight. and pass that information to all air defenses of Russia in ground for interception for low flying objects at much farther ranges.. than an S-400 can do on its own alone.

The Syrian Observatory For Human Rights?? Are you kidding?

S-400 are not using radio guidance like tors or pantsirs but semi active radar guidance so the missile needs the ground radar to illuminate or lock on the target so that the missile can hit. Unless they use 9m96 which are active radar missiles.

You might like to look up TVM guidance... or track via missile where the radar antenna in the missile is used... when the missile is a long way from a target obviously that huge ground radar is better for guidance but as it gets closer and closer the radar on the missile becomes more useful because it is so much closer to the target... the S-300 and S-400 missiles are launched vertically so don't have a lock on the target when they are launched... an A-50 can provide the location details of the target to the launcher and when the missiles get close enough they can track the target via the SAMs radar... using the A-50 as a communications relay.

And BTW what makes you think the 250km and 400km range S-400 missiles are not active radar homing... especially when it is know the smaller lighter 60km and 140km range missiles are.

48N6DM is semi active. The 9M96 is active.

which law of Physics will break an A-50 to do the same radar functions of a ground radar.

Because the radar on the A-50 is not using the same frequency as a targeting radar. It could send the coordinates to the missile if it has the datalink to do so but it can't lock on the target and let the missile guide itself on the lock like a real semi active missile would because surveillance radar like the one on the a-50 are not precise and because the semi active radar in the missile is not design to detect those frequencies the a-50 operates.

US missiles are active radars. They only needs to be send near the target like 20km from it and switch on their own radars. You don't need to be precise for this.

What can happen when you take your eye off the ball, you lose it.


Danny Makki
‏ @Dannymakkisyria
12h12 hours ago

Thread: #ISIS takes over Southern #Damascus town of #Qadam in space of 3 days & kills dozens of Syrian Troops in Deadly ambush, here’s how it happened


https://twitter.com/Dannymakkisyria/status/975935895986753538

EDIT

Followed by


Qalaat Al Mudiq
‏ @QalaatAlMudiq
8h8 hours ago

S. #Damascus: #ISIS claims it took control of most of Qadam district. 50+ Assad fighters killed past days in several attacks/ambushes. Regime sent large reinforcements.

Isos wrote:

which law of Physics will break an A-50 to do the same radar functions of a ground radar.

Because the radar on the A-50 is not using the same frequency as a targeting radar. It could send the coordinates to the missile if it has the datalink to do so but it can't lock on the target and let the missile guide itself on the lock like a real semi active missile would because surveillance radar like the one on the a-50 are not precise and because the semi active radar in the missile is not design to detect those frequencies the a-50 operates.

US missiles are active radars. They only needs to be send near the target like 20km from it and switch on their own radars. You don't need to be precise for this.

You are base your information on the assumption that is "impossible" for Russia S-400s long range missiles to have  Active radars warhead too.. If already their smaller missiles have that feature... but also their long range Kalibr missiles too and many of Russia sukhois and migs combat planes too.  Aside that S-400s "short range" missiles ,
9M96 missiles their range is 120km... and up to (150km) depending the information source..  So really what is your point?  There is no reason for an A-50 to not be able to assist and S-400 air defense.. (with their short range missiles)
to intercept a cruise missile far beyond the visible horizon or the limitations of S-400s own radars in ground..

Remember this A-50 can operate as a Mobile Flying Radar. and it can guide any Russian missile of any air defense directly or indirectly to the place in needs to go.  and assist the missile into a direct hit..  for example.. turn the
short range missile (9M96) into hit targets 400km away.. how can you do that? simply deploy some short range TEL launchers closer to the borders of Syria..lets say 300km away and then it will be able to target anything 100km away from that place. 300km +100 = 400.  So it seems to me ,that there is a misconception of how air defenses works , people believe that Air defenses were designed to work alone ,and can't operate as a team. But if Russia do anything like that will be foolish.. to not take advantage of a flying mobile radar..  

Russia can launch cruise missiles from the caspian sea.. and after 2,000km travel by satellite guidance, in the final trajectory , missiles if warhead configured to be guided with laser sensors  ,it can switch to direct guidance , either with drones or special forces locking in the target. This is what a Connected NETWORK is supposed to do..   So in reality ,there are no limitations on the targets you can hit and the distance ,if you have Grounds assets and air assets also helping in the final phase.   Russia artillery works this way in team.. the artillery fire more or less to the position ,the enemy should be.. and then in the final phase ,the artillery is guided by laser guidance.. is called TEAM WORK.  and this is how is supposed to be..

A-50 should also be able to detect Infra Red signals too , and guide heat seeking +radio guidance missiles too ,from Pantsirs ,Tors and Buks deployed far away of Russia military base. if for example ,the line of sight of those air defenses is block by a  mountain. then with the A-50 guidance ,it will be able to see what is behind the mountain and even guide
a heat seeking TOR missile ,into hitting a cruise missile.

A-50 ,Is just a flying radar and extra goodies ,with wings..looking downwards, and nothing stop Russia from networking it with 100% of every other missile ,old and new ,of any other air defense. Even Armata tanks could be helped to shot down slow flying air targets with help of an AWACS. Their job is to early warning of any enemy hostile
targets in the air , whether is combat planes ,drones or missiles.

In other words..
S-400s interception limitations versus low flying cruise missiles ....30km? is only if you were to use them in a totally solo mode. without any external help.. but that is not how Battlefield defenses works..in battle field at least modern armies ,unify all their communications ,radars etc.. So that anything can benefit and could be connected to a major air defense network ,and provide additional information.

Syria however is the worse place for an S-400 to operate ,reason is because ,to fully take advantage of Long range air defenses ,or networked defenses.. you need enough space , that is safe . and in Syria .. Russia air defenses are at range of medium range artillery.. and close to terrorist positions.. So Russia can't use S-400s to its fullest potential ,not even close. They are used in the worse possible conditions . that enemy planes are allowed to fly near your military bases.  So their performance can't be judge based on how they do in Syria ,because is not a realistic battle field scenario ,of how they will operate in Russia main land.  In Russia main land ,there is zero tolerance for any invasion of airspace and no terrorist near Russia military bases.. and NATO planes intercepted when they show intentions to get a little close. In Syria ,Russia rules of engagement and NATO and terrorist occupation of many zones will limits significatively the performance of Russia air defenses. This can only be improved when Syria army takes control of 100% of Syria territory or at least most of it.. that way ,air defenses can be moved to Syrian Borders.

This is why to be a super power.. Technology alone is not enough.
Geography is extremely important.. for a very strong air defense ,To have a BIG enough territory ,to allow have a very deep layered system of defense. Syria is really bad place for a layered system of defense. ie.. Surrounded by Enemies.
IRAN in the other hand is much better its geography for deploying S-400s and a very strong networked air defense system. Kalingrad is vulnerable ,not ideal place for S-400s.. Israel is also very vulnerable even more than Syria
since only 1 or 2 nukes that enters will be enough to defeat them for being small place.. Why also Japan will be always
very vulnerable.. it can't fight any nation with nukes effectively for having a small territory. This is probably the
reason Israel is so paranoid .. at the idea of IRAN getting nukes..  

Because israel knows if IRAN gets nukes they are busted.. since they will be unable to intimate IRAN anymore..
just one or two hits with nuclear torpedos ,will be enough to disable the coast economic zones. People will not want to stay there ,after just one successful hit.. and the state will die its economy if everyone leave.
So for very small countries..like Israel or Japan, owning Nuclear weapons are not really good enough deterrence ,
Because they don't have the geography to survive a couple nuke attacks in way ,that will later the country will be economically sustained .

But Russia main land is a continent ,it have chance to survive even after a dozens of nuclear attacks. and its territory and ideal for developing a truly impassable air defense system.. at least for cruise missiles and enemy combat planes. until Russia develops its S-500s in enough numbers and their energy weapons too,which will expand the protection to the Space domain significantly to cover all Russia territory from space.

I'm basing my point of view on official data. Long range S-300 and S-400 are semi active unless you prove the opposite. And I just said A-50 can't guide those particular missiles but it may guide the active ones like 9M96 and let them use their actve seaker to hot the target. And I never said A-50 is useless.

They also have or had ka-31 in Syria which could probably or could be upgraded to guide 9M96 too.

If you guys are done with radars here are some maps:



Ghouta:



Afrin:

The jihadi turd keeps shrinking under the SAA blowtorch....



Pity about the ISIS foul-play in Yarmouk & Al-Quaim, but I guess tehy will have to wait in line for the East Ghouta treatment.

It is A-100 that will be able to direct missiles (AAM and SAM) to low flying and extreme range targets.

The A-50 in this case would be invaluable in the initial detection of a cruise missile attack and the coordination of the defence.

Using an S-400 missile against a US cruise missile would be a total waste of a Russian missile anyway... half of those American missiles miss anyway...

Big_Gazza wrote:The jihadi turd keeps shrinking under the SAA blowtorch....



Pity about the ISIS foul-play in Yarmouk & Al-Quaim, but I guess tehy will have to wait in line for the East Ghouta treatment.

The moment for a chemical false flag approaches quickly.

Vann7 wrote:

Militarov wrote:

A-50s cant provide POI data to SAM-s.

Also chance of anyone managing to use 48N6 aganist target 30km away is beyond slim. Also you should be aware that S-400 actually is capable of using 9M96E, which has 40km range.

Liana to my knowledge is not modified ground based radar either...

There is no reason for Russian AWACS to not provide with intelligence ,location of Enemy positions to Russian airforce
and Air defenses. Is not rocket science to get get the same targeting system on S-400 mounted on the A-50. American
AWACS do provide targeting to F-22 missiles.. so the stealth plane don't need to use their own radars.. So if you care to elaborate which law of Physics will break an A-50 to do the same radar functions of a ground radar.. Because this is old news that AWACS are Flying Radars  that are ideal to target low flying missiles.. I saw such reports in AUairpower
that release very detailed report by real pilots of how American and Russian combat planes ,missiles and air defenses
works..

http://www.ausairpower.net/editor.html

From there he have reports that explain how important are AWACS for US NAVY for detecting Russian low flying cruise missiles and to expand the detection range and provide early interception path. Since 2011 ,
i was reading DR KARLO reports of how US AWACS are key in the early detections of Russian cruise missiles for the protection of their aircraft carriers. Because they can expand the zone of the detection ,why called early warning..radars.

. So i really doubt Russia will not take advantage of this.. major advantage.. it will be foolish to not do it ,to network their AWACS with their air defenses.. --Just like Americans do it with their AWACS.--

Even Russian pilots train with Mig 31 to intercept cruise missiles with their plane radars..
So i don't see how an A-50 with a much bigger radar can't do better.. in the very early detection and targeting of Cruise missiles. That is to see much Farther and the S-400s radars can , if have terrains and hills covering their line of sight. and pass that information to all air defenses of Russia in ground for interception for low flying objects at much farther ranges.. than an S-400 can do on its own alone.

Liana is not targeting radar, that to start with.

Second... there is big difference between what you are saying and what i am saying. You claim A-50 can guide S-400 regiment fire by some magic via unexisting datalink, which it cant. And i am saying that it can provide such data via wave of information that is fed into central command, however anything related to guidance, aiming is down to the ground based systems.

AWACS do not provide targeting, they provide POI for aerial targets to fighters, there is big difference.

What is the big deal of MiG-31 pilots practicing using their radar? You are mixing very weird shit here. MiG-31 is an interceptor, that is one of its roles, to intercept shit.

One thing is early warning by A-50, totally different thing is providing targeting data. I am not sure if you are gasping the difference.

Isos wrote:I'm basing my point of view on official data. Long range S-300 and S-400 are semi active unless you prove the opposite. And I just said A-50 can't guide those particular missiles but it may guide the active ones like 9M96 and let them use their actve seaker to hot the target. And I never said A-50 is useless.

They also have or had ka-31 in Syria which could probably or could be upgraded to guide 9M96 too.

If you say so with A-50U probably it is true  but then strange who was designing it like this. Massive cruise missile attacks are one of main threats to Russia itself.
BTW 9M96 in Russian version (E is for export) has range of 120km if I'm correct.

In every  case if now US && vassals hit Syria and introduce land campaign this was the failure on strategical level for Russia.  Assad is killed, lost of Tartus and Khimenei, Syria as western protectorate or Islamic terrorist hot bed.

If tomahawks salvo is down then US  has 2 ways: full scale war with Russia or back down.


And what an advert when Russian AAD could repel massive cruise missile attack!

kvs wrote:
The moment for a chemical false flag approaches quickly.

Actually Assad together with Putin used same shit in UK  

As always no proofs needed.

Militarov wrote:

Second... there is big difference between what you are saying and what i am saying. You claim A-50 can guide S-400 regiment fire by some magic via unexisting datalink, which it cant. And i am saying that it can provide such data via wave of information that is fed into central command, however anything related to guidance, aiming is down to the ground based systems.

AWACS do not provide targeting, they provide POI for aerial targets to fighters, there is big difference.

Russian AAD in Syria seems to be scarce. Is anything Russians prepared for such an occasion in your opinion? salvo of 100 (some sources write 600 but had;y i can believe) - can Russians in Syria take it down?

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Russian AAD in Syria seems to be scarce. Is anything Russians prepared for such an occasion in your opinion? salvo of 100 (some sources write 600 but had;y i can believe) - can Russians in Syria take it down?

I highly doubt anyone in the world can master enough fire-ready systems to repel attack that consists of 100+ cruise missiles, that is just out of the question. There is reason why staturation attacks would happen, to overwelm.

Let alone Syrian air defence and those few Russian systems.

Militarov wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Russian AAD in Syria seems to be scarce. Is anything Russians prepared for such an occasion in your opinion? salvo of 100 (some sources write 600 but had;y i can believe) - can Russians in Syria take it down?

I highly doubt anyone in the world can master enough fire-ready systems to repel attack that consists of 100+ cruise missiles, that is just out of the question. There is reason why staturation attacks would happen, to overwelm.

Let alone Syrian air defence and those few Russian systems.

Then Russia already lost game. I dont think they were not preparing to this to this. Still there are BUks, Pantsirs, Osas, Su-34, Su-30, Su-35 I hope Iranians also moved something to Syria. Also there are how many frigates in Syria? 2? so 48 Buk Missiles+
IMHO the question will be what they are prepared for?

This should really be in the other thread but the Russians do seem to be reacting to the threat. Two documented An-124, maybe others, have flown 'stuff' into Hmeimim over the past few days and the Syrian Express is still going strong. Maybe its time for air defence batteries to get their 'enhanced' training even if it is just redeployment practice.

As already mentioned, absolutely the last thing that the US and NATO MICs want is partial success. Threaten sales with actual marginal performance? No way Jose.

Odin of Ossetia wrote:

Meanwhile the Alawite-dominated Regime Continues to Slaughter in the Eastern Guta


http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=86832

http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=87236

Bugger off, retarded troll.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-21/syrian-rebels-massacre-civilians-rocket-attack-days-after-assad-drives-himself

On Tuesday evening anti-government fighters in the embattled East Ghouta suburb of Damascus launched a major attack, firing several missiles and artillery shells into a crowded shopping district of government-held Jaramana area, resulting in a civilian massacre.

https://twitter.com/Dannymakkisyria/status/976165135927726081

"US-LED COALITION CLAIMS SYRIAN FORCES CONDUCT BUILD-UP IN EUPHRATES VALLEY."

It is their country asshole.

https://southfront.org/us-led-coalition-claims-syrian-forces-conduct-build-euphrates-valley/




"OVERVIEW OF BATTLE FOR EASTERN GHOUTA ON MARCH 21, 2018 (MAPS, VIDEOS, PHOTOS)."

















https://southfront.org/overview-battle-eastern-ghouta-march-21-2018-maps-videos-photos/




"RUSSIAN FORCES DELIVER HUMANITARIAN AID TO AREAS LIBERATED IN EASTERN GHOUTA."

https://southfront.org/russian-forces-deliver-humanitarian-aid-to-areas-liberated-in-eastern-ghouta/



"40 TONS OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS FOUND IN AREAS LIBERATED FROM MILITANTS IN SYRIA."


https://southfront.org/40-tons-of-chemical-weapons-found-in-areas-liberated-from-militants-in-syria/



"1,500 FIGHTERS OF AHRAR AL-SHAM TO LEAVE EAST GHOUTA WITHIN 24 HOURS UNDER AGREEMENT WITH GOVERNMENT."

https://southfront.org/1500-fighters-of-ahrar-al-sham-to-leave-east-ghouta-within-24-hours-under-agreement-with-government/






https://southfront.org/syrian-war-report-march-21-2018-three-chemical-weapons-attacks-are-prevented/

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Then Russia already lost game. I dont think they were not preparing to this to this. Still there are BUks, Pantsirs, Osas, Su-34, Su-30, Su-35 I hope Iranians also moved something to Syria. Also there are how many frigates in Syria? 2? so 48 Buk Missiles+
IMHO the question will be what they are prepared for?

Russia military is very aware of saturation attacks , they train for it ,all the time.. This is why short range air defenses
are important.. however  Electromagnetic warfare is the most effective way to defeat saturation attacks. If you understand what a magnet is , and how it can attract metal , with force.. a similar concept also exist for military
use , that for example they can Influence powerful Electric fields and magnetic fields in any large zone of their choice,
and then any electronic equipment , whether is a radio , a Gps device ,or Tank or a missile. once it enter in this zone..
the entire electrical operations of that hardware will cease to work.. it will simply TURN OFF the whole thing. So missiles will fall from the sky in the sand and tanks turned off ,will not move , And Russia claims that also can damage combat planes too AND injure their pilots too ,without firing a bullet or a missile ,but just using Electromagnetic warfare.
If you go to youtube ,you will see even amateurs EMP (electromagnetic pulse) guns ,that can shut down your pocket radio in a second.. by aiming at it.. How do you think IRAN captured Americans best stealth Plane ?  Using Russia electromagnetic guns , hardware IRAN got from soviet times... So Energy weapons , is the future.. it can easily stop
a billion of missiles attack, if they enter in a zone heavily attacked by Pulse magnetic electronic attacks..

In the same way , Fire ,do not works ,in a zone without Oxygen.. it simply automatically cease to exist.
In that same way Electricity do no work in the presence of an electric field/magnetic field , reversing the flow
of the current or provoking a short circuit.

There is a US military test in youtube.. where they SHUT DOWN car engine ,using this electronic attacks.. So counter electronic warfare works and very very well..  and if we are to believe in Russia military claims ,of what their EW hardware can do , then they pretty much shutdown any electronic military or civilian hardware in a zone of hundred of kilometers range or more.. but the are ways to protect electronics from such attacks.. So is all a race of who can do better , if the ones using EW or the ones protecting equipment from electronic attacks.. then you have laser anti air defenses gun ,to shutdown things.. which can effectively allow unlimited interceptions in a mass scale attack of missiles... So If Russia can produce enough laser anti air defenses ,and their energy weapons works as good they claim.. then eventually it can literary create an impenetrable wall ,for Planes ,drones and cruise missiles...  But.. will Russia want to reveal in
Syria everything they military is capable to do ? or will they want to not reveal all their cards too early to their enemies? In any case if Russia is not lying with their Electronic warfare capabilities and Laser Cannons and can mas produce them in big enough numbers? ,then it is very likely that Russia will be in the near future capable to secure 100% of its entire air space.. completely seal it ,from enemy attacks..and the only thing left is take their Laser Guns and Energy weapons to the space domain ,for total protection against any attack from space.