RV warheads from the SLBM missile has the same speed as the RV from the ICBM missile. The current SLBMs are ICBMs only fired from a submarine, have a continental range and a speed of over 7 km / s when go through the atmosphere.
The 7km/s intercept speed capacity of the S-500 is only needed to intercept ICBMs and SLBMs in space.
The speed of the RV is determined by its flight range, which varies with payload... light payload means longer range and higher speed, heavier payload means lower speed and shorter range.
The passage through the atmosphere is short, the loss of speed is small.
Drag is proportional to speed so just moving your arms around you can feel the air around you but it does not really restrict your ability to move your hands around you because you are incapable of moving them fast enough for drag to matter.
You can change this by putting your hand out the car window while the car is driving... you obviously feel the wind and the force on your hand much more and would struggle to hold a large light object in that slip stream like a sheet of wood or polystyrene.
Equally putting your hand in a denser medium like water can have the same effect at much lower speeds so you really do feel drag slow your hand and your ability to move your hand and arms and body immersed in water.
The increased density of water allows you to experience what air would feel like at enormous speeds... you could imagine your hand or a stone skimming off the surface of water at certain angles and speeds, but it is harder to imagine for a layer of air because most people can't imagine what it would be like being outside the layer of air.
A bullet is moving at enormous speeds in air could be stopped by a mere two metres of water... lower velocity bullets are less effected than very high velocity bullets so an AK-74 5.45mm bullet would stop in 2-3m of water and be non lethal, while a subsonic 9mm pistol bullet might still have the energy to kill you at that distance.
You could design RVs that don't slow down very much in the atmosphere but they would look like APFSDS rods with no space for a warhead ... let alone the ability to refine its trajectory to hit a point target accurately...
The HGV warhead, i.e. Avangard, may have a greater loss of speed in the terminal phase, because it performs most of the flight at the border with the atmosphere and in the atmosphere, but of course it maneuvers along the entire trajectory.
Avangard is believed to be powered and reportedly sped up from mach 25 to mach 27 inside the atmosphere.
Satellite time is available for S-400 as well but only with GLONASS.
GLONASS is a navigation satellite network and could not detect targets nor pass target information to a ground based SAM system.
You would need a dedicated radar equipped satellite system with radar pointed in a suitable direction to detect incoming threats from space to link to your SAM sites.
Russia had various such satellites for their Legenda system and its replacement but they are oriented for detecting ships and naval traffic for the use of anti ship missiles from platforms out of direct line of sight of their targets rather than ballistic targets for SAMs to deal with.
China and India might not be able to use their own satellite constellation.
China and India would probably be using them against each other or in the case of China against South Korea and Japan so they would not need the extra range coverage a satellite network would provide.
I suspect PAC-3 needs satellite support because set up time and engagements are slower so the target needs to be detected and identified as a target while it is further away.
In the past under the buy back option Indian Su 30s were bought and replaced with the Su 30MKI. India is purchasing 5 regiments of the S-400, so Russia can do something similar right now by deciding to export at least 2 regiments of the S-500 after exporting the first 3 regiments of the S-400.
They probably could but they shouldn't.
The S-500 is not a replacement for S-400... it is an extension...
The S-500 would be more useful when used together with S-400 and other smaller cheaper missiles.
It is not like say Tochka-U and Iskander... their performance and costs were very very similar so it made sense to withdraw the shorter ranged Tochka-U when there were enough Iskanders because they weren't much more expensive but had double the range with similar accuracy and payload.
The S-400 and S-500 is more like 300mm Smerch and Iskander.... they are totally different in terms of the roles you would use them for and would compliment each other so you would use both rather than one or the other.
It good that murkans are such arrogant fools. It was positively delicious watching those fools squirm and rage as the Talibs embarrassed them.
The fact of the matter is that if the roles were reversed and it was the Russians leaving Afghanistan now the west would be doing everything they could to help the Taliban turn it into a blood bath for Russians and the Afghans trying to leave...
And the west claims the moral and ethical superiority...
Yeah bro our hopelessly corrupt oligarchs are ten times better than their equally corrupt oligarchs. Ours put gay flags on our embassies.
To be fair all oligarchs are ass holes, but Putin seems to keep Russian ones in line for the benefit of the Russian people.
The problem for us in the west is that our oligarchs are totally in charge no questions asked... you just have to look at the track records of the last dozen US presidents... they all try to start new wars or keep existing wars going because that is profitable for those who actually control things in the west... and the control both sides so it does not matter who you vote for...
I can understand people burying their heads in the sand... less frustrating than confronting reality...
But not very practical and allowing them to continue doing what they are doing.
Regarding MALD, while not cheap, in large enough quantities they should be useful decoys for larger aircraft and in swarms they would have extreme jamming power. Have the russians figured out how to destroy MALD swarms of jammers while simultaneously destroying swarms of cruise missiles, AWACs tankers, and stealth fighters?
You call it a swarm but the number of platforms needed to seed this swarm can be target number one before the swarm even forms, and to deal with large numbers of targets they have something called an Integrated Air Defence System that includes sensors and missiles and guns and aircraft with missiles and guns and even now drones with missiles that with management and C4IRSTAR can actually deal with an enormous threat the most efficient way possible, while at the same time directing their own attacks on the enemy who launched this attack on them to damage or destroy them before a second attack could be mounted. Their enemies don't have IADS so their attack will be orders of magnitude more effective because they use vulnerable air based platforms for both attack and defence so when half are destroyed supporting the attack when they switch to defence those assets will be missing from the start leaving enormous holes Russia can exploit.
Also Russian AWACS is pretty crappy, still using a mechanically scanned array. its probably far inferior to S-400 radar or even Zaslon M. Its very important for fighters not to have their radar turned on at all too.
Russian AWACS are gap fillers that fill holes in their OTH radar coverage which is pretty comprehensive and complete.
Container radars in Russia were able to detect US F-35 fighters flying along the border between Iran and Iraq... they have a range of between 4 and 6 thousand kilometres but are no good for the first 1,000km or so... but they are located more than 1,000km inland making them rather difficult targets because you have to cross about 1,000km of Russian air defence systems to get to them, and for western planes they can spot you at 4,000km range....
But yeah, their current AWACS aircraft use mechanically scanned arrays.
Now that the INF treaty is gone I wonder if they will consider taking one stage off their ICBMs or using land based SLBMs as IRBMs for use against the Middle East, the Pacific and of course the EU...