Tested in the US, the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM missile is powerless against the S-400

In the United States, tests of a modernized version of the AGM-88 HARM missile were tested. We are talking about a missile, which is designed to neutralize air defense systems, missile defense, the destruction of radars. The initial version of such a missile was adopted by the U.S. Army in 1983. In 2005, the development of the AGM-88E version began.

An updated version of the American rocket (the beginning of modernization is 2019) is reported to have an increased range. The initial version of the rocket had a range of up to 150 km. New version - up to 230 km.

In addition to destroying the enemy’s radar, the purpose of its use is to disrupt communications, and its various types.

Modernization of the AGM-88 HARM received an updated rocket engine, which has an increased (compared to its predecessors) power, while fuel consumption is reduced by at least 9%.

Gordon Turner, Vice President of Northrop Grumman:

These tests were important for conducting a critical analysis of the project and verifying the effectiveness of the upgraded missile. The new rocket engine and warhead will provide enhanced capabilities for the detection and destruction of long-range air defense systems.

It is precisely as a tool to counter long-range air defense systems in the United States that a new version of a long-standing missile is in service. It is additionally noted that the missile can be used as a means of suppressing electronic warfare systems.

The American company reports that the updated version of the AGM-88 HARM will be used on F / A-18E, EA-18G Growler (US Navy REB carrier-based aircraft), as well as for all versions of the fifth generation F-35 fighters.

In American sources, materials appeared in which it was indicated that the missile was being modernized as "a possible option to counter the S-400 air defense system." But if we compare the range of the modernized AGM-88 HARM with the range of the 40H6 anti-aircraft missile, which the C-400 is equipped with, the Russian missile has an advantage in range of more than 150 km. This means that in order to defeat the Russian air defense system, an American aircraft will have to enter its area of ​​operation. In turn, this suggests that the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM is powerless against the S-400, since its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it can launch a rocket.

Comments

[poquello]

This means that in order to defeat the Russian air defense system, an American aircraft will have to enter its area of ​​operation. In turn, this suggests that the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM is powerless against the S-400, since its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it can launch a rocket.

Well, this does not mean anything, in certain situations they will be able to use them, because there is no dualism in life

[rocket757]

Indeed, some assumptions based on their unverified data.
Everything will depend on ... many reasons, the outcome of the duel is not obvious.
One thing is obvious, it is necessary to have COMPLEX SYSTEMS, both attacks and defense !!!

[Alex777]

One thing is obvious, it is necessary to have COMPLEX SYSTEMS, both attacks and defense !!!

And for starters, these 40H6 at least start supplying troops ...

[Advisor to the Council of Advisers]

I would like to see a reasoned dispute (or the same replenishment of information from different angles) as it once was at VO.
I could then read into the choke.
It was very interesting to read messages with calculations of characteristics, etc. from knowledgeable People.
And there were no unnecessary off-topic interventions in the conversation .. Eh, times .. (:

[Grandfather]

Tested in the US, the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM missile is powerless against the S-400

Quote: Advisor to the Council of Advisors

I would like to see a reasoned argument

and the "no analogs" argument will not suit you:

[Aleksandre]

Quote: Advisor to the Council of Advisers

I would like to see a reasoned dispute (or the same replenishment of information from different angles) as it once was at VO.
I could then read into the choke.

Do not rub salt on the wound ... A year or two ago I went in to read not articles, but namely comments and disputes, which were often more interesting and reasoned. And now it has become a rarity, but 300 comments of the correct nonsense under the article are easily and easily typed.

[Advisor to the Council of Advisers]

Quote: Aleksandre

Do not sprinkle salt on the wound ... A year or two ago I went in to read not articles, namely comments and disputes, which were often more interesting and reasoned. And now it has become a rarity, but for 300 comments of the correct nonsense under the article, it is typed easily and naturally.

Agree to all 100!
Although they do not deny it, there are still worthy People. Too bad they are disproportionately small.

Quote: Dead Day

and the "no analogs" argument will not suit you:

Here you need to laugh, or ..?

[ApJlekuHo]

Here you need to laugh, or ..?

This is their usual scheme, to reduce the conversation to an idiotic joke or to complete absurdity. I suppose all the "brains" have moved to another resource, where it is cleaner.

[ApJlekuHo]

VOs have been sold for a long time, in the wrong hands .. more than one self-respecting person will not become bogged down with argumentative disputes, with the trolls that have bred here.

[lucul]

I would like to see a reasoned dispute (or the same replenishment of information from different angles) as it once was at VO.

So the time of our technological backward passed, and the time of excellence began.
And if there is superiority, then what kind of debate is there?))) Previously, they simply opposed enemy propaganda, but now it simply disappears)))
On the topic, all possible attack on our air defense will be possible in 2 cases - with the help of an enemy AWACS aircraft or during the flight of an enemy satellite over this area (the satellite is not "hanging").
Aircraft AWACS Hokkai has a target detection range of 400 km, exactly the same as the missile range of our S-400. And he will direct all the goals that can go at extremely low altitude. In this case, the maximum coordination of work and the highest skill of the personnel is required to attack our S-400. Just because all actions will be carried out at the limit of the detection range of the AWACS aircraft. The plane is not a helicopter, it cannot hang in place, therefore it will fly in circles. It flies closer, it gets knocked down, it flies further, it loses its target.
In this case, our whole task is not to let the AWACS aircraft "lead" the target. For this purpose, the MiG-31 with the R-37M rocket is simply ideal. The AWACS aircraft will be shot down with a very high probability. And without it, an attack on our S-400 with an AGM-88 HARM missile is simply pointless)))

[Grigory_45]

Quote: lucul

Aircraft AWACS Hokkai has a target detection range of 400 km, just like the missile range of our S-400. And that he will set all the goals

Hokka is a deck for tactical reconnaissance in the interests of the AUG. E-3 Sentry will work over land (and over the sea too, if the area is within reach), and his radar is much more powerful than Hokkaevsky - 600 km plus
In addition to AWACS, there are satellites. They can easily give the coordinates of the positions of the air defense missile system - then the "head" Kharma will do everything herself

Quote: lucul

Aircraft AWACS will be shot down with a very high probability

interceptors are not an easy task. AWACS fly with good cover. And long-range missiles have never shown their effectiveness. All downed planes - at a distance of no more than one and a half hundred kilometers, and the lion's share of them - at a distance of less than 50 km.

[lucul]

Hokka is a deck for tactical reconnaissance in the interests of the AUG. E-3 Sentry will work over land (and over the sea too, if the area is within reach), and his radar is much more powerful than Hokkaevsky - 600 km plus

Laugh )))
Would you first read something ....
600 km of detection is only for high-altitude targets, a la MiG-31 at 20 km altitude.
For the E-3 Sentry, at an altitude of 9m, the radio horizon is only 000 km. And the practical ceiling, for the E-390 Sentry just makes up these 3m))) So, for any 9km detection range on the ground, for him, you can not tell me - he is simply not able to see more than 000km)))

[Thrifty]

The main thing is not to speak to Damantsev otherwise all stereotypes can be easily broken by a person !

[Gogia]

Unfortunately, we do not have a similar missile in service with such a range ... HARM is a very serious thing there, warhead oh-oh ... Therefore, you can write on the fence. A bunch of air defense systems have a radius of less than 200 km. And they will come kirdyk if there will be a massive launch.

[poquello]

Quote: Gogia

Unfortunately, we do not have a similar missile in service with such a range ... HARM is a very serious thing there, warhead oh-oh ... Therefore, you can write on the fence. A bunch of air defense systems have a radius of less than 200 km. And they will come kirdyk if there will be a massive launch.

we have many missiles with a much greater range, x15p 300km 78goda))))), with yabch in the same series))))

[SSR]

Quote: Gogia

HARM is a very serious thing

Yes.

Quote: Gogia

there warhead oh ...

But this is not the most important thing for a rocket of this type.

Quote: Gogia

A bunch of air defense systems have a radius of less than 200 km. And they will come kirdyk if there will be a massive launch.

Shooting down the HARM with the S-400, S-300 missile is stupid, the S-400 should be demolished, if the carrier made a launch, then the Wasp, Torah, Armor, and Buki’s edge should demolish this missile. In general, the S-400 is not against the HARM and similar missiles, it’s like to shoot a horsefly from Kord.
From mothers with missiles, this is just S-400 and 300, all that is after it is for other systems.

[lucul]

Unfortunately, we do not have a similar missile in service with such a range ... HARM is a very serious thing there, warhead oh ...

Laughed like a horse))))

[merkava-2bet]

And that there is no author's name or links from where this nonsense stuck?

[The leader of the Redskins]

And here the information is always unconfirmed anonymous.

[Pan_hrabio]

And why was it worth spoiling the adequate news with this senseless and misinforming last paragraph?
PS And there’s another heading.

[tlauicol]

f18 will fly at 18km altitude?

[Pan_hrabio]

And do not maneuver!

[Kasym]

Aviation will be selected for the air defense system (radar, in particular) at a low altitude - the radius of the radar of the air defense system is significantly reduced (curvature of the planet in particular). Much depends on the area. If there are mountains nearby, for example, then most likely from their side.
But on the other hand, launching a rocket from a low altitude reduces the maximum range of ammunition.

[Reserve buildbat]

And to this height, how do you drag a hornet? It has a practical ceiling of 15km.

[Narak-zempo]

Quote: Stroibat stock

And to this height, how do you drag a hornet? It has a practical ceiling of 15km.

Just as the Su-25 painted the 11 km ceiling at the time ..

[Carib]

And there is a radio horizon. Any plane creeps up in the mode of terrain envelope, slide, rocket launch, second, all, descent and rewind. Smart missiles after the destruction of the first radiating target capture the second, third, etc. And if there were 5 planes and each had 4 missiles ... it’s really difficult for the air defenders to have it, and if there is a short-range air defense like Armor, TOP, ...

[Pan_hrabio]

Plus, in parallel, air defense will be suppressed with electronic warfare and overloaded with false targets like MALD.

[mvg]

Noticed an error
Select the text and press Ctrl + Enter

Ctrl + A, then Ctrl + Enter. News worthy of the yellow Rambler resource, after the news about Volochkova and Lukasheko. Not enough pop-up ads

[Professor]

In turn, this suggests that the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM is powerless against the S-400, since its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it can launch a rocket.

The nameless author forgot about the curvature of the earth's surface.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: professor

In turn, this suggests that the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM is powerless against the S-400, since its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it can launch a rocket.

The nameless author forgot about the curvature of the earth's surface.

And the fact that today aviation is taught to work at extremely low altitudes. Oleg, look at the statistics of accidents in our aircraft over the past 15 years. 80% fought during flight operations at extremely low.

[Professor]

Quote: Aaron Zawi

Quote: professor

In turn, this suggests that the modernization of the AGM-88 HARM is powerless against the S-400, since its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it can launch a rocket.

The nameless author forgot about the curvature of the earth's surface.

And the fact that today aviation is taught to work at extremely low altitudes. Oleg, look at the statistics of accidents in our aircraft over the past 15 years. 80% fought during flight operations at extremely low.

I don't have to go far. Low-level planes often pass over the house, and sometimes "under the house" in the gorge.

[poquello]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

And the fact that today aviation is taught to work at extremely low altitudes.

cool, but how long will this missile fly at launch from such a height? )

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: poquello

Quote: Aron Zaavi

And the fact that today aviation is taught to work at extremely low altitudes.

cool, but how long will this missile fly at launch from such a height? )

I am not an expert, but they told me that there is such a term as bombing during cabrying. For rockets, this technique is even easier.

[poquello]

Quote: Aaron Zawi

Quote: poquello

Quote: Aron Zaavi

And the fact that today aviation is taught to work at extremely low altitudes.

cool, but how long will this missile fly at launch from such a height? )

I am not an expert, but they told me that there is such a term as bombing during cabrying. For rockets, this technique is even easier.

not, well, the old one with the declared range of 150 km flew only 20 when starting from a low altitude)))))), the question is, what are they screwing to it there, if upgrading is only to increase the range - consider it yourself), if the air defense is still unknown , well, and PRVD at low altitude xs

[Avior]

20 is from low altitudes.
in this case, the launch of the Harma is possible immediately at the time of detection, in contrast to the launch of the SAM — the delay time will be at least 15-20 seconds — detection, taking for escort, etc.
Harm will arrive in 30 seconds at a speed of 2M, only the radar will be turned off as soon as Harm’s launch is detected from such a distance.

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

Harm will arrive in 30 seconds at a speed of 2M, only the radar will be turned off as soon as Harm’s launch is detected from such a distance.

if Jews write here there is still no reason to poke the Jewish situation, for 20 km no fy35 can be selected for normal air defense even along a ditch because they will block the ditch too

[Avior]

for harma, this is precisely the method and the pre-mortgage method of cabling.
the fighter’s climb rate is about 250 m / s, that is, he gains a kilometer in 4 seconds in steady state. that is, dialing for launch from 2,5 km to 5 is 10 seconds.
They write that the launch of Harma is possible immediately upon detection of radar radiation.
That is, the start of Harma in time is less than the working time of the air defense system.
When launching at a long range, the fighter will have time to again go under the horizon before launching it.
And an air defense missile missile 200 km fly to this place another 200-250 seconds, if that, at an average speed of 3M.

[Crimean partisan 1974]

When launching at a long range, the fighter will again have time to go under the horizon before launching it .......... well, only a full station will be located in the lowlands.
S-300 battery and modes are capable of firing up to 24 targets simultaneously using data from the detection station. and the next moment. it’s about that the 40N type of missile system has an ARLS and is thrown to a height of one and a half km, after which it picks up the signature of the target of attack against the background of the earth. it's about like a flycracker

[Avior]

There are no lowlands, but not everywhere mountains are at hand.
About 40n6 no one writes how about a rocket against fighter jets

[Crimean partisan 1974]

About 40n6 no one writes how about a rocket against fighters .... but have you seen the face value of S-300 mods? for example M-ki, the same thing. catch targets on the background of the underlying surface. go figure it out in TPK, Veshki. Nki or Mki

[bk0010]

The trick is that the plane itself sees little from the extremely low, is deprived of the possibility of using planning ammunition, plus it is vulnerable to every little thing. Driving aviation to extremely low is already a big deal.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: bk0010

The trick is that the plane sees very little from extremely low

an airplane does not have to "see" something itself. There are satellites, there is AWACS, there are, in the end, previously reconnoitered positions of the SAM location. So there is a chance, and a very large one - to go into a given square, make a jump (even if they find it, they won't have time to do anything), launch a rocket (or several) - and dump home

[Camrad]

Sokolov Oleg forgot that the station can be put on a hill.

[rocket757]

Everyone prefers to forget that air defense is an integrated system, this is the case with us! It is enough than to look beyond the horizon, aim, intercept and .... therefore they do not fly, but only advertising articles are shoved everywhere.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: professor

The nameless author forgot about the curvature of the earth's surface.

or, rather, did not know, judging by the article in general. A set of letters from an illiterate amateur

[Reserve buildbat]

And for a Hornet with Harm, is the land flat?

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Stroibat stock

And for a Hornet with Harm, is the land flat?

A plane can make a slide - find a goal - launch a rocket - and again go beyond the horizon. And that's it, it is not available for air defense systems. Harm flies on autopilot (inertial and GPS), then passive and active GOS come into play

[V1er]

If the missile is carried by a suicide drone, then it is a completely working option.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: V1er

If a suicide bomber carries a rocket, then it’s a completely working option

if it carries even the F-35 - also quite an option. Given the small EPR of the carrier itself, it can get close to the launch range unnoticed. And then the air defense system will have to deal not with the carrier, but with missiles, which is an order of magnitude more problematic. And if the enemy does not possess S-400 class air defense systems, then he will be completely sad

[Avior]

Slightly very tightly pulled by a bird on a model of the globe.

1. Nobody canceled the radio horizon and the range of direct radio visibility.
This means that the radar at a distance of 400 km, in principle, will be able to see the enemy only at an altitude of 10 km and above. at a distance of 200 km - 2500m or higher. Given the enemy’s electronic warfare, the target detection range will actually be even less.
It is enough for an airplane not to rise higher when approaching, then make a slide, start up and fly back.
2. The 40N6 missile is everywhere characterized as a missile against AWACS; it has a relatively low overload capacity.
It would be difficult for her to shoot down a maneuverable fighter.
Against AGM-88 HARM it is much more logical to create high-tech powerful simulator traps.
but they will be expensive, in addition to the passive GOS, she also has an active, millimeter range.

[Liam]

Quote: Avior

Nobody canceled the radio horizon and the range of direct radio visibility.

This is not about the EPR

[Avior]

and this must be taken into account, of course.

[knn54]

Against hypersound, the advantage in the range of the 40H6 missile is leveled. If the Yankees can install the appropriate block.
True, more than 1-2 missiles the fighter will not pull.
I wonder how sensitive the assassin's targeting system is.
During the Vietnam War, bamboo shields were placed in front of the locators. It turned out pretty well.

[Avior]

the cabs were studded with these shields
to be honest, they don't look like a strong defense

Near the PA cabin, upholstered in bamboo shields to protect against Shriki.
http://www.nhat-nam.ru/vietnamwar/oldfoto23-4.html
Shrike warhead 66 kg, AWP 97 kg.
Slightly, to put it mildly, unconvincing.
Unless at the end of the striking elements.
Used other methods, such as switching to the equivalent

We also had to experience the use by American pilots of Shrike-type homing missiles, both fragmentation and ball versions.
In the division under the command of Major S.T. Vorobyov, after the missile was launched at the target, the manual support operator V.K. Melnichuk saw on the screen a "burst" of the target and a moving mark separated from it. He immediately reported to the commander:
- I see the Shrike! Heading for us!
While the issue of removing radiation from the antenna was being resolved through an interpreter with the Vietnamese command, the Shrike was already flying up to the SNR. Then the guidance officer Lieutenant Vadim Shcherbakov himself made a decision and switched the radiation from the antenna to the equivalent. After 5 seconds, there was an explosion. In cockpit P, on which the transmitting antenna is located, the door was knocked out by an explosion and a Vietnamese operator was killed by a shrapnel. The trees standing next to the cockpit were cut off by the Shrike fragments like a saw, and from the tent in which the battery personnel were before the shooting, there were rags the size of a handkerchief. Our military was lucky - everyone survived.
In the event that a "Shrike" stuffed with balls exploded, they scattered around the starting position and hit the missiles on the launchers. The warhead of a rocket weighing 200 kg exploded together with an oxidizer and fuel. The explosion detonated and exploded rockets on other launchers. Everything metallic turned into twisted, full of holes from the accordion. Highly toxic rocket fuel ignited and burned. The sensation and the sight, I tell you, is not a pleasant one.

http://flibusta.site/b/309830/read

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

It is enough for an airplane not to rise higher when approaching, then make a slide, start up and fly back.

that's bad luck, for this rocket the range is directly tied to the launch height)))))))

[Avior]

Of course, tied up, although not directly. For that, a slide is needed.

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

Of course, tied up, although not directly. For that, a slide is needed.

so the hill will start to do - it will already burn and higher, the complex will have few chances to pass, but if it slips to the launch point it will be a question of where the pu air defense missiles are

[Avior]

If he attacks the complex, then he will not pass it.
On the hill, he will show up, but as soon as he goes under the horizon, he will disappear again.
And there they will be able to bring down the Harmas, or they will fall, then you can continue.
As for the slide, this is very little time. Obviously not enough to bring down an airplane at a distance of 200 km. And another question, maybe without a range slide is enough.
You need to watch the launch range.

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

On the hill, he will show up, but as soon as he goes under the horizon, he will disappear again.

this is unlikely

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Avior

Against AGM-88 HARM it is much more logical to create high-tech powerful simulator traps.
but they will be expensive, in addition to the passive GOS, she also has an active, millimeter range.

AARGM-ER has an active and passive radar homing system plus inertial with storing coordinates of the radiating object (radar). The simulator must be very, very tricky for the rocket to re-aim

[Avior]

I wrote so. Combined GOS is deceived only by a very realistic simulator.

[Liam]

It doesn’t even redirect to realistic. Unless the simulator stands right next to the radar, but then there is no point in using it. The missile will destroy both the simulator and the radar.

[Avior]

if there is the possibility of retargeting in flight, then there is also a probable probability of deceiving the simulator.

[Liam]

GPS coordinates. No simulator can change them. The missile flies to the point with the exact coordinates, and the military version error is miserable. The missile will not simply respond to other radiation outside this error radius

[Avior]

depending on what mode
for a new harm, they write about the possibility of re-targeting in flight.
that means it can be redirected.

[Liam]

Maybe, but for this it is necessary that the initial signal is turned off. This means, firstly, that the air defense system stops its work and its objects that are covered by it are defenseless. And secondly, no one bothers to launch 2 or more missiles programmed so that at least one of them hits the original source without being distracted by other sources. HARMs, however, tens of thousands released. This is not counting other types of missiles. Throw anyone. And the cost of S-400 billion (not rubles). You can’t release them tens of thousands

[bk0010]

The coordinates determined by radio engineering are very approximate, far from meters. So the rocket does not fly to a point, but to an area.

[Liam]

Well, yes. By squares, they practically beat with GPS and inertial

[Kolka Semenov]

1. The same is true for AARGM - the launch range of 230-300km is given for maximum carrier speed and maximum flight altitude. When flying at low altitudes, the flight range can be safely divided into three, since the USA has no supersonic air defense missiles at low altitudes - they wrote off F111, the Tornado will most likely not be able to carry this stray without modernization, and it will fly 5 years, that is, no one will bother with such an upgrade.

As for electronic warfare, it works both ways: the S-400 can use the triangulation method to calculate the source of interference and fire it.

It is not enough for an airplane to make a slide, first you will need to make sure that the rocket has captured the target, and this is the time. The S-400 itself will be covered by Carapace, so the grandmother in two said how it would all end.

2. Most of the PPs are also far from aerobatics - no one has canceled a bunch of extra equipment, and it does not add aerodynamics.
The millimeter range has its advantages and disadvantages, but none of the ranges is a panacea.

[huntsman650]

Nobody canceled short-range air defense systems forward, to a maximum, under the cover of long-range air defense systems, nobody canceled the corner reflectors.

[Avior]

The same is true for AARGM - the launch range of 230-300km is given for maximum carrier speed and maximum flight altitude.

with a launch range of 200 km, the aircraft will be below the radar horizon of the complex’s radar at average altitudes below 2500 m.
it can be started from cabling without rising above the radio horizon.

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

The same is true for AARGM - the launch range of 230-300km is given for maximum carrier speed and maximum flight altitude.

with a launch range of 200 km, the aircraft will be below the radar horizon of the complex’s radar at average altitudes below 2500 m.
it can be started from cabling without rising above the radio horizon.

do not carry this garbage about the curvature of the earth, Jews use the terrain and not the curvature of the earth

[Avior]

What, is the earth flat?
Then I'm sorry, I was mistaken ....

[poquello]

Quote: Avior

What, is the earth flat?
Then I'm sorry, I was mistaken ....

no but not a ball

[Kolka Semenov]

And how, having no signal from a working radar, this stray will find it? She either needs an external control center, or the plane must enter the air defense work area above the horizon and wait until the GOS missile captures the target, and this is the time. Fall in my eyes lower and lower.

[poquello]

Quote: Semenov Kolka

And how, having no signal from a working radar, this stray will find it? She either needs an external control center, or the plane must enter the air defense work area above the horizon and wait until the GOS missile captures the target, and this is the time. Fall in my eyes lower and lower.

this is bouncing from the development of inertial guidance by the bourgeoisie, though our rebs kottsa him)

[Liam]

Quote: Kolka Semyonov

The S-400 itself will be covered by Carapace, so the grandmother in two said how it would all end.

You can ask Syrian and Libyan grandmothers

[poquello]

Quote: Liam

Quote: Kolka Semyonov

The S-400 itself will be covered by Carapace, so the grandmother in two said how it would all end.

You can ask Syrian and Libyan grandmothers

why not at Nitanyahu? I would also ask the Iranians what they are in response to missiles do not shoot rockets, it's time

[Kolka Semenov]

And you can also turn on your head and find out that the Shell is an element of layered air defense and alone should not fight with the air attack, and it is a miracle that he could bring down something in these sands, which speaks of the highest characteristics, against the background of crooked hands local natives.
In theory, the Carapace should receive telemetry from the same S-400 and work on an external control unit, and a millimeter-sized AFAR for him only in order not to drown in interference. On the tip of the S-400, he can shoot down much more and better.

[Liam]

That is, this is a meaningless unnecessary device without S-300/400 in your opinion. I wonder why it is supplied / bought then by countries where there is no S-300/400. On the other hand, for some reason, those who buy S-300/400 (Turkey, China, India), why they don’t take the Shell, which is supposedly absolutely irreplaceable in this connection. Something is wrong with this theory.
By the way, Syria also has S-300s and S-400s, but this somehow did not stop the Turks from hitting their second-class UAVs with Shells as partridges and there, just like Israel.

[Kolka Semenov]

All right, you just do not need to make generalizations while "under the fly".
As Khmeimim showed, the effectiveness of 100% interceptions, including shells of the MLRS shell and Tor demonstrate in the hands of our operators and in the presence of an external control system. Without these factors, options are possible and the effectiveness of Shell-like systems is significantly reduced.
As for countries that buy Shell, but do not take S-300 / S-400, they simply do not have money, while China and India, who take S-400 but not Shell, take them to protect against ballistic missiles and not to protection of the last frontier, so drink less.

[Liam]

Quote: Kolka Semyonov

As Hmeimim showed

Are these those devices glued with scotch tape from the city of. And sticks bought on Aliexpress?
The Turks, on their second-rate (but real) UAVs, cut out, in addition to the Shells themselves, hundreds of armored vehicles in a week in Syria under the watchful eye of this "complex" air defense

[poquello]

Quote: Liam

Quote: Kolka Semyonov

As Hmeimim showed

Are these those devices glued with scotch tape from the city of. And sticks bought on Aliexpress?
The Turks, on their second-rate (but real) UAVs, cut out, in addition to the Shells themselves, hundreds of armored vehicles in a week in Syria under the watchful eye of this "complex" air defense

))))))))))))))))))) thousands, thousands, and three Syrian armed forces

[poquello]

Quote: Liam

By the way, Syria also has S-300s and S-400s, but this somehow did not stop the Turks from hitting their second-class UAVs with Shells as partridges and there, just like Israel.

and they shot down a lot in Khmeinim?

[Liam]

Did the Turks attack Khmeinim?

[poquello]

Quote: Liam

Did the Turks attack Khmeinim?

and shells beat like a partridge?

[bk0010]

Quote: Avior

Against AGM-88 HARM it is much more logical to create high-tech powerful simulator traps.

There is a long time. No one has yet canceled the newsboy.

[Avior]

Newsboy to protect the s-300 created

To be honest, it doesn’t look like a high-tech product. Maybe against the Harmos of the 80s he was effective.
But since then, Harm has had a combined passive-active GOS of the millimeter range, combined with an inertial and satellite control system, and whether the Gazetchik is able to deceive her - a big question.

[mvg]

And the “newsman” knows how to use Vika, a little math, about “3-” about, poorly versed in topics and does not check the material. But overall, great for a weekend

[Svetlana]

Forgive the sedition, but in practice, who will win .. depends on the "tychyachi-million" circumstances.

[poquello]

Quote: Svetlana

Forgive the sedition, but in practice, who will win .. depends on the "tychyachi-million" circumstances.

this is not sedition, it is

[rocket757]

Quote: Svetlana

Forgive the sedition, but in practice, who will win .. depends on the "tychyachi-million" circumstances.

Basically, the quality of the preparation of calculations and the correct tactics for ensuring the effective operation of the entire air defense system. This is an axiom, homework, t.s. . Those who cooked it in a good quality can also benefit from buns, otherwise cones.

[eklmn]

This rocket is made by Ratheon. But there is Northrop Grumman with its AARGM-ER
The other day :
“The prospective AARGM-ER air defense missile of the US Navy made its first flight” (missile device attached)
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/33830/navys-highly-promising-long-range-air-defense-busting-missile-has-taken-its-first-flight
or here
https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2020/06/19/Navys-anti-radiation-missile-completes-critical-design-test/868159258518
“The main objective of the AARGM-ER, as in the case of the AARGM, will be to suppress and destroy the enemy's integrated air defense networks, including on enemy radars and other emitters associated with surface-to-air missiles and other air defense systems. However, its guidance package is a multi-mode guidance with an inertial navigation system component with a GPS receiver that allows you to reach targets over long distances and a millimeter-wave radar capable of detecting targets even if they are disabled and stop transmitting signals. ”
“The package of instructions is also networked, so an airplane can launch it without having to first select a target. External sources outside the plane that launches the rocket can transmit updated information about the target of the rocket in flight. According to reports, the rocket in the last minutes can transmit data on whether it successfully hit the target or not. ”
This article does not provide the distance of defeat, but flashed (could not be found in several days) to 500 km and by 2023 -700 km.
It is launched from the earth / plane / ship.

[Thunderbolt]

Quote: eklmn

According to reports, the rocket in the last minutes can transmit data on whether it successfully hit the target or not. ”

Right grandma Wang, not a rocket

[rocket757]

And in response, what will fly? We can assume no less bizarre and lethal.
Therefore, it does not fly, which is sure to fly back.

[carnifexx]

This is the analytics arrived. He looked at the range of the missiles and concluded. Despite the fact that there are many variables, it is important to take into account the launch platform, weather and so on. In adverse weather, launching such an F-35 missile can create problems for the S-400. I do not claim that this is bound to happen (I am not the author of this masterpiece here), but this option should not be dismissed.

[rocket757]

You need to start with the fact that all this will end ...
But you have to finish, not the first time.

[Grigory_45]

The AGM-88G Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile - Extended Range (AARGM-ER) will be integrated into the armament of the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet, EA-18G Growler and F-35A / C Lightning II aircraft.

AGM-88G AARGM-ER is another member of the well-known AGM-88 HARM family. The new missile is distinguished by a hull with a diameter increased to 290 mm, of the aerodynamic planes there are only aerodynamic ridges instead of wings and tail rudders to accommodate F-35A aircraft in the internal compartments. The rocket also received a new engine, which allows it to have a speed of more than 2,5M and a flight range of up to 300 km, which will move the launch line from enemy positions. As a result, the enemy will have to use more long-range air defense systems capable of hitting a carrier aircraft in order to repulse the attack in a timely manner. Otherwise, anti-aircraft systems will have to deal with a more complex target in the form of a rocket.

Missile guidance system - combined, includes an inertial system, a satellite navigation system, passive and active homing radar heads. Such a guidance system is believed to significantly expand the capabilities of the missile to combat the most advanced air defense systems, including in the conditions of electronic warfare and the use by the enemy of camouflage measures and false targets.
The onboard equipment of the rocket is capable of exchanging data with the carrier, up to the moment it hits the target. In particular, this allows the operator to be informed of a successful defeat or miss.
The guidance system is capable of "remembering" the coordinates of the target, which allows you to hit it even if it stopped emitting (if the radar was turned off)

The warhead of the rocket is equipped with a multi-mode fuse that provides detonation when it hits the target directly or when passing near it.

The development of the AARGM-ER long-range anti-radar missile was launched in the interests of the US Navy back in 2015 by Orbital ATK, which was absorbed in 2018 by Northrop Grumman Corporation (and now the basis of its Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems division), and is considered by the Americans as one of the most promising means of countering the notorious "restricted zones" (A2 / AD) of potential adversaries.

[Dikson]

Yes ... oh, here just now materials were going on the Internet that the Israelis got the SAMs from the Shell in some way .. And now the Shells clearly see Israeli rockets, but they can't shoot them down ... They’re lying for sure! How is it that our air defense systems and the adversary could not be brought down? Regarding the article, no matter what they say, you don’t need to hold on to the inept Americans in this area .. Their aviation products are at a very high level .. Both guided bombs and air-to-ground missiles .. This is not for you to throw FABs ..

[huntsman650]

Which they proved in Yugoslavia.

[Flurry]

"It never was, and here it is again ..." Now a single S-400 division against a Super Hornet with Harms. No air defense complex can stand alone against enemy aircraft. We need our own fighters, our own electronic warfare, our own AWACS planes. Then Harm is just another air-to-surface missile, and no roller coaster will save the attacking aircraft. Air defense systems mostly to increase the stability of their air forces and to finish off the breakthrough enemies, and not for duels with fighters.

[Avior]

As the question was posed in the article, they are being discussed.
and as for

Most air defense systems for the most part to increase the stability of their Air Force and wandered through the erupted enemies, and not for duels with fighters.

then ground-based air defense eats away money from the aviation component of the army and is incapable of concentrating forces, this also needs to be taken into account.

[Aleks2000]

"S-400, as its carrier will be shot down in the event of a threat - before it has time to release the missile."
these are all words, and the victims are ege. (the standard task of the student is to get closer / delete)

But in reality, a missile against an anti-aircraft gun, no anti-aircraft gun was tested on an airplane. It can only be judged indirectly - in Syria. Where C300 / 400 does not show.

[TatarinSSSR]

Who writes such articles? Victims of the exam? Such a stupid American pilot directly flies on his F-18 with this missile, at an altitude of 10 km and nothing at all. Without the support of EW aircraft, without distracting maneuvers, without flying at low altitude with enveloping the relief, it stupidly flies in the direction of the S-400. And there are only flat fields on the earth. Perfect coverage of the radar field. Not a mound. And then bam, for 400 km a rocket from the S-400 flies into it. Before dying, the pilot thinks - and what kind of Vasya came up with this - just fly on a long-range air defense system ?!

[Zeev zeev]

In the real world, real equipment is at war, which is controlled by real people, taking into account the real parameters of weapons and real terrain. Maybe somewhere in a distant, distant galaxy, planes hit with anti-radar missiles, being in the affected area and dutifully waiting for them to be shot by the enemy's long-range air defense. In our universe, half a century ago, the ancient "Phantoms", no less ancient "Shrikes" were launched not just like on the test site, but with feeling and invention: from behind the radio horizon, hiding behind folds, actively maneuvering and using electronic warfare ... So that the new modification of the AGM-88 is far from powerless against Russian-made air defense, but is a dangerous weapon against which new precautions must be created and taken.

[Zaurbek]

1. First HARM is a pretty massive missile
2. Not everyone has S-300/400 and these are rather large countries.
3. Long-range missiles are unlikely to target tactical vehicles at such ranges
4. It is unlikely that the search for S-300 and 400 and the launch of HARM will carry out the same aircraft
5. For such a tempting goal as C300 / 400, not 1 piece of HARM and not 1 piece of F-18 will be allocated
6. The new HARM has AGSN.
7. There are a bunch of other air defense systems - TOR-Shell-Buk, S-125, S-75 Dvina.

What do we have in this caliber?

[Tom Johnson]

This week this site published AARGM-ER article- why now this disinformation?

[Tom Johnson]

This site last week published an article regarding AARGM-ER. So why do you publish this abstract? OLD NEWS --- AARGM-ER

[kris_67]

"powerless against the S-400 air defense system" - but what has someone tried? Again, like in a movie "in a simulated battle, a conventional enemy was conventionally shot down"