Military Review

Chinese press: The popularity of Russian S-500 air defense systems in the world market depends on their ability to fight stealth fighters

106

The Chinese press is actively discussing the imminent introduction of the latest S-500 anti-aircraft missile systems into service with the RF Armed Forces. The discussion is also associated with an attempt to answer the question of whether China should purchase these new generation air defense systems from the Russian Federation.


A material was published on the pages of the Chinese portal Sohu, which says that the popularity of the Russian-made S-500 Prometheus complex in the world arms market may turn out to be high if it can fight stealth fighters. It is noted that the S-500 air defense system radar allows detecting and identifying targets at distances that none of the existing complexes can provide monitoring. At the same time, it is added that the S-500 air defense system is not only an anti-aircraft weaponbut also anti-missile.

An author in the Chinese media writes that one of the most likely first buyers of the S-500 Prometheus air defense system from Russia may be India. From the article:

India could acquire the S-500 from Russia, even if it is not confirmed that it is capable of countering stealth fighters. Anti-missile performance can play a role. India may order the S-500 as a more modern addition to the contracted S-400 Triumph, since they do not have their own air and missile defense technologies.

At the same time, the Chinese author, assuming that it is India that can become the first buyer of the Russian S-500s, he is pumping up, adding that in this case, China's geopolitical competitor can get the PRC ahead of a more advanced anti-aircraft weapon.

Earlier in the Russian Federation, representatives of the defense industry noted that there was no talk of exporting the S-500 air defense system. The main task is to deliver the latest systems to the Russian Armed Forces.
106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Doccor18
    Doccor18 13 September 2020 07: 38 New
    -7
    The main task is to deliver the latest systems to the Russian Armed Forces.

    I would like to believe.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Insurgent
      Insurgent 13 September 2020 08: 03 New
      10
      Chinese press: The popularity of Russian S-500 air defense systems in the world market depends on their ability to fight stealth fighters

      What kind of posing a question, when the S-300 air defense system was designed to combat complex targets, including those performed according to the "Stealth" scheme ...
      1. orionvitt
        orionvitt 13 September 2020 08: 16 New
        +5
        I have always said and will continue to say that the degree of "invisibility" directly depends on the degree of technical equipment of the enemy. The higher the equipment, the lower the "invisibility". So, in this regard, Russia has nothing to fear. As the events in Yugoslavia have shown, "stealth" is a myth for the aborigines. Or for the Arabs, there this topic gave a ride.
        1. Free wind
          Free wind 13 September 2020 08: 19 New
          -11
          And what did they show there?
          1. orionvitt
            orionvitt 13 September 2020 08: 37 New
            +6
            If you are not aware, then in Yugoslavia, a stealth fighter, such as the "non-kill" and "invisible" F-117, was shot down by the old Soviet S-125 complex. after that, for the bombing of Yugoslavia, the Americans no longer sent such expensive planes. So the myth has long been dispelled. Well, here's a link for you.https: //rg.ru/2019/03/27/ohota-na-nevidimku-20-let-nazad-byl-sbit-amerikanskij-samolet-f-117.html
            1. Free wind
              Free wind 13 September 2020 08: 52 New
              -2
              Firstly, not invisibility, but inconspicuousness, and secondly, to shoot it down, a special operation was needed, which was preparing for almost a month and did not work several times, in the third it flew like that, simply did not play slovenly.
              1. orionvitt
                orionvitt 13 September 2020 08: 55 New
                +1
                Quote: Free Wind
                it took a special operation to shoot him down

                So what? Whatever it was, the fact is obvious. Which once again proves that the technical equipment of the enemy is the most decisive factor.
            2. Avior
              Avior 13 September 2020 09: 10 New
              +2
              One F-117 was shot down over Yugoslavia on the 3rd day of hostilities.
              After that, the F-117 flew there for another three months, 850 sorties.
              No more was shot down.
              From this it is strange to conclude that the f-117 is unusable.
              Moreover, there were thousands of sorties in Iraq - not a single one was shot down.
              1. Insurgent
                Insurgent 13 September 2020 10: 02 New
                +4
                Quote: Avior
                From this it is strange to conclude that the f-117 is unusable.

                Conclusions are not ours No. , AMERICAN yes

                Too fast for a combat aircraft, the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk left the scene ...

                How many years did he actively serve in the US Air Force, and how many, for example, the F-16, which, by the way, no one is going to write off?
                1. Avior
                  Avior 13 September 2020 10: 11 New
                  -3
                  American conclusions are known - there was an alternative between the f-117 and f-22 programs, there was not enough money for everything at once. We chose the f-22 naturally.
                  1. Insurgent
                    Insurgent 13 September 2020 10: 19 New
                    +6
                    Quote: Avior
                    American conclusions are known - there was an alternative between the f-117 and f-22 programs, there was not enough money for everything at once. We chose the f-22 naturally.

                    You haven't confused warm with soft?

                    For the F-117 was already production program and obviously modernization with proven technologies and the availability of production facilities, and for the future F-22, only a program of expensive development with vague prospects.

                    Nevertheless, because the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk showed itself as chicken droppings as a combat unit (both in the breakthrough of air defense, and in aerial combat, especially - "iron", one word yes ), in the United States and hastened to get rid of such an expensive but useless toy that did not meet the high hopes that had been pinned.
                    1. Avior
                      Avior 13 September 2020 11: 03 New
                      -2
                      About air combat of a purely strike aircraft, where he allegedly showed himself badly, this is something.
                      Next, you will probably write about transport air battles that you have shown yourself poorly.
                      As for the shock capabilities, the f-117 showed its full effectiveness, thousands of sorties in the most difficult missions.
                      And only one shot down is a unique result for an attack aircraft.
                      But most importantly, the f-117 fully confirmed the effectiveness of the stealth concept - the Americans, according to the experience of its use, began to make unobtrusive aircraft not in dozens, like f-117, but in thousands. It is clear that with such a release, it became economically impractical to modernize several dozen relatively old aircraft.
                      The situation is similar all over the world - everyone is trying to be invisible for modern people - within the limits of their technological capabilities, of course.
                      1. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 13 September 2020 13: 01 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        About air combat of a purely strike aircraft, where he allegedly showed himself badly, this is something.

                        Namely - SOMETHING, because in an air battle, in a direct collision with the enemy, he, not even having an on-board radar, and receiving target designation exclusively "from the outside", could not oppose ANYTHING to the attacking enemy.

                        And as for the aerobatic properties, as I already wrote "the iron ... The pilots who flew on it gave it a nickname different from Nighthawk - Wobblin 'Goblin, in a simple way" lame goblin "...

                        Come on, praise "super stealth" yes , so quickly, by the standards of aviation history, has become a "dinosaur", a dead-end branch of evolution further, consider all your arguments "FOR" ...
                      2. Avior
                        Avior 13 September 2020 14: 02 New
                        0
                        This is a strike aircraft and not a fighter, and its maneuverability and overload capabilities are similar to other strike aircraft, at least not inferior, the same 6 units.
                      3. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 14 September 2020 07: 24 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        This is a strike aircraft

                        Yes,shock, which I thought about. Here are just its impact properties, against the background of the exorbitant price prevailing in the course of the US rate on the imaginary total "invisibility", turned out to be a complete mess.

                        How to "hit" if they intended to quietly approach and hit, but "quietly, on creeps" did not work ... They found out.

                        For it turned out visible to everyone и completely defenseless in front of air defense, both ground and Soviet fighters ...
                      4. Avior
                        Avior 14 September 2020 07: 41 New
                        0
                        They were so easily discovered that they were able to shoot down completely by accident, or rather because of negligence, as much as one of thousands of combat missions.
                      5. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 14 September 2020 07: 54 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        They were so easily discovered that they were able to shoot down completely by accident, or rather because of negligence, as much as one of thousands of combat missions.

                        An ancient complex, the army of Yugoslavia ...

                        Would you still "high x-ki"and him"combat value"iron, confirmed with this example yes :

                      6. Avior
                        Avior 15 September 2020 05: 34 New
                        +1
                        The element of chance always exists.
                      7. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 15 September 2020 07: 44 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        The element of chance always exists.

                        Naturally. And they wrote him off from the Air Force, also by accident. Well, Yankees, what can you do ...
                      8. Avior
                        Avior 15 September 2020 07: 49 New
                        0
                        it was not written off, they still fly.
                        but new ones appeared long ago
                      9. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 15 September 2020 07: 54 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        it was not written off, they still fly.

                        "Fly", and"are on alert"are not there two, big differences?

                        I already wrote:

                        Quote: mvg
                        By the way, F-117s are still flying. Well, sometimes.

                        Quote: Insurgent
                        I saw U-2 (Po-2) also fly, and also occasionally.
                      10. Avior
                        Avior 15 September 2020 07: 58 New
                        -1
                        And they didn't write them off, they fly.
                        And the fact that they have replaced them with new ones, so those who have money often do this. Nothing is eternal.
                      11. Insurgent
                        Insurgent 15 September 2020 08: 19 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        And they didn't write them off, they fly.

                        You write nonsense, not confirmed by anything, obviously due to blind admiration for the supposedly effective "stealth" technology implemented in the F-117.
                        Quote: Avior
                        Nothing is eternal.

                        Of course, even the B-52 will be written off sometime ... But do you know, and are you able to adequately assess HOW MUCH this bomber will serve in the Air Force, and how long the iron you praise has served?
                        Quote: Avior
                        And the fact that they have replaced them with new ones, so those who have money often do this.

                        a good don't change No. , B-52 as an example for you yes
                      12. Avior
                        Avior 15 September 2020 08: 46 New
                        -1
                        And how many peers of the B-52 or Tu-95 fly still?
                        The F-117 was put into storage when new ones appeared, everything is obvious.
                        And you, it seems, have such a dislike for F-117 that you cannot even eat. smile
                        I will not bother you.
                        hi
  • ilia3075
    ilia3075 15 September 2020 01: 10 New
    0
    Just type in the name "Operation Red Herring" into a search engine. And everything will become clear to you.
  • hrych
    hrych 13 September 2020 09: 14 New
    +3
    To begin with, the S-500 itself is seen not simply as a separate, independent system, but fully integrated into a single air defense-missile defense system, as well as the first generation of anti-aircraft missile defense, i.e. swung at space defense. Therefore, it will apparently receive information from the ZGRLS, early warning systems and other tracking and guidance systems. We also know that the stealth geometry is sharpened to reduce the ESR, but precisely if the emitter-detector of the enemy's locator is combined. When the emitter and the detector are separated in space (as Ufimtsev, the father of the stealth, wrote), the Stealth geometry does not work. It is the advantages of PFAR over AFAR, in that it is done in an elementary way. Also, RTI employees were able to create a technology for detecting the so-called "invisible", which was based on the analysis of the radar shadow of the observed object. The company itself explained that if, together with the image of an object shifted along the bearing, its "shadow" can be observed, then further tracking is carried out directly along it. This already applies to conventional radars and only a new algorithm is being added.
    1. orionvitt
      orionvitt 13 September 2020 09: 29 New
      +2
      Quote: hrych
      This already applies to conventional radars and only a new algorithm is added.

      I don't understand the term "conventional radars". Any object (flying in the atmosphere, and at speeds close to, or higher than sound), creates so many disturbances in the environment that it is detected in many spectra of radiation. No radar. Conventional radars are good, no doubt about it. But for every cunning ... y, there is always a bolt with a reverse thread.
  • mvg
    mvg 13 September 2020 10: 02 New
    -2
    was shot down by the old Soviet S-125 complex

    Can you first figure out how and why was shot down? In Iraq, these F-117s suppressed 30% of the air defense in the first two weeks. Moreover, the most difficult. No loss.
    Let's remember 08.08.08 How the Russian Aerospace Forces pressed on the air defense.
    1. Genry
      Genry 13 September 2020 11: 17 New
      +1
      Quote: mvg
      In Iraq, these F-117s suppressed 30% of the air defense in the first two weeks.

      Not "these" but winged Tomahawks.
      1. mvg
        mvg 13 September 2020 11: 42 New
        -5
        Not "these" but winged Tomahawks

        And they too.
        http://i.cons-systems.ru/u/f8/df29de94c211e4bb3c940d9a955b35/-/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B5%20%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5%20F-117.pdf
        That's what the Nighthawks did ... no more, no less.
        A 316 Axes. It's so-so. In Syria, hundreds of bullets are being shot, and they are shot down to death by VO experts. Straight off the couch.
        1. hrych
          hrych 13 September 2020 12: 26 New
          +3
          Quote: mvg
          VO experts knock to death. Straight off the couch.

          And some run straight from the kibbutz to comment and sideways back wassat but they cannot answer why such successful and deadly f-2008s have been decommissioned since 117 ... at all. I will tell you, justifying the owners, they post the version that there was not enough money for their operation wassat Americans have wassat And they said a printing press, a printing press. Can you clarify how such a superwunder ... was sent to the trash heap Davis-Monten? AND?
          1. Insurgent
            Insurgent 13 September 2020 13: 20 New
            +6
            Quote: hrych
            Can you clarify how such a superwunder ... was sent to the trash heap Davis-Monten?

            No. Can not No. Avior then "pushed" the version that it was replaced by the F-22, but that's it ... A clumsy excuse yes

            It is difficult for them to clearly and reasonably explain why such a "wunderwaffle" was written off so soon ...
            1. hrych
              hrych 13 September 2020 13: 30 New
              +2
              Quote: Insurgent
              It is difficult for them to clearly and reasonably explain

              The Serbs are to blame for everything, the Serbs. They also say the French called the American brothers quietly and whispered that they saw the invisible with their radars. The king is naked wassat And given that the flight performance characteristics of the f-117, like the Messer wassat to the trash heap of Davis Monten wassat
            2. Insurgent
              Insurgent 13 September 2020 13: 36 New
              +2
              Quote: hrych
              taking into account that the flight performance characteristics of the f-117, like those of the Messer

              Here you are wrong No. , I object yes In Messerschmitt Me-109 (if you meant it), the aerobatic h-ki were at their best, in contrast to Wobblin 'goblin ("lame goblin"- unspoken," behind the eyes "nickname of the F-117 from the US Air Force pilots)
            3. hrych
              hrych 13 September 2020 13: 43 New
              +2
              Quote: Insurgent
              unlike Wobblin 'Goblin

              wassat yes
        2. mvg
          mvg 13 September 2020 15: 08 New
          -6
          such a "wunderwaffle" was written off so soon ...

          Soon, how's that? F-117 have been flying for 40 years, this is not a VAZ-2101, where "perfection does not need to be replaced." 1967-2014. These are not 50-year strategists.
      2. mvg
        mvg 13 September 2020 15: 04 New
        -5
        why such successful and deadly f-2008s have been decommissioned since 117 ..

        maybe because 550 F-35 has already been printed, and F-117 is already 40 years old?
        Hrych, do not suggest versions. They are inadequate. By the way, F-117s are still flying. Well, sometimes. wink Use the facts more. Do not use the head. Doesn't suit you. Does not work
        1. hrych
          hrych 13 September 2020 15: 15 New
          +3
          Quote: mvg
          Do not use the head. Doesn't suit you. Does not work

          Rudeness from you and no more. Typical ...
        2. mvg
          mvg 13 September 2020 17: 27 New
          -4
          Rudeness from you and no more

          Hamlyu only in response to inadequacy. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
      3. Insurgent
        Insurgent 14 September 2020 07: 42 New
        0
        Quote: mvg
        By the way, F-117s are still flying. Well, sometimes.

        I saw U-2 (Po-2) also fly, and also occasionally.
      4. mvg
        mvg 15 September 2020 12: 44 New
        -3
        I saw U-2 (Po-2) also fly, and also occasionally

        F-117 bombed Syria. Decommissioned in 2007, if that. That's better? Yes, and in Norfolk they still fly, experiencing something. Not a bad iron. For tens of thousands of sorties, one loss. At the same time, a computer is required for flight;
  • Insurgent
    Insurgent 13 September 2020 08: 20 New
    +2
    Quote: orionvitt
    I have always said and will continue to say that the degree of "invisibility" directly depends on the degree of technical equipment of the enemy. The higher the equipment, the lower the "invisibility".

    And you are reasoning correctly, by the way. yes

    And according to the Chinese what ... Let them, or the United States create independently something similar at least to the S-300 ...
    1. Vol4ara
      Vol4ara 13 September 2020 09: 26 New
      -1
      Quote: Insurgent
      Quote: orionvitt
      I have always said and will continue to say that the degree of "invisibility" directly depends on the degree of technical equipment of the enemy. The higher the equipment, the lower the "invisibility".

      And you are reasoning correctly, by the way. yes

      And according to the Chinese what ... Let them, or the United States create independently something similar at least to the S-300 ...

      HQ 9
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 13 September 2020 09: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: Vol4ara
        HQ 9


        And what is HQ 9?

        Hongqi-9 or HQ-9 ("Red Banner-9", export designation - FD-2000) is a Chinese long-range anti-aircraft missile system. Designed to destroy aircraft, cruise missiles and helicopters. The first Chinese air defense system capable of intercepting ballistic missiles. Developed on the basis of the S-300.


        I wrote: "Let them, or the United States create independently something similar at least to the S-300 ..."

        Chinese air defense system - independent development?
        1. Vol4ara
          Vol4ara 13 September 2020 10: 39 New
          -4
          Quote: Insurgent
          Quote: Vol4ara
          HQ 9


          And what is HQ 9?

          Hongqi-9 or HQ-9 ("Red Banner-9", export designation - FD-2000) is a Chinese long-range anti-aircraft missile system. Designed to destroy aircraft, cruise missiles and helicopters. The first Chinese air defense system capable of intercepting ballistic missiles. Developed on the basis of the S-300.


          I wrote: "Let them, or the United States create independently something similar at least to the S-300 ..."

          Chinese air defense system - independent development?

          Provide me with their technical documentation and I will answer
          1. Insurgent
            Insurgent 13 September 2020 10: 42 New
            +4
            Quote: Vol4ara
            Provide me with their technical documentation and I will answer

            Actually, then, on what basis you ALREADY replied that HQ 9 " chinese self-development"?

            Just blurted out?
            1. Vol4ara
              Vol4ara 13 September 2020 10: 46 New
              -1
              Quote: Insurgent
              Quote: Vol4ara
              Provide me with their technical documentation and I will answer

              Actually, then, on what basis you ALREADY replied that HQ 9 " chinese self-development"?

              Just blurted out?

              Based on their complex, if you want to prove that this is not so, then you must provide evidence, not they
  • Vol4ara
    Vol4ara 13 September 2020 09: 23 New
    +1
    Quote: orionvitt
    I have always said and will continue to say that the degree of "invisibility" directly depends on the degree of technical equipment of the enemy. The higher the equipment, the lower the "invisibility". So, in this regard, Russia has nothing to fear. As the events in Yugoslavia have shown, "stealth" is a myth for the aborigines. Or for the Arabs, there this topic gave a ride.

    As Yugoslavia showed, over the entire existence of the technology, one plane was shot down, the most imperfect one, and the country was turned into ruins
    1. kot423
      kot423 13 September 2020 09: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: Vol4ara
      the country was turned into ruins

      Not an indicator from the word at all. You are still the Mumbu-Yumbu tribe and the warthog compare.
      Quote: Vol4ara
      one plane was shot down

      But this is an indicator that was initially dunked into a deep well. all the screams and show-offs of mattresses.
      1. Vol4ara
        Vol4ara 13 September 2020 10: 38 New
        -2
        Quote: kot423
        Quote: Vol4ara
        the country was turned into ruins

        Not an indicator from the word at all. You are still the Mumbu-Yumbu tribe and the warthog compare.
        Quote: Vol4ara
        one plane was shot down

        But this is an indicator that was initially dunked into a deep well. all the screams and show-offs of mattresses.

        You are apparently from another universe because you write complete nonsense
        1. kot423
          kot423 13 September 2020 10: 45 New
          +1
          Do you see the essence of the answer? However...
          1. Yugoslavia was brought down by the coalition, with a variety of different weapons, not just mattresses and 117s. (which is why the comparison of a wild tribe with bows and A-10 is given)
          2. Downed 117 - 1st blow to the prestige and consistency of squeals and show-off of mattresses about stealth. Your "most imperfect" is incorrect, because you are comparing the 1961 air defense and the 1981 aircraft.
          1. Vol4ara
            Vol4ara 13 September 2020 10: 51 New
            -1
            Quote: kot423
            Do you see the essence of the answer? However...
            1. Yugoslavia was brought down by the coalition, with a variety of different weapons, not just mattresses and 117s. (which is why the comparison of a wild tribe with bows and A-10 is given)
            2. Downed 117 - 1st blow to the prestige and consistency of squeals and show-off of mattresses about stealth. Your "most imperfect" is incorrect, because you are comparing the 1961 air defense and the 1981 aircraft.

            The blow that has led to interest in technology around the world, all modern countries are building modern aircraft with this technology in mind. This is not a blow to the prestige of stealth, but its greatest victory, in the entire history of military conflicts 1 plane was lost, the very first one with shit aerodynamics. And now the Jews at F35 feel at ease in Syria, despite the Pantsiri and the 300.
            Well, about the old air defense and waste that that, so the sheriff's Indians don't care about the problems
            1. kot423
              kot423 13 September 2020 11: 04 New
              0
              Quote: Vol4ara
              This is not a blow to the prestige of stealth, but its greatest victory,

              Bravo! Those. the declared performance characteristics (which turned out to be empty PR) are steeper than the actual performance characteristics. Very much the "hammer" from 404 reminds, the main thing is to squeal louder, but the fact that he does not fulfill his "duties" (shall we say so) - but what garbage, women still give birth.
              Quote: Vol4ara
              about the old air defense and waste that that,

              Of course, the air defense of the era of mammoths endures a super-duper development, debunking the myth of invisibility - this is the sheriff (who was puffed up with pride for his military hardware) - does not care ...
              PS Modern aircraft are built taking into account stealth, and not "invisibility", about which there were and are squeals of mattresses, but you apparently do not notice this difference in concepts.
              1. Vol4ara
                Vol4ara 13 September 2020 11: 18 New
                +1
                Quote: kot423
                Quote: Vol4ara
                This is not a blow to the prestige of stealth, but its greatest victory,

                Bravo! Those. the declared performance characteristics (which turned out to be empty PR) are steeper than the actual performance characteristics. Very much the "hammer" from 404 reminds, the main thing is to squeal louder, but the fact that he does not fulfill his "duties" (shall we say so) - but what garbage, women still give birth.
                Quote: Vol4ara
                about the old air defense and waste that that,

                Of course, the air defense of the era of mammoths endures a super-duper development, debunking the myth of invisibility - this is the sheriff (who was puffed up with pride for his military hardware) - does not care ...
                PS Modern aircraft are built taking into account stealth, and not "invisibility", about which there were and are squeals of mattresses, but you apparently do not notice this difference in concepts.

                Airplanes are not built with stealth in mind, but with the use of stealth technology, that is, stealth. And everyone always knew that this was not a panacea and that stealth is not invisibility and that such an aircraft could be shot down. After the loss of 117, they began to take planning more seriously and the result - no more losses
                1. kot423
                  kot423 13 September 2020 11: 30 New
                  0
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  And everyone always knew that this was not a panacea and that stealth is not invisibility and that such an aircraft could be shot down.

                  Really chtoli? Google PR 117 at your leisure in the press.
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  After the loss of 117, they began to take more seriously

                  Which brings me back to my words above
                  Quote: kot423
                  But this is an indicator that was initially dunked into a deep well. all the screams and show-offs of mattresses.

                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  the result - no more losses

                  Again - not an indicator from the word at all. And the point is not that in the Syria you mentioned, Jews fly penguins at C 300 (like they can't see and can't shoot down), here they are already calculating geopolitical risks, i.e. what will happen next and what are the consequences if the penguin (yes, any plane) is demolished. Syria is not a country that can actually protect its airspace and then show the fact to the whole world.
                2. hydrox
                  hydrox 13 September 2020 16: 12 New
                  +1
                  About "deep" this you quite rightly noted :: one and only RANDOM SUCCESSFUL combat contact - that's all!
                  The delay trigger worked in the brain - and the States abruptly closed the direction and combat use of the one hundred and seventeenth, glowing like Christmas trees on the screens of old P-nis.
                  In the same way, the Yankees are now afraid of "accidental" combat contacts of the Fu-35 with the Su-35 and NEVER get into the detection range of not only the S-400, but also the "three hundred".
                  And the fact that the Jews from time to time from their Needles throw missiles towards Syria is because it is said very simply: "As soon as you try to shoot down at least one of our aircraft in the skies of Palestine or Jordan, we will arrange for you such a sanctions hell, from which you will never get out of. You don't need terror on your territory, do you?
                  For this, we will fire at the Shiites only occasionally and only aimed, and we will not even look in the direction of Khmeimim. "
                3. hydrox
                  hydrox 13 September 2020 16: 25 New
                  +1
                  This is just a basic outline situational set that both sides still adhere to ...
            2. 3danimal
              3danimal 13 September 2020 14: 13 New
              -1
              Somehow they wrote to me here that according to rumors (!), As many as one or two "Spirits" were shot down smile
        2. standan
          standan 13 September 2020 22: 26 New
          0
          And now the Jews at F35 feel at ease in Syria, despite the Pantsiri and the 300.

          And on them someone used the Pantsiri and the S-300?
  • venik
    venik 13 September 2020 09: 52 New
    +2
    Quote: Insurgent
    What kind of posing a question, when the S-300 air defense system was designed to combat complex targets, including those performed according to the "Stealth" scheme ...

    =======
    good And just the "writers" of this Sohu apparently do not know ( lol ) that "stealth" technology does not make the plane invisible, but simply reduces its EPR! And therefore we are talking mainly only about the detection range of such a target and "taking on escort"
  • Ilya-spb
    Ilya-spb 13 September 2020 09: 09 New
    +1
    Both the Chinese and all other Indians should not sell as long as possible.
  • Megatron
    Megatron 14 September 2020 02: 05 New
    0
    Should I buy them in China?
    Rather, they should not be sold to China and even more so to Turkey.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 13 September 2020 07: 49 New
    +2
    is it worth China to purchase these new generation air defense systems from the Russian Federation
    the first to buy, there is such a chill winked
    1. Victor_B
      Victor_B 13 September 2020 08: 16 New
      -2
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      the first to buy, there is such a chill

      They have such devices huge printer!
      Copy-Past!
      And here they are their S-500!
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 13 September 2020 09: 14 New
        +1
        Not the case.
        There is a strong suspicion that the article is aimed at establishing some priority in the export deliveries of the S-500 and the first to be. Chinese.
        I believe that this should not be expected, since the S-500 will surely be unbearably slow to enter the troops also because, as in the case of the Su-57, in the production process, a program will be implemented to lick the stocks and flaws that are so complicated during the production process. systems simply had to happen: We worked at the Russian Academy of Sciences on orders from the defense industry and we know that catching and licking all kinds of jambs is the most disgusting stage of production processes, which is not at all subject to planning and management.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 13 September 2020 08: 06 New
    +4
    "Invisible" fighters are a journalistic exaggeration. The correct term is subtle. To distinguish them is the task of modern radars. The parameters of the S-500 detection systems, of course, no one will tell us. But EPR targets are known. Although they are also classified, and in "peacetime" they are hidden by installing "Luneberg lenses" ... However, scientists and intelligence are working.
    Yes, only to supply the latest developments to anyone ... To put it mildly, it is premature.
    1. venik
      venik 13 September 2020 10: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The parameters of the S-500 detection systems, of course, no one will tell us.

      =========
      It is this (the lack of information about the S-500 - even the appearance of the system is not published, although it is already completing state tests!) - that gives reason to assume that if the system is to be exported, it will be very, very long ago ... If at all will go!
  • GREG68
    GREG68 13 September 2020 08: 12 New
    0
    After all, we can, when we want. It is worth a lot to produce such high-tech combat systems. I wish we could transfer this backlog and technology (of course, within reason and without revealing secrets) to light industry, to consumer goods. We wouldn't have a price. And then almost everywhere the dominance of imports and "imported" technologies.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 13 September 2020 08: 47 New
    +3
    China bought the S-400.
    Why are they so worried if the S-500 can shoot down stealth aircraft?
    After all, the S-400 knocks them down perfectly.
    1. _Ugene_
      _Ugene_ 13 September 2020 09: 09 New
      +1
      After all, the S-400 knocks them down perfectly.
      hardly excellent, but apparently better than any other air defense complex
    2. hydrox
      hydrox 13 September 2020 09: 21 New
      +4
      S-500 is a network-centric system, at the same time not local, but at least regional, while not situationally created, but constantly operating, with an umbrella for thousands of square meters. km and radii of detection for thousands of km.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 September 2020 09: 33 New
        +2
        In this way, everyone who can do it builds their air defense.
        This pleasure is not cheap, but it won't work otherwise.
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 13 September 2020 10: 28 New
          +3
          Exactly who can do it!
          Only in the world there are less and less SUCH forces, and our backlog allows Russia to make a little extra effort, forming a queue of them with all their might of those who wish, I will assume that for at least five years ahead (not all of them, even used ones, which we removed from the S-300 DB) received - why should they dream of receiving the S-500!).
          By the way, it is already a year since the Turks received the S-400 from us :: I wonder if during this time they have learned whether these complexes at least simply include in operation (I’m not talking about setting them on a DB) ?? laughing
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 13 September 2020 10: 58 New
            +1
            Turkish leadership, very clever and wily.
            There have been reports that they are flying around the purchased systems with various types of aircraft! They had to carry out these tests by their own calculations, especially since the training of the main specialists of the buyers is carried out in our training centers, as well as test / training launches at our test sites.
            They will master it, this is not a question ... but how successfully they will be able to use it, this is their business!
    3. venik
      venik 13 September 2020 10: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Why are they so worried if the S-500 can shoot down stealth aircraft?

      ========
      From the point of view of the physics of the process (radar detection and guidance), there is no fundamental difference between objects built using stealth technology and without it - NO! Simply reducing the RCS also reduces the range of exposure and "capture" of the target - that's all! And how much it reduces - this depends both on the "absorbing" coating and the shape of the aircraft, and on the characteristics of the radar (including and on the radiated power, the ability to work in different wavelength ranges).
      1. _Ugene_
        _Ugene_ 13 September 2020 10: 28 New
        +4
        Simply reducing the RCS also reduces the range of exposure and "capture" of the target - that's all!
        that's all? This is the point - to reduce the detection and capture range to levels that are safe for oneself, i.e. to be able to release missiles without entering the detection zone, turn around and dump, and at the same time, the gos of the missile launched in pursuit will lose the target and, ideally, will not be able to capture it at all, this is not "just all", this is the possibility of unpunished action, ideally, of course , as in fact it is not yet clear
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 13 September 2020 10: 50 New
          0
          For an integrated air defense system operating from different angles, there is no stealth problem. Again, targeting weapons is quite effective.
          There are problem areas with difficult terrain, but on their own territory, some part of the adjacent territory, this can be solved.
          The question is who can afford such an expensive pleasure, to have a full-fledged, developed air defense system.
          There remains such an aspect as long-range missile launch, when the carriers do not enter the air defense zone at all. But here carriers of a completely different class are used, army aviation is not equipped with such means of attack.
          In general, this already looks like full-fledged military action and other rules come into effect there !!! To which no one, so far, seeks to reach.
          1. _Ugene_
            _Ugene_ 13 September 2020 20: 34 New
            +1
            For an integrated air defense system operating from different angles, there is no stealth problem.
            Yes, only our country is so huge that it is simply impossible to close all the borders of echeloned air defense, no budget will be enough, only Moscow is closed with an integrated air defense system, because our officials are sitting there, they will surely cover their ass
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 13 September 2020 21: 22 New
              +1
              Quote: _Ugene_
              yes, only we have a country of such a huge size that it is simply impossible to close all the borders of echeloned air defense,

              It is possible to cover EVERYTHING, because carriers of low visibility, according to their characteristics, can only come from some directions ... and everything else is detected by numerous means of reconnaissance and control long before entering our territory.
              Quote: _Ugene_
              only Moscow is closed with an integrated air defense system,

              You are wrong. According to the agreements, we could cover only ONE DISTRICT tightly. Then they covered the capital. There is an operating, oldest systemic air defense - missile defense of our country! She is the way they were made then.
              Now the EQUIPMENT is DIFFERENT, system air defense - missile defense is being built in a different way !!!
              It should be understood that not a single air defense missile defense system in the world will hold back a global strike !!! This is understood by everyone who can deliver such a blow, because they, too, have NO PROTECTION and in response to aggression they will receive their "gifts" in the proper amount !!! This is the ONLY RELIABLE PROTECTION !!!
              From single attacks, our industrial areas, areas of residence of a large number of citizens are covered by EVERYTHING!
              This is an objective reality.
        2. venik
          venik 13 September 2020 14: 00 New
          0
          Quote: _Ugene_
          How much is that? This is the point - to reduce the detection and capture range to levels that are safe for oneself, i.e. be able to launch missiles without entering the detection area

          =========
          Did you read it carefully? It was said:
          Quote: venik
          And how strong reduces - this depends on both the "absorbing" coating and the shape of the aircraft, and on the characteristics of the radar (including the radiated power ability to work in different wavelength ranges).

          -------
          The problem is that all these "radio-absorbing" coatings work on the principle interference absorption (more correctly: "attenuation") of reflected (or more correctly: "backscattered") electromagnetic waves.
          Such a system has one vulnerability: it is designed for a certain range of wavelengths (frequencies) - usually short-wave, because for long-wave, the coverage must be overweight! Can you imagine a coating several centimeters thick or, say, a decimeter? I - with difficulty! Although the first "stealth" - F-117 just had a two-layer spaced skin, a few centimeters (filled with honeycomb filler!).
          Modern "stealth" coatings work effectively just in the centimeter and millimeter ranges (aircraft PAR). But against ground-based air defense systems, where the dimensions of the HEADLIGHTS are much larger and there is a possibility of operation (including simultaneous) in 2 or more "spaced" ranges at once (for example - centimeter and decimeter / meter - in fact, such coverage - will not help and the target will be in the longwave range "glow like a flashlight in the night"at very, very long distances! Well, the shortwave range will be used for accurate targeting / illumination of the target at the terminal stage of flight!
          Like that! Maybe, of course, a little tongue-tied ... But, as I can! request
          1. _Ugene_
            _Ugene_ 13 September 2020 20: 20 New
            +1
            Modern "stealth" -coating effectively work just in the centimeter and millimeter ranges
            correct, because these are the most effective ranges for detecting and accurately aiming missiles at an aircraft type target
            at once in 2 or more "spaced" ranges (for example - centimeter and decimeter / meter - in fact, such a coverage - will not help
            in centimeter, as you correctly noted, nothing will shine because stealth is sharpened to the greatest extent, as everyone already knows, the meter range will be the most effective, but firstly, these are the huge dimensions of the antennas, and secondly, low accuracy, there is no way to aim missiles in this range it turns out, and it turns out that it seems like something sees an eye, but a grudge, and launching a rocket somewhere, hoping that when the seeker gets close, it is extremely unproductive, so you can quickly use up all the ammunition.
            All the radar stations of the meter range that are now in the SURVEY troops, they cannot direct anything anywhere, you can direct the missile in cm and mm. ranges, but just in them, the detection range of stealth is too small.
            Do not oversimplify, the problem of stealth is quite real, you can't throw hats here
            1. venik
              venik 14 September 2020 08: 42 New
              0
              Quote: _Ugene_
              to the greatest extent, as everyone already knows, the meter range will be most effective, but firstly, these are the huge dimensions of the antennas, and secondly, the low accuracy, it will not work to direct missiles in this range,

              =======
              Right! But there are some "nuances":
              1) - Ground-based radars (with HEADLIGHTS) SAMs are not as "constrained in size as aircraft, and therefore, at least the decimeter range is not a problem for them! By the way, it is in the decimeter range that the 91Н6E and 92Н2Е radars of the S-400 complex operate.
              2) - Whether these systems can also work in the microwave and EHF ranges - not in the know. But this does not play a "special piano", since the missiles are equipped active GOS, and a radio correction system on approach. Those. the task of the control center is to bring the missile not exactly to the target, butto the area target, where its seeker will "lock" the target even with a very small RCS! So "super-precision" is not needed here!
              -------------
              Quote: _Ugene_
              All the radars of the meter range that are now in the SURVEY troops, they cannot direct anything anywhere

              ========
              And they DO NOT NEED! It is enough to give out the coordinates, altitude and speed of the target, then target detection, even with a small RCS and even at decent distances, is greatly simplified! (Remember HOW the F-117 was shot down in Yugoslavia!).
              -------------
              Quote: _Ugene_
              Do not oversimplify, the problem of stealth is quite real, you can't throw hats here

              ========
              I'm not oversimplifying! He just noted that the "stealth problem" for air defense is much less significantthan for the Air Force, where microwave and EHF radars are used, and air combat is largely determined by the "who is who before discovered ".
              1. _Ugene_
                _Ugene_ 14 September 2020 11: 16 New
                0
                Whether these systems can also work in the microwave and EHF ranges - not in the know
                in the meter range they cannot, but in dm. Stealth also has significantly less EPR than 4th generation aircraft, i.e. detection range is too short
                Those. the task of the control post is to bring the missile not exactly to the target, but the target area, where its seeker will "capture" the target even with a very small RCS! So "super-precision" is not needed here!
                this is nonsense, I wrote to you about it right away - the missile seeker has a rather narrow sector, you cannot shoot it somewhere there, approximately in the hope that it will do everything by itself, it must be guided exactly to the target, and even in this case, the probability of capture and defeat is far from one hundred%
                And they DO NOT NEED! It is enough to issue the coordinates
                NECESSARY, air defense does not work that way, with this approach, all ammunition will be used up in milk
                Remember HOW the F-117 was shot down in Yugoslavia!
                I remembered that they were pointing through the visual optical channel, i.e. they were already so insolent that they flew low and slowly and allowed the missile to be guided visually
                He just noted that the "stealth problem" is much less significant for air defense
                you are mistaken, very, very significant, listen less to our flaunting bosses
                and for pilots, even more so, because their radar is much weaker, and the power of the rocket's rocket is very small due to weight and size restrictions, as a result, the failure of the capture or unstable capture of the target, all this gives stealth a great advantage
                1. venik
                  venik 14 September 2020 12: 36 New
                  0
                  Quote: _Ugene_
                  in the meter range they cannot, but in dm. Stealth also has significantly less EPR than 4th generation aircraft, i.e. detection range is too short

                  ========
                  HOW MUCH? In terms of how much less?
                  -------------
                  Quote: _Ugene_
                  Remember HOW the F-117 was shot down in Yugoslavia!
                  I remembered that they were pointing through the visual optical channel, i.e. they were already so insolent that they flew low and slowly and allowed the missile to be guided visually

                  ========
                  Wrong! A-117 was shot down by radar channel. It just seemed to the pilot that he was flying straight up the mountain and he gave a sharp "candle" upward, substituting the "belly" under the radar beam. Only 2-3 seconds, but this was enough for him to "light up", after which they were "hooked" on him and no longer let go of the grip before entering the affected area, although the "exposure" was very weak! Perhaps they would not have paid attention to him, if not for the trick with the "candle"!
                  ----------
                  Quote: _Ugene_
                  less listen to our flaunting bosses

                  ========
                  Do I listen to them ??
                  -----------
                  Quote: _Ugene_
                  the missile seeker has a rather narrow sector, you cannot shoot it somewhere there

                  ========
                  How narrow? 1 degree, 2 degrees, 5 degrees, or 60 degrees? Perhaps it depends on the type of GOS?
                  1. _Ugene_
                    _Ugene_ 14 September 2020 13: 15 New
                    0
                    HOW MUCH? I mean, how much less?
                    Well, yes, now they have laid out all the exact data on the ranges for you, there are only rough estimates that in the decimeter range the EPR increases by about 25-40 percent compared to cm, which is also very small.
                    How narrow? 1 degree, 2 degrees, 5 degrees, or 60 degrees? Perhaps it depends on the type of GOS?
                    depends on the type of seeker, but this is not the point, air defense does not work that way, surveillance radars of the meter range do not provide data for launching missiles (besides, meter-range radars are relatively easy to choke on interference), and no one will launch a missile into the white light, one it's your theory and it's another matter of how it actually happens.
                    1. venik
                      venik 14 September 2020 13: 45 New
                      0
                      Quote: _Ugene_
                      Well, yes, now they have laid out all the exact data on the ranges for you, there are only rough estimates that in the decimeter range the EPR increases by about 25-40 percent compared to cm, which is also very small.

                      =========
                      Only 25-40%? Is not a fact! This largely depends on the material of the skin and the geometry of the aircraft:

                      ----------
                      Quote: _Ugene_
                      Air defense does not work like that, surveillance radars of the meter range do not provide data for launching missiles

                      ========
                      WHERE did I say such nonsense ??? Reconnaissance and early warning radars provide data for stations illumination and guidance. And when you know WHERE to look, you find much faster (than turning your head 360 degrees), even if the target's illumination is very weak!
                      It's like an acquaintance who served in a reconnaissance company (back in Afghanistan), said: "If you just look - you don't see anyone! And if they poke a finger, take a closer look at that bush - so here it is, my dear! And how did you not notice it right away?"
                      1. _Ugene_
                        _Ugene_ 14 September 2020 13: 51 New
                        0
                        so I mean it too - the meter radar saw something (which is not clear, in this range the target cannot be identified, the resolution is not that), then the dm radar starts working in this direction. and see ranges, in order to identify the target and launch a rocket, it must be confidently captured in the cm range, and this range with the smallest RCS for stealths and to lock the target will turn out at a much shorter distance than the radar of the meter range sees, so it turns out that the eye sees tooth itching. But at least it is possible to raise the interceptors in time (which will also go blindly, their radars do not see the target).
                        We are waiting for rofars, although no one really explained to me what exactly the rofars had a breakthrough in detecting stealth in comparison with afars.
    4. mvg
      mvg 13 September 2020 10: 38 New
      -2
      After all, the S-400 knocks them down perfectly

      Yes, faster than leaving the assembly line. And the rest in caps ...
  • rocket757
    rocket757 13 September 2020 08: 48 New
    +2
    None, even the best, complex is a panacea, protection from everything and always !!!
    It is an integral part of a large complex of technical means and organizational measures, which in total are a full-fledged air defense!
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 13 September 2020 09: 27 New
      0
      At least small / medium AWACS are needed. In the general C500 system. And with AWACS, while not everything is fine.
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 13 September 2020 09: 36 New
        -3
        Yes, it just sucks if you don't lie to yourself ... crying
      2. rocket757
        rocket757 13 September 2020 09: 38 New
        +1
        On its territory, you can build an effective control system without aviation, but reconnaissance of the situation over the hill will be very limited.
        It is also necessary to increase such a component of the reconnaissance system as AWACS aviation.
        A matter of time and finance, as always.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 13 September 2020 08: 57 New
    +1
    Does the C500 have different radar and missiles than the S-400?
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 13 September 2020 09: 24 New
      +1
      No, there is a many times more powerful computer with an appropriate network control system (probably this is the PROTO-type of the umbrella system that will cover the whole of Russia)
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 13 September 2020 09: 25 New
        0
        I understand that there must be more than one type of radar? Air defense and missile defense are different tasks ...
        1. hydrox
          hydrox 13 September 2020 09: 34 New
          +1
          This goes without saying: and if an old P-shka sees a young Fushka, then some version of the meter range may be there (if we have not already learned how to reproduce P-shek signatures on AFAR)
          1. hydrox
            hydrox 13 September 2020 20: 44 New
            +1
            For reference: P-shki are VHF radars that were produced in the 50-70s and had complex multi-vibrator antennas
    2. rocket757
      rocket757 13 September 2020 09: 42 New
      +2
      Air defense systems of previous generations are being modernized, equipped with new missiles and equipment, they can quite effectively perform the assigned tasks. Nobody is going to write them off ... they are good and will be used for a long time.
    3. Genry
      Genry 13 September 2020 11: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: Zaurbek
      Does the C500 have different radar and missiles than the S-400?

      The tasks and goals there are completely different: this is a long-range and high-altitude air defense system and complements the S-400, or rather the S-400 is merged under the control of the S-500.
  • Gluxarek
    Gluxarek 13 September 2020 09: 50 New
    0
    Chinese press: The popularity of Russian S-500 air defense systems in the world market depends on their ability to fight stealth fighters

    Silently envy the Chinese! And to whom and what we will sell is none of your business .. Try to make a copy)))))
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 13 September 2020 10: 32 New
      +1
      Aha, from a photo from space! laughing
    2. mvg
      mvg 13 September 2020 11: 03 New
      -1
      Try to buy a brain on Ali-express. Suddenly come in handy. Do not look at the country of origin.
  • viktor.
    viktor. 13 September 2020 11: 16 New
    -1
    I think in the future we will still regret for the military technology provided to China yes
  • EnGenius
    EnGenius 13 September 2020 12: 13 New
    0
    By all indications, the S-500 will contain the main components of air defense from the S-400, partially or completely, and everything new will be from the integration of missile defense components in the form of missiles and radars. So the sale of the S-500 to China may not take place at all for geopolitical and military reasons, but India may well get them earlier.
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 13 September 2020 13: 34 New
    +1
    while at home it is necessary))) then bargaining!
  • Svetlana
    Svetlana 14 September 2020 13: 53 New
    0
    Hmm .. dreaming is not harmful. Nobody will sell С500 in the near future. С500 will start selling only after the conditional С600 appears on the way. This is exactly the same as with the C400. They began to sell them relatively recently, when the C500 was already looming on the horizon