In the USA, a missile was tested from the F-18, which was called the "destroyer" of the S-400 air defense missile system in the press.

136

In the United States, the latest aircraft-based AGM-88G AARGM-ER missile was tested. We are talking about an anti-radar missile, the main targets of which are sources of radio emission, which are integral parts of complexes and systems of air-missile defense.

The American press confirmed information that the AGM-88G AARGM-ER was tested from an F-18 multipurpose aircraft (F / A-18E / F) in the area of ​​the Pacific Point Mugu training ground. It is part of the so-called US Western Proving Grounds, where missile tests are carried out.



At the same time, in the American media, the new supersonic missile is designated as "the destroyer of existing and promising anti-aircraft missile systems." There are often statements that the tests were associated with "testing the capabilities to destroy the S-400 air defense system." American journalists, referring to representatives of the Pentagon, write that "the tests were successful." At the same time, it is not noted that it was on the territory of the test site that it could serve as an imitation of the Russian-made S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile system.

Reportedly, "tests of the latest anti-radar missiles have confirmed the ability to destroy modern air defense-missile defense systems." It adds that the missile is capable of destroying targets that "pose a threat to American combat aircraft, as well as to aviation allies ".

Thus, the United States is trying to neutralize the advantage that Russia (and other countries armed with the S-400) have in terms of air defense and missile defense. A separate question is to what extent one can generally speak of the "success of tests" in destroying the same S-400, when instead of real systems there is some kind of imitation of them. Unless, to consider the variant of the "reaction" of the rocket to the radio signal emanating from the "imitation of" Triumph "...
136 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    4 August 2021 06: 34
    Another super duper?
    1. -5
      4 August 2021 06: 46
      Yeah, a real threat to the S-400 with a range of 300 km. wassat The fact that the S-400 defeats the 400 does not bother anyone in the amerskoy army. But super duper.
      1. +4
        4 August 2021 07: 07
        something is doubtful about 300 km, it seems to me more chatter was 150 km and suddenly akhalai mahalai 300 km I don’t believe
        1. +10
          4 August 2021 07: 49
          Quote: Graz
          something is doubtful about 300 km, it seems to me more chatter was 150 km and suddenly akhalai mahalai 300 km I don’t believe

          Here's a reference to article 20g here. The basic version was 150 km. In this one, it seems like 300.
          https://topwar.ru/172001-raketa-agm-88g-aargm-er-vyshla-na-ispytanija.html
          Judging by the minuses, the adepts of amerskoy weapons are fully armed wassat
      2. +2
        4 August 2021 07: 16
        Maybe 400. But for what purpose (size) and at what height? The curvature of the Earth's surface has not been canceled.
        1. +2
          4 August 2021 07: 53
          If the range is 300 km, then the carrier itself falls under the S-400 in any case.
          .
          Quote: Lykases1
          The curvature of the Earth's surface has not been canceled.

          Don't you think that they will be placed in the gorge? At the Olympics in Sochi, they stood at the very top, they saw through the whole of Turkey
          1. -9
            4 August 2021 10: 43
            Quote: NDR-791
            If the range is 300 km, then the carrier itself falls under the S-400 in any case.
            .
            Quote: Lykases1
            The curvature of the Earth's surface has not been canceled.

            Don't you think that they will be placed in the gorge? At the Olympics in Sochi, they stood at the very top, they saw through the whole of Turkey

            The fact that already at 400 f35s it will be able to accurately determine the target, but the c400 can really work on it only after it has shot and shows its tail cannot be called a 100% advantage
            1. +2
              4 August 2021 15: 16
              The missile can be aimed at the S400. But she still needs to fly to this С400. That is, the rocket, while flying to the target, will, as I understand it, glow so robustly. And we also have air defense of medium and short range and will not be an observer.
              In fact, the United States is thus trying to reduce the superiority of our air defense over its aircraft, which is at the moment. That is to say, to increase the sharpness and length of the canines.
              For God's sake, these missiles will not be used against us in any case due to the impossibility of a war between nuclear powers as such.
              1. -8
                4 August 2021 15: 35
                Quote: Pensive Lawyer
                The missile can be aimed at the S400. But she still needs to fly to this С400. That is, the rocket, while flying to the target, will, as I understand it, glow so robustly. And we also have air defense of medium and short range and will not be an observer.
                In fact, the United States is thus trying to reduce the superiority of our air defense over its aircraft, which is at the moment. That is to say, to increase the sharpness and length of the canines.
                For God's sake, these missiles will not be used against us in any case due to the impossibility of a war between nuclear powers as such.

                The basis of air defense of any range is the ability to use radars. An aircraft that has sent several such gizmos to the target, one way or another, has every chance of hitting and leaving unscathed. Because it will be more or less realistic to detect it only after it opens its "belly" to release missiles. (and even then only under many favorable circumstances)
        2. +2
          4 August 2021 10: 04
          Quote: Lykases1
          Maybe 400. But for what purpose (size) and at what height? The curvature of the Earth's surface has not been canceled.

          On an ultra-small plane, they can see it from a distance of 40 km. The problems of the American packages are different - false targets are created (from the microwave to the MIG - 21-23 radar, located in the district - and it is not clear where it will go.
      3. -5
        4 August 2021 09: 19
        Quote: NDR-791
        Yeah, a real threat to the S-400 with a range of 300 km

    2. +10
      4 August 2021 06: 49
      In Vietnam, a similar rocket claimed many lives of anti-aircraft gunners. Don't underestimate her. But the means of countering such missiles also exist.
      1. 0
        4 August 2021 15: 26
        Quote: Torins
        But the means of countering such missiles also exist.

        Well, the fact that long-range air defense systems should have their cover was written more than once. So, in response, it is necessary to raise the question of a better cover, for example, a multi-barreled small-caliber gun mount.
  2. +10
    4 August 2021 06: 35
    There were also successful tests of a zumvolt railgun, a Boeing laser, and nuclear-pumped anti-missile orbital lasers. Remember, yawn
  3. +10
    4 August 2021 06: 40
    Maybe I am, but it seems to me that our Air Defense Pro has echeloned defense. Who amers said that their rocket before flies to the target?
    1. +5
      4 August 2021 06: 44
      Who said that she even exists? They didn't even show the cartoon. laughing
      1. +5
        4 August 2021 07: 27
        It has been in existence since 1983. This is a new version of the increased range of the American Harm, which has been used for a long time and has been repeatedly modernized and used in combat.
    2. +3
      4 August 2021 07: 01
      Quote: skif8013
      Who amer said that their rocket before flies to the target?

      So they were told by the media!
    3. PN
      +3
      4 August 2021 07: 04
      Probably the one who said that no country in the world has 100% effective air defense / missile defense.
  4. +17
    4 August 2021 06: 40
    Super-duper air defense is still a fairy tale ... Alas ...
    And the S-400 is not one either.
    Even complete with Shells and Torahs.
    The complexes are beautiful, no doubt. Really "unparalleled", but quite destructible.
    Only the price of the issue may be too high.
    1. +8
      4 August 2021 08: 15
      I support. There was not, is not and will not be the ultimate weapon. In addition, potential adversaries closely monitor each other and try to respond in a timely manner to the appearance of other new types of weapons. Those. the arms race is not new and very costly.
      As for the simulated targets that were used during the tests of the discussed missile, it is likely that the S300 air defense system played this role, possibly modified taking into account the parameters of the S400. It should be remembered that at the beginning of the 90s 2 sets of C300 were sold in the USA, and there are basically no fundamental differences between the C400 and the C300, with the exception of the expanded range of missiles and the corresponding refinement of some hardware and software. So I would not be puffed up about the super duper unkillable С400.
      Yes, the S400 air defense system is quite worthy by modern standards of the air defense system, but there is nothing fundamentally new in it, compared to the C300. And life has repeatedly punished those who puffed out their cheeks and kicked themselves in the chest with a heel.
      And what the press writes (any, whether Russian or foreign) should be treated very carefully). After all, her main task is to present and sell the material as beautifully as possible. Due to this, the press is kept on the surface.
      Sometimes the press is ordered by interested persons and organizations in deliberately gloomy tones in order to scare or pity those people on whom the financing of certain programs and projects depends. At the same time, how the likely opponent of the authors of the publications will react to the publication is of little concern.
      1. -9
        4 August 2021 09: 04

        It should be remembered that at the beginning of the 90s 2 sets of C300 were sold in the USA, and there are basically no fundamental differences between the C400 and the C300, with the exception of the expanded range of missiles and the corresponding refinement of some hardware and software.

        Yes Yes ))))
        The differences are in signal processing, on the S-400 everything is already in "digital".
        Secondly, even the S-300s, which are in Belarus, have a range of only 85 km, in no export version of the S-300 the range is not higher. And the S-400 has a range of 400 km.
        1. +6
          4 August 2021 09: 50
          I dare to correct you, dear Vitaly.
          Already in the C300, digital processing of radar information signals (primary and secondary) was used to the fullest. as well as the digital control of the scanning of the beam of the survey (Obzor) and sector (Ginger) antennas. Radar.
          The management of missiles, as well as the exchange of information with higher command and control units (for example, with Polyana D4), also could not do without a number. Yes, and the management of missiles was based on the use of digital technologies.
          Naturally, over the years, the algorithms for information processing and control of missiles have improved as well as the SAMs themselves, which I already mentioned in my comment. The component base was also improved. But in general, apart from the growth of individual performance characteristics due to the use of missiles with a longer range and more advanced homing systems, no fundamental changes are observed in the S400.
          The fact that the S400 air defense system began to be attached to radars of the meter and decimeter range and their information can be combined in the air defense system with the information of their own radars, again, there is nothing new.
          It's just that in the S300 air defense system, such a unification took place at the level of the command / control unit of the unit (for example, the same Polyana D4) and now it can be done on the C400 itself, which undoubtedly increases the autonomy of the S400 air defense system, but on the other hand reduces the secrecy of the entire complex and increases the likelihood of it defeat by anti-radar missiles.
          And the last thing. When we talk about the range, it is advisable to remember that this figure speaks of the potential range, confirmed during various tests at proving grounds. And such tests are rarely carried out using the entire range of possible electronic warfare means of a potential enemy (active and passive jamming, decoys, etc.)
          Those. in reality, the maximum range may be significantly lower. How much? Do not know. Perhaps this will become clear in the first serious (God forbid, of course) battles
          1. 0
            4 August 2021 11: 55
            The fact that the S400 air defense system began to be attached to radars of the meter and decimeter range and their information can be combined in the air defense system with the information of their own radars, again, there is nothing new.
            It's just that in the S300 air defense system, such a unification took place at the level of the command / control unit of the unit (for example, the same Polyana D4), and now this can be done on the S400 itself

            On the S-300, this required professional operators to bring together data from the three radar bands, and in the S-400 this is done automatically by the processor, which greatly increases the efficiency of the system. After all, if stealth aircraft are poorly visible in a certain wavelength range (millimeter), then in a dynamically changing air environment (aircraft are on the verge of missile reach and "strike" along the edge of reach), the operator's reaction (data processing) speed (human factor) may not keep up due to changes in the situation, then the computer does not have such a problem.
            1. +2
              4 August 2021 13: 33
              Again you are wrong, Vitaly.
              Operators are needed in any air defense / missile defense system in which the process of detecting and tracking air targets is carried out, and both the C300 and the C400 are just such systems. And this is not because the equipment is bad, but because decisions on target detection (true or false), tracking and tracking in military radar systems are still being made by a human operator, because Despite numerous attempts to replace a person in these processes with a computer, which have been going on since the mid-60s, the computer ended up somewhat removing the load from the operator, but could not replace him.
              In air traffic control systems (ATC), the above tasks are solved by a computer, and the ATC controller is given a ready-made aircraft route with additional digital information about the fuel supply, board number, and other data. And all because ATC systems work with aircraft equipped with constantly working transponders, transmitting information about the aircraft via a secondary radar channel.
              The primary radar information (echo signal) is used only in cases where the secondary channel has failed.
              In military systems, there is no such luxury, and therefore primary radar information comes to the fore, in which useful information about the target is mixed with noise and interference. And to work with such information, you need a person - an operator.
              And in general, decision making in all military systems, including radar (stationary, mobile, flying, waterfowl, etc.) artificial intelligence, about which a lot is written, has not yet reached such a level as to replace a human operator and it is not known whether it will, and if da] e does, it is unlikely that he will be given such a right, because it is fraught with
              1. -4
                9 August 2021 01: 16
                Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory)
                Yes, the S400 air defense system is quite worthy by modern standards of the air defense system, but nothing fundamentally new, in comparison with the C300 it does not. And life has repeatedly punished those who puffed out their cheeks and beat themselves in the chest with a heel.


                gregor6549 (Gregory), do not write about what you do not know, Israeli! The S-300 has a detection radar with a phased array, and the S-400 has an AFAR. It is ugly to write what you are doing.

                Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory)
                In military systems, there is no such luxury and therefore primary radar information comes to the fore, in which useful information about the target is mixed with noise and interference. And to work with such information, you need a person - an operator.

                How far you are from radar.

                Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory)
                Here in air traffic control systems (ATC) the above tasks are solved by a computer, and the air traffic controller is given a ready-made aircraft route with additional digital information about the fuel supply, board number, and other data.

                This does not require a computer, but a transceiver on the radar and transceivers on aircraft with an NPO (ground-based transponder) on the radar. Example: DRL-7SM. You are very far away.
                1. 0
                  9 August 2021 16: 27
                  Quote: Gori
                  gregor6549 (Gregory), do not write about what you do not know, Israeli! The S-300 has a detection radar with a phased array, and the S-400 has an AFAR. It is ugly to write what you are doing.

                  Yes, judging by your comments, you are an unsurpassed specialist both in terms of radar and in terms of determining the citizenship of commentators.
                  In terms of citizenship, I hasten to reassure you. I have been a citizen of the USSR since pre-war times (I was born in Leningrad), and after the collapse of the Union, I automatically became a citizen of the Republic of Velarus, where I live (and live) at the present time.
                  This time, you are our preoccupied
                  And two. Instead of arguing with you about which antenna array is used in the S400 surveillance radar, I will cite an article http://bastion-karpenko.ru/S-400/, as well as an article by Carlo Kopp, a very famous Australian in expert circles,
                  http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Acquisition-GCI.html#mozTocId420074
                  So, even from the photographs of this radar, you can see two antenna sheets rotated 180 degrees relative to each other. Moreover, each of the canvases has its own emitter common to the entire web.
                  The radar of the sector view (or as it is also called the multifunctional radar) also has a horn radiator common for the entire antenna, although it is not as noticeable as the radiators of the surveillance radar, incl. located behind the antenna strip.
                  In antennas with AFAR (unlike antennas with PFAR), such emitters are useless, since Each AFAR element is a miniature microwave transmitter with a controlled radiation pattern, while the PFAR uses a common transmitter and the radiation pattern is formed using controlled phase shifters.
                  Yes, the issues of developing radar antennas with AFAR for promising air defense systems with AFAR have been considered more than once by the leading specialists of NPO Almaz (Moscow), which is the head enterprise-developer of the S300 and S400 air defense systems, and the developers of the radars that are part of the S300 S400 air defense system from the Research Institute of Measuring Devices (Novosibirsk).
                  Well, I had a chance to take part in the development of the Trassa radar image processing automation complex for the USSR Civil Air Fleet, so I am a little familiar with this technique, as well as with what differs radar image processing in civil and military systems ..
                  It would be possible to continue and further deal with your comments, but why.
                  For experts like you, it is not the essence of the matter that is important, but the desire to expose and stigmatize those whose opinion differs from yours, and to be noted. Vanity is such a thing.
                  But as they say in one of Ostrovsky's well-known comedy "On Every Wise Man, Enough Simplicity". So be simpler, you are our sage, and people may be drawn to you. Although unlikely.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                  2. -2
                    10 August 2021 22: 42
                    Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory)

                    And two. Instead of arguing with you about which antenna array is used in the S400 surveillance radar, I will cite an article http://bastion-karpenko.ru/S-400/, as well as an article by Carlo Kopp, a very famous Australian in expert circles,
                    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Acquisition-GCI.html#mozTocId420074
                    So, even from the photographs of this radar, you can see two antenna sheets rotated 180 degrees relative to each other. Moreover, each of the canvases has its own emitter common to the entire web.
                    The radar of the sector view (or as it is also called the multifunctional radar) also has a horn radiator common for the entire antenna, although it is not as noticeable as the radiators of the surveillance radar, incl. located behind the antenna strip.


                    Show your complete ignorance in the field of radar again.
                    User lucul (Vitaly) was right. In the S-400 complex, two types of surveillance radars are used, the new 96L6E with AFAR release in 2014 has a range of D = 700 km on a target with EPR = 1 sq. The red graph is for the 96L6E radar.
                    1. +2
                      11 August 2021 01: 17
                      Still it would be nice if you learned to read your own charts. Because the red line indicates a value in the region of 400 km for the target with RCS = 1 sq. M. Opps!
                      It would also be nice to understand to the graphs from the Internet that in more than 99% of cases they are "fakes" for actual and especially new weapon systems.
                      I see you have, apparently, "the roof moved down" on the topic of radar. You seem to be a city madman. I'll ask a very simple question. What kind of process in nature forms radio waves? It will be funny if you fall over on such a "childish" question. Really looking forward to the answer. hi
                      1. 0
                        11 August 2021 01: 44
                        Sorry, I was in a hurry, otherwise they are deleting my comments. I read it on a different chart! You are completely correct.
                        When recalculated to compare targets with EPR = 4 square meters of targets, we get D = 565 km. On our sites, sometimes there is much more lies.
                      2. +3
                        11 August 2021 02: 15
                        Quote: KKND
                        I see you have, apparently, "the roof moved down" on the topic of radar.

                        I noticed this three years ago. This character is known on VO as It Vasya.
                      3. 0
                        12 August 2021 15: 17
                        Quote: Sergey Linnik topic: Modern Japanese radar airspace control and Japanese air defense control system
                        The radar uses a cylindrical AFAR that does not require mechanical rotation. A second omnidirectional antenna (a small cylinder on the roof of a large cylinder) is used to suppress parasitic signals.

                        Bongo (Sergey), tell me what this is about and how did they achieve this with a simple antenna?
                      4. -2
                        12 August 2021 16: 14
                        Quote: Gori
                        Quote: Bongo (Sergey)
                        The radar uses a cylindrical AFAR that does not require mechanical rotation. A second omnidirectional antenna (a small cylinder on the roof of a large cylinder) is used to suppress spurious signals.

                        Bongo (Sergey), tell me what this is about and how did they achieve this with a simple antenna?

                        Bongo (Sergey), or do you not know the essence of the question? Then let the other specialists of the VO site answer, who like you for your articles. Yours faithfully, for your minuses to me, "hurray - a patriot"!
                      5. 0
                        11 August 2021 02: 22
                        Lightning. With any sparking, electromagnetic waves are emitted. I'm a radar engineer -
                        specialty 0701 - Radio engineering.
                      6. +1
                        11 August 2021 04: 17
                        Again. How exactly, what exactly creates radio waves? No particulars are needed. The answer is short and unambiguous.
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
              2. -3
                9 August 2021 03: 54
                Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory
                The primary radar information (echo signal) is used only in cases where the secondary channel has failed.
                In military systems, there is no such luxury and therefore primary radar information comes to the fore, in which useful target information is mixed with noise and interference.

                Again, write incorrectly, in your case, the main interference affecting the quality of the radar image will be reflections from "local objects". And then you forgot about the coherent processing of the reflected signals - the SDC (TWS) mode for the selection of moving (moving) targets. Coherent processing mode is also primary radar information. Otherwise, in the "passive" mode of civilian radar stations, you will lose the mark from the aircraft when there is a large illumination of the PPI at the beginning of the radar distance.
                1. 0
                  9 August 2021 18: 27
                  First, do not "write", but "write". The native language must be respected.
                  Secondly, signal processing in the receiving paths of the radar can also be considered a part of the primary radar data processing. But still, primary processing is usually understood as post-detection processing of radar echo signals, the result of which is a decision on whether it is a false signal or true, as well as the conversion of this signal into digital form.
                  Next comes the secondary processing, i.e. linking the track of the detected target and its tracking, including dropping false tracks from tracking.
                  And at each of these stages of RI processing, the participation of a human operator is mandatory. And in order for this participation to take place, various types of radar images are used on which both post-detector (analog) information and secondary information are displayed (digital marks of targets, including extrapolated ones, parameters of their movement, target movements, signs of state ownership, etc.) After secondary processing, usually follows tertiary processing (combining tracks, grouping targets, etc.), but it is usually performed at a higher level than the radar (for example, at the command post of the ZRBR)
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +3
          4 August 2021 10: 08
          Quote: lucul
          the S-300s, which are in Belarus, have a range of only 85 km, in none of the export versions of the S-300 the range is higher. And the S-400 has a range of 400 km.

          It would be nice if you didn’t take the liberty of talking about what you don’t understand at all.No.
          The S-300PS of the armed forces of the Republic of Belarus has a firing range of 90 km. The longest-range SAM used in the S-400 can hit large high-altitude aerodynamic targets at a distance of up to 380 km. But we do not have many combat systems with such missiles. Most of the S-400 air defense systems are equipped with missiles with a firing range of 250 km. The same missiles are used on the S-300PM, but the S-400 has better command control and can simultaneously fire at more targets.
          1. -1
            4 August 2021 11: 48
            It would be nice if you didn’t take the liberty of talking about what you don’t understand at all.

            Indeed)))
            The S-300PS of the armed forces of the Republic of Belarus has a firing range of 90 km.

            I made a mistake from memory for 5 km (85 versus 90 km) range - it's a phenomenal mistake, it's a colossal gap, right?
            Most of the S-400 air defense systems are equipped with missiles with a firing range of 250 km.

            So and the enemy pilot does not care how many long-range missiles the S-400 has on board - the main thing is that they are, and he will not fly closer than 400 km))))
            1. +3
              4 August 2021 15: 31
              Quote: lucul
              Indeed)))

              After your comments about the Turkish air defense, despite the fact that a whole cycle was written on this topic personally for you, I personally have no doubts about it.
              Quote: lucul
              I made a mistake from memory for 5 km (85 versus 90 km) range - it's a phenomenal mistake, it's a colossal gap, right?

              Or maybe you shouldn't write about what you really are a layman? These same 5 km are the firing range of MANPADS, and not so little in modern combat.
              Quote: lucul
              So, the enemy pilot does not care how many long-range missiles the S-400 has on board - the main thing is that they are, and he will not fly closer than 400 km

              And how will the pilot determine at what distance he is from the position of the air defense missile system? And how will this affect the reflection of the raid of deck / tactical aviation and the CD?

              Perhaps it will be a great discovery for you, but when fighting with CD, the firing range of the S-400 and S-300P of all modifications is the same (about 60 km). The S-400 has the advantage of fighting air-based missile carriers up to the launch line, and has a greater channel capacity. Don't disgrace yourself about 400 km, it's just ridiculous to read fool There is no such range on any of our serial complexes.

              As already written to you, the 40N6 missile defense system can hit a very large and slow air target flying at an altitude of 10-12 km. But few such missiles were fired.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. -4
                9 August 2021 02: 57
                Quote: Bongo
                As already written to you, the 40N6 missile defense system can hit a very large and slow air target flying at an altitude of 10-12 km. But few such missiles were fired.

                40N6 - ultra-long-range anti-aircraft guided missile, designed to destroy all types of aircraftincluding hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles. It is capable of striking aerodynamic targets at ranges of up to 380 km and ballistic targets at an altitude of 185 km.

                I guess you won't argue.
                1. +4
                  9 August 2021 03: 50
                  Another reincarnation of E-that Vasya?
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. 0
            9 August 2021 03: 31
            Quote: Tucan (Vasily)
            The longest-range SAM used in the S-400 can hit large high-altitude aerodynamic targets at a distance of up to 380 km.

            What do you mean by large aerodynamic targets and what is their RCS according to your data?
            1. +2
              9 August 2021 04: 24
              Do you seriously expect that I will enter into polemics with those who will soon be banned without the right to correspond? fool
        3. +2
          4 August 2021 10: 29
          Quote: lucul
          And the S-400 has a range of 400 km.

          Such a scale of range is provided by very large / expensive missiles, which are designed to shoot down valuable targets such as AWACS. There are practically no or very few of them.
          Missiles at 150 and 70 km are the main armament of the S-300/400.

          These American wrecks (HARM - harm) themselves fly to the means of their destruction, they do not need high-altitude and long-range air defense - they can be shot down from the Pantsir cannon (a complex and clumsy machine - it is better to produce something simpler where the cannons and missiles are on separate chassis and with large BC).
          1. -3
            4 August 2021 12: 03
            Such a scale of range is provided by very large / expensive missiles, which are designed to shoot down valuable targets such as AWACS

            Are you saying that the cost of a long-range missile is higher by a C-400 than the cost of an F-35? )))
            1. +3
              4 August 2021 12: 47
              Quote: lucul
              Are you saying that the cost of a long-range missile is higher by a C-400 than the cost of an F-35? )))

              Tortured to launch rockets. During the arrival of the rocket, the plane will have time to leave the rocket's reach. Or land altogether - a stationary target is not processed.
              And large air defense missiles are effectively knocked out by small ones, even with the F-35.
              1. -4
                4 August 2021 13: 19
                Tortured to launch rockets

                Tortured to start up planes)))
                During the arrival of the rocket, the plane will have time to leave the rocket's reach

                Why start it up over 400 km? Flies closer - then for sure, all the same, he has missiles only 150 km.
                Or land altogether - a stationary target is not processed

                Where to land? )))
                At such distances, he and the MLRS will get it at the airfield)))
                And large air defense missiles are effectively knocked out by small ones, even with the F-35.

                To shoot down a missile with an anti-missile, you need an anti-missile with a speed exceeding the speed of a missile defense system)))
                1. +3
                  4 August 2021 13: 30
                  Quote: lucul
                  Why start it up over 400 km?

                  You have not entered ...
                  Quote: lucul
                  At such distances, he and the MLRS will get it at the airfield)))

                  Where will you let it? After losing the track of the plane, he could fly to hell knows where.
                  Quote: lucul
                  To shoot down a missile with an anti-missile, you need an anti-missile with a speed exceeding the speed of a missile defense system)))

                  It is not speed that is needed for the edge, but maneuverability (in tennis, you don't run faster than a ball, do you?). Speed ​​is needed only if in pursuit.
                  1. -4
                    4 August 2021 13: 36
                    Where will you let it? After losing the track of the plane, he could fly to hell knows where.

                    To find out, we have our own aviation, and the F-35 will even catch up with the MiG-21)))
                    It is not speed that is needed for the edge, but maneuverability (in tennis, you don't run faster than a ball, do you?). Speed ​​is needed only if in pursuit.

                    Maneuverability without speed is nothing)))
                    1. +2
                      4 August 2021 13: 41
                      Quote: lucul
                      The F-35 will even catch up with the MiG-21)))

                      At the races? And behind the front line?
                      Quote: lucul
                      Maneuverability without speed is nothing)))

                      To intercept, even at half the speed of the target - above the roof. Therefore, many Russian air defense systems have already been declared capable of shooting down hypersound.
                      1. -2
                        9 August 2021 01: 55
                        Quote: Genry

                        И large air defense missiles are effectively shot down by small ones, even with the F-35.

                        Until now, no one in the world has shot down 40N6 S-300, S-400 and RVV-BD R-37M anti-aircraft missiles with an F-35 RVV-BD AIM-120 - this is your invention.
                      2. -2
                        9 August 2021 02: 12
                        Quote: Genry

                        Such a scale of range is provided by very large / expensive missiles, which are designed to shoot down valuable targets such as AWACS. They are practically no or very little.
                        Missiles at 150 and 70 km are the main armament of the S-300/400.


                        Genry, don't tell lies. The Israelis are immediately visible.

                        40N6 - ultra-long-range anti-aircraft guided missile, designed to destroy all types of aircraftincluding hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles. It is capable of striking aerodynamic targets at ranges of up to 380 km and ballistic targets at an altitude of 185 km.
                      3. +1
                        9 August 2021 02: 39
                        Quote: Gori
                        do not write a lie. The Israelis are immediately visible.

                        Are you talking to yourself?
                        Quote: Gori
                        40N6 - ultra-long-range anti-aircraft guided missile, designed to destroy all types of aircraft

                        There are very few of these, and they have appeared recently.
                      4. +2
                        9 August 2021 03: 54
                        Quote: Genry
                        Are you talking to yourself?

                        Don't pay any attention to him. This is a troll known as I-from Vasya. He previously registered under two dozen accounts, he is regularly banned for rudeness and flooding.
              2. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
        4. +1
          4 August 2021 10: 29
          Quote: lucul
          It should be remembered that at the beginning of the 90s 2 sets of C300 were sold in the USA, and there are basically no fundamental differences between the C400 and the C300, with the exception of the expanded range of missiles and the corresponding refinement of some hardware and software.

          Yes Yes ))))
          The differences are in signal processing, on the S-400 everything is already in "digital".
          Secondly, even the S-300s, which are in Belarus, have a range of only 85 km, in no export version of the S-300 the range is not higher. And the S-400 has a range of 400 km.

          The range for the drlo 400 aircraft, which glows like a beacon, but tell me the range for the same penguin? Detection range?
          1. -1
            4 August 2021 12: 04
            The range for the drlo 400 aircraft, which glows like a beacon, but tell me the range for the same penguin? Detection range?

            Ask the Turks, they know)))
            1. +3
              4 August 2021 15: 56
              Quote: lucul
              Ask the Turks, they know)))

              I read your comments and go nuts wassat Are you really like that, or do you get paid for it?
              If the latter, then you compromise your employers. negative
              1. +3
                11 August 2021 01: 38
                Quote: Tucan
                If the latter, then you compromise your employers.

                Yes, my neighbor in the country "patriot" all his life and worked as the head of the motor corps, did nothing and did not know how and nothing, now "you cannot kill with a shovel." A little blat, to snitch on time, to lick whoever needs it, and everything is in order. True, the plant collapsed.
                So we picked it up "by pull."
          2. -2
            9 August 2021 02: 24
            Quote: Vol4ara
            The range for the drlo 400 aircraft, which glows like a beacon, but tell me the range for the same penguin? Detection range?

            I'll tell you if your memory regularly fails you. Detection range D = 600 km for targets with RCS = 4 square meters (approximately) in free space. F-35 with EPR = 0,3 sq. meter will be detected at a distance of D = 313 km in free space and then destroyed by RVV-BD. According to the direct range equation, the numbers will be different.
            1. 0
              9 August 2021 10: 56
              Quote: Gori
              Quote: Vol4ara
              The range for the drlo 400 aircraft, which glows like a beacon, but tell me the range for the same penguin? Detection range?

              I'll tell you if your memory regularly fails you. Detection range D = 600 km for targets with RCS = 4 square meters (approximately) in free space. F-35 with EPR = 0,3 sq. meter will be detected at a distance of D = 313 km in free space and then destroyed by RVV-BD. According to the direct range equation, the numbers will be different.

              Where does the infa on EPR 35 come from?
              1. -1
                9 August 2021 11: 43
                Quote: Vol4ara
                Where does the infa on EPR 35 come from?

                At present, this is easily calculated mathematically on the surface of the F-35 model using the standards of reflecting surfaces, excluding the Luneberg lenses ... which was done by Russian designers.
                1. 0
                  9 August 2021 18: 22
                  Quote: Gori
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  Where does the infa on EPR 35 come from?

                  At present, this is easily calculated mathematically on the surface of the F-35 model using the standards of reflecting surfaces, excluding the Luneberg lenses ... which was done by Russian designers.

                  The geometry can be calculated, and where does the data on the absorptive capacity of the coating come from?
                  1. -1
                    9 August 2021 21: 07
                    Quote: Vol4ara
                    The geometry can be calculated, and where does the data on the absorptive capacity of the coating come from?

                    The United States has gone not far from Russia and it is always possible, with the help of its own or "foreign" absorbing materials, to estimate the corresponding indicators in the calculations, which are physically problematic to surpass at certain stages of the development of science ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. -3
        9 August 2021 11: 31
        Quote: gregor6549 (Gregory

        Yes, the S400 air defense system is quite worthy by modern standards of the air defense system, but there is nothing fundamentally new in it, compared to the C300. And life has repeatedly punished those who puffed out their cheeks and kicked themselves in the chest with a heel.



        "The air base in Khmeimim is protected from raids by a more solid system - the S-400 Triumph. It can do everything the same as the S-300VM, but at a higher level. The radar detects targets at a distance of 600 km, and based on stealth technology - 150 km. Simultaneously accompanies 100 targets.

        The 6 different missiles at the disposal of the S-400 cover a huge range in terms of speed, distance, and maneuverability. The farthest interception is carried out at a distance of 400 km. The maximum target speed (in this case, a ballistic missile) is 4800 m / s. The minimum height of destruction of aircraft and cruise missiles is 5 meters, the maximum height is already in space - 185 km.

        Of course, General Joseph Votel is unhappy with this state of affairs. But he has no leverage to influence him. However, his pathos about "the Russians preventing us from flying wherever we please" refers to the export of the latest Russian systems. "
        https://vegchel.ru/index.php?newsid=35947


        You can't kill the truth. She is alone in the Russian language, like the truth. The data in the open press on the Russian air defense systems are presented quite accurately. Some sources give the number of types of anti-aircraft missiles not 6, but 5.
  5. +4
    4 August 2021 06: 51
    Calm yourself and your allies. Say, we have both an "invisibility cloak" and a "sword-kladenets" so that "in one fell swoop with seven beats" ... In a real battle it will only become clear what works and what is "not very good" ...
    Are they planning a massive airstrike from aircraft carriers? On objects covered by the S-400? Then let them plan and strike at the AIRCRAFT CARRIERS. Well, at least "Daggers" ...
    1. +2
      4 August 2021 07: 03
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Then let them plan and strike at the AIRCRAFT CARRIERS. Well, at least with "Daggers" ...

      Classic: "What about us?" )))
    2. 0
      4 August 2021 15: 53
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Are they planning a massive airstrike from aircraft carriers?

      And don't you take into account the pro-NATO Ukraine right next to us ?!
      1. 0
        4 August 2021 16: 21
        Quote: Elephant
        And don't you take into account the pro-NATO Ukraine right next to us ?!

        I don't take 404 into account at all. Russia has not yet seriously dealt with this territory. They are successfully destroying themselves. They will launch NATO troops into their territory - well, then who has not hid ... But NATO will not climb ... There are no suicides there.
  6. AAC
    0
    4 August 2021 06: 54
    And what is the rocket itself amazed at?
    1. +7
      4 August 2021 07: 07
      Quote: AAC
      And what is the rocket itself amazed at?

      The missile itself is hit by the "Shells" of the cover. She's not "hyper", but the last "Pantsyr" became long-range, and the target speed up to 2000 m / s "digests" ... And it can work on target designation of the "big brother" ...
      1. -4
        4 August 2021 07: 22
        Shell. There was information that he did not show himself very well at the test site. Cannons against applied targets in general 0. Lost Thor devastatingly. Still from every iron-carapace. It is interesting to solve problems with him or just someone is actively promoting him
        1. +6
          4 August 2021 07: 35
          This is old information, almost from the beginning of the XNUMXs. This same shell uzhr was modernized twice.
        2. +2
          4 August 2021 07: 41
          Quote: Lykases1
          There was information that he did not show himself very well at the test site.

          "There was information ..." do not forget the link ... And then you can voice a lot of things ... And the link is better to check for the source. A lot of such "information" is surfing the Internet!
        3. +5
          4 August 2021 07: 45
          Quote: Lykases1
          Carapace. There was information that he did not show himself very well at the test site.

          And why "sound" the "centenary" old? There was criticism against the "Pantsir-S" of the first modifications ... In the present and near future, "Pantsir-SM" should become the base! The Pantsir-S1 air defense system has been modernized in order to eliminate the discovered deficiencies in the Pantsir-S1M ... But the Pantsir-S1M (heard ...) is intended primarily for "replacement" abroad "Pantsir-S / S1 / C2 "... (Actually, for me, the TOR SAM system is in the first place! ...)
          1. +1
            4 August 2021 11: 09
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            Quote: Lykases1
            Carapace. There was information that he did not show himself very well at the test site.

            And why "sound" the "centenary" old? There was criticism against the "Pantsir-S" of the first modifications ... In the present and near future, "Pantsir-SM" should become the base! The Pantsir-S1 air defense system has been modernized in order to eliminate the discovered deficiencies in the Pantsir-S1M ... But the Pantsir-S1M (heard ...) is intended primarily for "replacement" abroad "Pantsir-S / S1 / C2 "... (Actually, for me, the TOR SAM system is in the first place! ...)

            And in your universe, weapons change all at once and everywhere?
            Do factories manage to produce 150 new shells in one night?
            Or will it continue for 10-12 years, in fact?
            1. +1
              4 August 2021 11: 29
              What, sir, are you talking about so absurdly? belay What does this have to do with it? I tell you about Thomas, and you tell me about Erema! fool
  7. -3
    4 August 2021 07: 06
    A separate question is to what extent one can generally speak of the "success of tests" in destroying the same S-400, when instead of real systems there is some kind of imitation of them.
    Merikatos' regular Hollywood! laughing pointed cardboard boxes, and are trying to portray a target, which they call the S-400! laughing
    1. +1
      5 August 2021 03: 45
      excited neotovarischi, yes! laughing sweaty thick fingers sculpt a minus! tongue
  8. +3
    4 August 2021 07: 15
    Harm E version with increased range.
    It is capable of hitting radar with a change in frequencies, non-working radar, has a combined control - it is capable of being displayed at the point of location of the radar according to reconnaissance data and performing additional search.
    ... In 2016, work began in the United States on a new modification, AARGM-ER (Extended Range). The task was to "merge" the guidance system from the "E" model, a standard fuselage and a jet booster, thanks to which the rocket would fly to a significantly greater range. Tests completed in 2020.

    development of the AGM-88E variant; the program received the abbreviation AARGM - Advanced Anti Radiation Guided Missle ("Advanced anti-radar and guided missile"). Its difference was the combined homing head (GOS), capable of working both in the usual way and as a millimeter-wave radar seeker (the latter mode allowed the radar antennas to be detected, even if the radars themselves were turned off). The rocket also had an inertial navigation system, and as an auxiliary - satellite. These systems brought her to the area where the presence of enemy radar was assumed, after which she began to look for the target herself.

    The E version has a launch range of up to 150 km, the ER should have even more, that is, we are talking about the use outside the enemy's air defense zone.
  9. +8
    4 August 2021 07: 22
    We have air defense radar simulators. The data is really old, now this system is probably more perfect.
    OJSC "Defense Systems" and OJSC "Design Bureau" Kuntsevo "have developed simulators-emitters of air defense radars. Each emitter is a mini-transmitter with a power of at least 4 kW per pulse. Its weight is about 80 kg, it operates on powerful batteries in standby mode for 24 hours, for radiation - 3-4 hours. During testing of the protection system, six domestic anti-radar missiles were fired on the operating radar. All of them were removed from the radar by an average of 400 m. The station did not receive a scratch. The product is manufactured in series.

    https://bukren.my1.ru/Ware/asimm_otvet.doc
    1. +5
      4 August 2021 07: 53
      Quote: riwas
      We have air defense radar simulators

      It is better to shoot down new PR missiles, given that PR missiles are capable of memorizing the coordinates of radar targets ...
      1. +1
        4 August 2021 08: 25
        So the snag turns on earlier, and the S-400 complex only when the carrier enters the effective firing range. And anyway, when the enemy has a lot of targets, it always strains him.
        1. +3
          4 August 2021 09: 32
          Quote: riwas
          So the snag turns on earlier, and the S-400 complex only when the carrier enters the effective firing range.

          Look what happens ... "Deceptions", after all, are "not far" from the complexes ... -approximate "coordinates ... It is necessary to create units equipped with radar simulators capable of simulating radars of different complexes ... such units should be located in the same positional areas as the air defense missile system; but not "close-close" ... And turn on simultaneously with "real" radars ... Then they will make the enemy aircraft bewildered, which of the ten "flashes" should be used to launch a PR-missile ... But in general, I think that the development of air defense weapons has come to the "threshold" beyond which a change in the "priorities" of building air defense systems must take place ... Otherwise, with the promised effectiveness of air defense systems, a "puff" may happen!
          1. 0
            4 August 2021 14: 52
            "honking" the enemy about the presence of "nearby" air defense systems.

            Of course, you don't need to place a circle around the radar fellow
      2. +3
        4 August 2021 08: 34
        Do not just remember the location, but also distinguish it from radar simulators by the presence of a specific antenna
        1. 0
          4 August 2021 17: 07
          and also distinguish from radar simulators by the presence of a specific antenna

          And how does she detect this SPECIFIC antenna? belay
          1. 0
            4 August 2021 18: 14
            For example, by EPR?
            Have you seen the radar antennas?
            1. 0
              5 August 2021 10: 53
              For example, by EPR?
              Have you seen the radar antennas?

              Sergey, you are also one of God's chosen ones - do you answer questions with questions?
              I saw the radar antennas.
              Unlike you, I am an air defense officer in reserve.

              You can't find anything by EPR, EPR is a numerical characteristic, REFLECTED signal.
              It is possible to detect by the signal to select the target by the signal signature.
              That's just for a working radar, as well as for a passive seeker, this is a signal radiate.
              So the signatures of the radiation of the radar simulators and the radar itself DO NOT DIFFER.
              Learn materiel adept of American weapons.
              1. -1
                5 August 2021 11: 00
                Read carefully what they write to you before commenting.
                On Kharmah, the seeker, in addition to a passive receiver, includes a millimeter active part, and is able to find and select whether the radar antenna is turned on or off. And the simulator and the real radar are different
                1. 0
                  5 August 2021 12: 11
                  is able to find and select whether the radar antenna is turned on or off.

                  It's clear. That you do not understand anything. laughing How many orders of magnitude do you think the signal from the missile seeker reflected from the antenna is air and air less than the signal from a working radar antenna?
                  Have to repeat
                  Learn materiel adept of American weapons.

                  Well, for general education. The beauty of the charm is that he has a passive GOS - it is difficult to intercept.
                  1. -1
                    5 August 2021 13: 54
                    The peculiarity of Kharma is that it has a complex combined seeker with inertial, satellite, passive and active guidance systems, and their combination can significantly increase efficiency, including quite reliably distinguishing a real radar against the background of simulators and makes conventional methods of dealing with anti-radar missiles ineffective ...
                    1. 0
                      5 August 2021 15: 13
                      Harma feature

                      I do not know about what a "feature" is.
                      Satellite + inertial guidance systems and millimeter radar missiles have many missiles, for example, the well-known tomahawks.
                      And the danger (difficulty of interception) of the harma is his 2-mach speed and passive mode, but this is solved by traps.
                      1. 0
                        5 August 2021 16: 09
                        Take an interest in the features of Harma and the combined seeker, just against traps and other countermeasures such as turning off the radar.
                        The Tomahawk, by the way, does not have a millimeter radar, it has purely optical guidance at the terminal site.
                      2. 0
                        5 August 2021 16: 15
                        it has purely optical guidance at the terminal site.

                        Yeah of course RGM / UGM-109B
                        Teach materiel. laughing
  10. Eug
    +2
    4 August 2021 07: 36
    And what, the S-400 air defense system will be used in splendid isolation and patiently wait for this "super-duper" to arrive at it? Deception will not be applied? "Brothers" with a smaller range won't help? Air defense is strong precisely because of its multilayer system.
  11. +2
    4 August 2021 07: 49
    In the USA, a missile was tested from the F-18, which was called the "destroyer" of the S-400 air defense missile system in the press.
    ... Come on, the magazine / L / ist and its owner wants both attention and babosikov.
    And the reality is that .... and what is it reality ???
    We do not have the PANCIRE OF LONE on the fields, nor all the other complexes do not work alone !!! We have everything COMPLEX!
    Well, how will that plane, with its super-duper rocket, overcome all this, smash it ???
    Surely, the breakthrough / strike operation will also be COMPREHENSIVE ... real military, experts know this, that's just empty chatter to the public, they don't do ... military secrets, however
    And let the people hawala, another bike, about a super-duper killer and everything else like that.
    1. +4
      4 August 2021 09: 16
      For internal consumption they wrote and let them sleep peacefully, and the specialists all understand perfectly well that the air defense and missile defense is an echelon ...
      1. +1
        4 August 2021 10: 17
        People hawala ... many media simply have no other goal.
        1. +5
          4 August 2021 11: 44
          So politicians use all this to their advantage, and the media have long turned into a political instrument ...
          1. +1
            4 August 2021 13: 32
            The media has always been a tool for someone and for something ... everything else, such as ads, fashion and crosswords, is an additional feature, nothing more.
            1. +4
              4 August 2021 14: 04
              Previously, there was some kind of objectivity in the media, but now they are all taken over and used ...
              1. +1
                4 August 2021 14: 20
                Objectivity was etched away, as unnecessary, dangerous, preventing all come / D / urk from sleeping peacefully and concocting their affairs here and there.
                1. +4
                  4 August 2021 14: 31
                  Yes, journalistic investigations are a thing of the past, or rather, they were simply banned and forced to write only what is beneficial to the owner ...
                  1. +1
                    4 August 2021 15: 48
                    So they are extinguished, regularly ... those who seek to get to the bottom of the truth! Now this business is extremely dangerous.
                    1. +4
                      4 August 2021 16: 10
                      They extinguish this to put it mildly, at best they lose their jobs and can no longer be journalists anywhere ...
                      1. +1
                        4 August 2021 17: 40
                        There are also more radical cases, alas.
                      2. +4
                        4 August 2021 17: 44
                        Well, I modestly kept silent ... but they intimidated very quickly ...
                      3. +1
                        4 August 2021 17: 49
                        This has happened before, hardly less ... but still, you can't put up with it.
                      4. +3
                        4 August 2021 17: 53
                        The money has done its job, and who will give money for independent media and the circle is closed ...
  12. +2
    4 August 2021 08: 09
    We already read about this product a year ago. The rocket fits well into the parameters of the typical target of Thors, Armor, Vityaz. The weapon is far from being ultimatum.
  13. +2
    4 August 2021 08: 17
    The information war is in full swing, everyone is praising their equipment and army, bringing and humiliating the enemy's armies and equipment. Everyone says that they are kind and fluffy and the enemy is a bastard who has nothing to do with a person.
  14. +4
    4 August 2021 09: 14
    American journalists, referring to representatives of the Pentagon, write that "the tests were successful."


    And at what distance from the target he attacked her, that's the whole question ...
  15. +1
    4 August 2021 09: 32
    Didn't they think that the S-400 would cover the Carapace? He will land the rocket.
    Oh, these storytellers.
    1. +2
      4 August 2021 09: 46
      How many missiles the plane carries. How many waves of planes there will be. With what probability from 400 will hit the target in conditions of interference. It is quite possible to break through the air defense just further - Yars and Tridents.
      1. +3
        4 August 2021 10: 19
        Quote: Lykases1
        It is quite possible to break through the air defense just further - Yars and Tridents.

        That's right ... that's why they still don't fly, don't shoot and ...
        Weak consolation, but there is simply NO other!
      2. 0
        4 August 2021 12: 35
        This is all clear. But who will agree in our time to donate a hundred boards at a time?
        1. +4
          4 August 2021 14: 23
          Doubt about a hundred. Not those times. A division with 400, if memory serves, aims 72 missiles at 36 targets and is out of the game. But he will work on the Boeing at an altitude of 15 km. And if the reconnaissance passes first. plane and will open the position of 200 km. And there seem to be such. And then the F-15 will launch dozens of missiles or gliding bombs. Do not think that I am such a pessimist, but we are not the USSR and without nuclear weapons they will roll us into a pancake. Yes, and whether the troops completely switched to the s400, I strongly doubt it.
          1. 0
            4 August 2021 14: 27
            They will not bomb one division. Agree.
            They will break through the front. And there, just, hundreds will be needed.
            Although, in our theater of operations there is nowhere to take them.
          2. 0
            4 August 2021 20: 31
            It looks like you are a "strategist", but not strong in air defense tactics, unfortunately ...
            By the way, such figures for missiles and targets refer to the S-400 air defense system and not to a separate air defense system. And why "drops out of the game", it's just the maximum capabilities of the system in a single time interval, and even very good ones. Taking into account the means of direct cover associated with the command post of the system, its capabilities increase significantly.
            1. 0
              5 August 2021 05: 53
              Eliminates because the next reload follows, and it is not very fast. The system will simply be oversaturated.
              1. 0
                5 August 2021 18: 49
                What kind of outfit of forces of a potential adversary is needed to "saturate" such a system, taking into account that aviation will work out on the distant approaches on delivery vehicles?
                1. 0
                  5 August 2021 20: 06
                  Read on the same site about Israeli gliding bombs with a range of under a hundred kilometers. How many bombs will the carrier fire? I don't remember, but not two, but much more. Are there twenty planes? Part throws bombs, part hits missiles. So that there was a different speed of targets. Plus, nobody canceled cruise missiles. They go low try the serifs. And a question for air defense specialists, as I understand it, constant target illumination is needed. The seeker is far from being on all missiles. Theoretically, a return line, like a shrike, can fly along this ray. Is there any opposition to this?
                  1. 0
                    6 August 2021 05: 56
                    The S-400 air defense system is a long-range missile system, the destruction of various projectiles, NURS and other gliding bombs is not his profile. This is the task of means of direct cover such as Pantsir, Tor, etc. The S-400 is designed to combat carriers, cruise missiles, ballistic targets.20 aircraft in the raid far does not exceed the capabilities of the system, even with a two-division composition. Cruise missiles - a complex was created to combat them, the fight against them has been worked out and is not a big deal.
                    1. 0
                      6 August 2021 06: 21
                      Well then, such a question. The targets were detected by the complex at a distance of 150 km - an altitude of 10 km. Then he will not find them - radio horizon. Targets bulge bk, the complex works out on the carriers. After the volley, the targets begin to descend and go beyond the horizon. There are 400 missiles with gsn. Will the missiles hit the carriers in this situation, or will they have to re-target them at attacking missiles and spend ammunition? How long does it take to recharge the complex? If the kr did not pose a threat, no one would do it. On the one hand, a large slow target, on the other, low-altitude. What is the detection range? Will they have time to react?
              2. 0
                5 August 2021 18: 50
                At the position of each missile launcher there is at least 2 ammunition missiles, which is quite a lot :)
      3. 0
        4 August 2021 14: 59
        How many airfields and aircraft carriers will remain, how many planes will be able to take off, how many pilots and technicians will remain alive after the exchange of missile strikes, in a word, questions, questions and more questions. Giveaway games, like in Syria, can get bored by someone and instead of the shaitan-missile, normal tactical missiles will arrive and there will be a new "some kind of crisis" with a bunch of deaths. In the meantime, you can watch and discuss new wunderwales with a hypothetical approach of an aircraft to the S-400 from a hypothetical airfield.
  16. +7
    4 August 2021 12: 09
    For each "destroyer" there is a destroyer
    1. +1
      4 August 2021 16: 28
      Everyone understands this very well. The question is - who has better technology, more modern electronics, etc. In general, the advantage of a country or blocs of countries is who has a higher scientific and industrial potential.
      1. 0
        4 August 2021 20: 15
        The "modernity" of radio electronics for weapons systems is a controversial issue. Its task is to solve the tasks set in the terms of reference, fit into a certain volume and be reliable. Microprocessors from iPhones are not applicable here. This technique is basically "piece" developments.
  17. -2
    4 August 2021 20: 08
    The time of Shrikes and standard workstations is over.
    This was relevant (anti-radar missiles) for single-channel systems of the C-75 type. For the S-400 PRR type Shrike or similar - just one of the busy firing channels. The launch range does not matter. Previously, the work of the PRR was used along the side or rear lobe of the directional pattern of the air defense missile system. With digital signal processing, this problem is negligible.
    The declared launch ranges of the PRR do not provide any tangible advantages for the destruction of the S-400.
    1. -2
      5 August 2021 08: 05
      This is Harm, not the Shrike
      And he left the Shrike, like the S-400 from the S-75.
      He is able to hit the radar not only without a side lobe, but simply turned off.
      The world has long gone ahead in many industries, not just radar.
      1. 0
        5 August 2021 18: 42
        More details about the destruction of "switched off" radars. Have you accidentally confused the capabilities of the Harm PRS and the "Kashperovsky ellipsoid"? AGM-88 (your vaunted Harm) is a late 70s development. It differs from the Shrike in the presence of memory and greater noise immunity. Guidance along the radar beam, and now if the radar is turned off, the rocket is guided to the point from which the signal was emitted, but at large distances and errors are large, so it is far from the fact that it will hit the antenna alignment.
        1. 0
          6 August 2021 06: 06
          Even during the Arab-Israeli wars, the "Doubler" system was used to combat the PRR. The modern system is many times better, more compact and perfect.
  18. 0
    5 August 2021 15: 34
    Scratch your tongue, do not roll bags. Here the other day it happened to see the start of the S-500, but the speed of the rocket at the start is impressive.
  19. -1
    5 August 2021 21: 09
    Destroyed already? Did they give it to the Jews? Will they destroy? And the fact that the S-400 is the destroyer of the F-18, they seem to not take into account.
  20. The comment was deleted.