Shelling from the S-300: fact or fiction?

151
Shelling from the S-300: fact or fiction?

Some Russian media recently burst out with "accusatory" articles on the topic of the destruction of infrastructure facilities by Russian S-300s. Say, everything that was said by Ukrainian media is the true truth and the Russian army is really shelling targets on the territory of Ukraine with the help of anti-aircraft missiles of the S-300 complex.

It is worth sorting out this issue simply because this shying from side to side will not lead to good. Either Ukrainians are firing at themselves in our country, their rockets are falling on houses with civilians, now a general accusation of everyone and everything in the army will begin on the topic that, yes, they are firing S-300 rockets at houses with civilians.




The most unpleasant thing about this is that the civilians, to whom the S-300s fly, are either kicked by an owl or an owl is hitting a stump. Whose rocket - no difference, flew in, bang - there is not much difference. But from a political point of view, it is worth dotting the i, especially since the letter is not Russian, but very Ukrainian.

In general, it is worth remembering how it all began. And it began with repeated statements by the Ukrainian side that the Russian side was shelling cities with S-300 missiles. It seems to be how cruise missiles fly, and with them missiles from the S-300.

I deliberately use the very vague term "missile from the S-300 air defense system", because there are many modifications of the S-300 systems, and they differ very much from each other in missiles. And to paint the differences between the same 5V55K from 9M96 to our audience, more than savvy, is not worth it.

And it’s worth talking in as much detail as possible, discussing two positions: the Ukrainian one, which has long been explaining to the whole world why and how Russia uses air defense missiles in cities, and the Russian one, which says that all this is nonsense.

The Ukrainian version is very original. There was such a herald of all Ukraine, Arestovich. At one time, with the stubbornness of a woodpecker, he pecked that Russia would soon run out of missiles. This swotting became the foundation for the Ukrainian version, according to which Russia has so few missiles, because if they don’t run out, they will run out soon, and then the Russian military genius came up with the idea of ​​​​using an air defense system to shell the front-line cities.

The Ukrainians said that there is a technical possibility of such firing, however, for this, it is still necessary to modify either the installations or the missiles themselves. Yes, Kim had that in order to shoot at ground targets, they began to install GPS or GLONASS on air defense missiles.

And they made up fairy tales about the rockets themselves. And it is difficult to detect the launch, and the rocket flies quickly, and it is almost impossible to bring it down, and the damage from it is hoo. However, the capabilities of warheads are slightly lower, although yes, the explosive charge of the 5V55 is not the smallest.

The main argument of the Ukrainian side was that so many missiles of the 5V55 family had been made that they could compensate for the lack of Caliber and Iskanders.

In short, this is to put together everything that was erupted by the Ukrainian side.

The Russian version is easier. Since the Ukrainian air defense is located mainly in large cities, the centers, and its backbone are the same S-300PS and PT, that is, the air defense systems of the first wave. Naturally, armed with very old missiles. Given the age and safety of the missiles, it is not surprising that they both work abnormally and fly God knows where.

Actually, everything. In general, the Ukrainian military beautifully came up with the problem of uninterceptable S-300s, and by this they explain to the citizens of the country why air defense cannot bring down anything, and alarms are turned on after the explosions have thundered.

These are the two theories, and each has the right to life.

In general, the logic is simply fantastic and it is simply unrealistic to understand it. Why replace less expensive but more effective cruise missiles with more expensive and less effective anti-aircraft missiles?

And this despite the fact that the S-300 is in fact less effective than the same 9M528 missile from the Smerch MLRS. The warhead of an air defense missile system is always fragmentation or fragmentation rod. High-explosive action, even for hitting air targets, is minimal, the main damage comes from striking elements. If we take the warhead of the 9M55F Smerch missiles - 258 kg, of which 95 kg of explosives and 1100 submunitions weighing 50 grams each. And a rocket of the 5V55 family - there the warhead has a weight of 133 kg, of which 47 kg of explosives. The number of fragments is also many times less.

That is, in terms of the impact force of the warhead, the Smerch missile is much more effective than the S-300 air defense missile.

If you look at the firing range, then anti-aircraft missiles are not the best thing for firing at ground targets.

The range of destruction of ground targets during regular firing of such an air defense system as the S-300 cannot be more than 30-40 km. Yes, despite the fact that the S-300 seems to be able to work on ground targets, missiles require certain conditions.


Air defense missiles, except for the most recent generations, operate somewhat differently than tactical missiles in terms of guidance. Let me remind you that we are talking about missiles of the 5V55 type. So, every rocket that flies somewhere must “understand” what it must do. Therefore, there are two data packets: the coordinates of the ground target and the height of the detonation of the warhead. With the first one, it is clear that the missile must know where the target is, and the second - when to detonate the warhead, because the air defense missile is detonated remotely and it does not have an impact fuse. That is, the parameters of the height of the undermining.

XNUMXD picture


That's just the data is not entered into the rocket itself, but transmitted to the guidance station, which controls the flight of the rocket. This is typical for both the S-300 and S-400. That is, the illumination and aiming radar leads the missile to the target and transmits certain commands to the missile control unit for the final aiming at the target. The target can maneuver and dodge. And at the command of the guidance station, the warhead is undermined.


What follows from this? An unpleasant moment: until the warhead is detonated, the missile must be in the visibility zone of its guidance radar. There are no problems with this in the air, but with ground objects everything is more difficult. There is such a thing as a radio horizon.

The radio horizon is simple. Since our planet is not flat (although there are those who believe that it is the other way around), and radio waves propagate in a straight line, then at a certain distance from the antenna, the curvature of the Earth will not allow you to “see” the target or transmit a signal from one antenna to another. In the same way as when looking with the help of sight, the horizon hides what is beyond it.

But the radio horizon does not coincide with the optical one, since the planet's magnetic field somewhat deflects the waves of the same radar from the ideal straight line, therefore the radio horizon is a little further than the optical one.

The corresponding formulas make it possible to calculate that a radar located at a height of 20 meters above the Earth's surface will "see" at 18-20 km. So the whole question is how much it will be possible to raise the radar antenna above the ground. By the way, that is why the radar antenna of ships is above all.

So, it turns out that the 5V55 missile must be in the zone of contact with the guidance station until the moment the target is hit. This means that the maximum firing range of the S-300 at a ground target is somewhere in the region of 30 km, no more. Despite the fact that in the sky the rocket flies a greater distance. If the rocket is not undermined at ground level, but at a height, then the range may increase. But there is no particular point in undermining warheads at a height above 50 meters; fragmentation-rod submunitions will lose their destructive ability.

Of course, it is easier to shoot at ground-based stationary radio-contrast targets than at the same ships. When firing at a target such as a ship, the guidance station must see both the target and the missile. Track changes in coordinates and develop corrections. And for a ground target, it is enough for the guidance station calculator to compare the initial coordinates with the coordinates of the tracked missile and develop commands to correct the course.

That is, I boldly emphasize this: this is not homing, it's like classic radio command guidance! With the observation of the rocket throughout the entire flight segment in the radio range.

I mean, it's not the smartest idea.


We just take it and think, what is the chance of defeat for the S-300, which, frankly, is not small and is noticeable both visually and in the radio range? What can prevent the enemy from sending a specialized missile on the radar or simply covering the complex with artillery? 30-40 km is a very ugly range. This means that in order to hit a target 300 km from the front line with a S-25 air defense missile, the complex must be placed almost back to back. That gives a great opportunity to detect the complex and strike at it.

Is a very expensive anti-aircraft missile system worth cosplaying like this with its weak Iskander or Smerch warhead? Don't think.

The Ukrainians, however, corrected themselves. Bloggers and "experts" unanimously began to talk about the fact that we have finalized old missiles of the 5V55 type, installing GLONASS system modules in them, thus turning them almost into ballistic missiles.

Are these old, actually analog 5V55? Wrapping a smartphone with electrical tape? And then? Well, you can plug in a GPS or GLONASS module. But the module needs brains that will receive information from the module about the location of the rocket and issue control commands.

In general, Iskander has already been invented. And it flies further, and most importantly - more precisely, because it was originally designed for this - for ballistic flight. What is the point of perverting over old anti-aircraft missiles with their weak high-explosive warheads - probably, unless everything is really bad and there is nothing more to shoot with.

As a result, modernized old Russian missiles fly across Kyiv, Dnieper and Poltava?


Doubtful. Too far from the front line or the border. 5V55 in the best of times could fly up to 75 km. 5V55U could fly 150 km. That is, there is no way to fly from Kursk and Belgorod, with all the desire.

Why am I focusing so much on 5V55? Yes, here they are, in the pictures taken "from the other side." Here they are, folks. And there is a lot of substance in these pictures.


To begin with, the question is: is it possible to take and shoot 5V55, which, according to the Ukrainian side, we have in bulk, from S-300PMU1 or S-300VM? More precisely, it will be possible to charge and possibly launch, but alas, to direct. Different generations of missiles, different equipment responsible for guidance.

In general, the army S-300V / VM have their own missiles, the air defense systems from air defense have their own. And in order to fire old 5V55 missiles, you need the same old S-300P / S-300PT launchers. With the question of the compatibility of the 5V55 and the S-300PMU1 launcher, I very much puzzled the representative of the air defense regiment covering our facilities in my area. Comrade captain honestly admitted that he had not seen such a miracle as 5V55, because he had only served for the 13th year. And he did not find these rarities, he came to the S-300PF, and there were already quite modern 48N6E.

But the captain from the air defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine not only sees such missiles, he also uses them. Because the very same S-300PT / S-300PS / S-300V1 are in service with the air defense of Ukraine. Just the same ones, under 5V55.


Oh yes, I forgot. More good neighbors from Slovakia brought one S-300PMU. But this, you know, is nothing. All the same 5V55KD and 5V55RM, which start from the launch complexes listed above, have fallen, are falling and will fall on Ukrainian cities. And which Ukrainians diligently attribute to Russian missiles falling on houses.

We have a number of such missiles. True, they were slightly converted into the Favorit-M aerial target complex. It is clear that the missiles are there without warheads, and they are not trained to hit ground targets either. It's probably not worth telling how the target works.

So, with all the more than critical attitude towards our army today, I think that the order to launch anti-aircraft missiles as ballistic missiles is too much. Simply because the rework of these missiles will take so much time and resources that the game will not be worth the candle. Someone may object, like, this is Russia - but not to the same extent?

Re-mothball and prepare the old launchers of the S-300PT type, equip the missiles with new control units (there is still a question - where to get them) specifically for these missiles, navigation modules ... No, it doesn’t look normal. Of course, such a missile could fly 150-180 kilometers, but here is the very possibility of converting old missiles into ballistic missiles - sorry, we buy copters and walkie-talkies in China and give them out for our own, and here control units for missiles ...

That is why the Ukrainian media are firing rockets from S-300s at cities that are not far from the front line: Kramatorsk, Nikolaev, Zaporozhye, Kherson, settlements of the Donetsk region. Sometimes, of course, they are brought there and there are stories about the arrival of S-300 missiles from the territory of the Belgorod Region. Perhaps, of course, but by no means in a shock performance. The air defense near Belgorod is working, therefore, of course, parts of the rocket could easily fall to the ground on the territory of Ukraine.

But in general, the Ukrainian media almost cope with the task of the prosecution, talking about the arrival of the S-300 from Tokmak, Zaporozhye region, to the Dnieper. That is, 150 km.


Photo evidence is more than enough. The Internet is littered with photos of boosters, warheads, submunitions. The only question here is whose missiles they really were. And to whom they flew initially.

By the way, about the flight. I unintentionally forgot about the principle of operation of anti-aircraft missiles. They hit the target not with high-explosive impact, but with fragments or arrows. And if the rocket did not explode on command near the target, as it should, then it has a self-liquidator that will destroy it in the air. This, by the way, is the answer to an unasked question about the submunitions scattered around the crash site.

The mass of the warhead of any missile of the 5V55 family is 133 kg. This is a shell, explosives, damaging elements. Weight of explosives 80 kg. This, of course, is enough to cause some damage, but the same 9M55F from Smerch has a warhead weight of 250 kg, and there are 95 kg of explosives and 55 kg of submunitions. Comparable? Yes, but 9M55F flies MINIMUM 25 km, but 5V55 MAXIMUM 25-30 km. And at the maximum, the Smerch projectile, you know, flies for 70 km. Yes, not exactly. But the accuracy of an air defense missile flying somewhere along the coordinates is also not ideal.

MLRS is a tool for working on areas. Air defense - in terms of space. Is it really advisable to send 5V55 to the house and undermine it in the hope that the damaging elements will hit something? But here is such a nuance: in many places I met a mention that MLRS shells (some) have a high-explosive fragmentation effect, but they write about air defense only about fragmentation. What is the point of picking static objects (read - buildings) with arrows and shrapnel, if there is the same "Caliber", the warhead of 450 kg of which is guaranteed to smash, if not any structure, then it will shake it so much that it will not seem a little?

Isn't it easier to send 2-3 Shaheda, which has a warhead of 50 kg, but which does not need an expensive guidance radar. The effect will be about the same, but much cheaper. And - effectively.

In the Ukrainian media, one can often see approximately the following lines: "The enemy fired from the S-300, damaged houses, schools, hospitals, no one was injured." So it was in the same Nikolaev. 9 rockets were reported fired, one of which hit the house. Where do the rest go? Shot down? And their debris fell on the city?

That's the beauty of the 5V55, that booster blocks don't weigh that much when they run out of fuel. And because of this, they are not very deformed, it is convenient to photograph them by dragging them to the nearest funnel. Here, they say, is a funnel from the S-300. And there is such a hole that "Smerch" will envy. Or a photo of a destroyed building, and not a single fragment of the S-300 nearby.

But this is propaganda, and it must work with the greatest effect. Otherwise, it's not propaganda, is it?

Total


It seems to me that the very idea of ​​\u5b\u55busing XNUMXVXNUMX instead of the same "Point U" is not very correct. Why "Point U"? Well, there is simply no worse rocket. And even more so for us. Until recently, the Ukrainians had “Point”, but, apparently, it ended there too.

The whole problem is worth nothing. The Russian army has more than a decent range of missiles at its disposal. weapons, from Smerch and Tornado-S to Iskander and Caliber. Flaw? Then it would definitely be possible to reactivate the “Points U” in storage, and this would not be the worst option. They at least fly twice or even three times as far as 5V55. Accuracy? Yes, the QUO at Tochka U is disgusting, but who said that 5V55 is more accurate? Who froze?

Most likely, the accuracy of a ballistic missile will be no worse than that of an air defense missile used in, to put it mildly, emergency mode. And who is more difficult to intercept is also a question.

The Ukrainians boast that they intercept. And they show in the pictures from Kharkov the "remains" of missiles from the S-300, which arrived from Belgorod. And then there is the label. 5Zh93. Look at what the Russians are doing.


And what about the Russians? But nothing. 5Zh93 is a high-explosive fragmentation part of the 5V55K missile. Yes, first-generation missiles with a maximum range of 47 km. Even from Oktyabrsky or Yasnye Zor you can’t get to Kharkov, no matter how hard you try. Well, I couldn’t get 5V55K to Kharkov in any way.

And so, most likely, in 90% of cases, which are spoken of as Russian shelling of Ukrainian facilities with S-300 missiles.

Still, as some forces would not like to imagine that the Russian army uses the S-300 as ballistic missiles out of hopelessness, alas, it’s more likely that Ukrainian old missiles of the first releases fall wherever they hit, since 10 years ago they expired all their expiration dates , and warranty, and guaranteed.

Well, they just don't live that long.

Yes, if there really was absolutely nothing to shoot with, then yes. But given the constant use by the Russian army of both Smerchs and Tornados (which are definitely better than 5V55), it is most likely that Ukrainian air defense is working on them.

And here, in fact, the situation is like "Well settled down." Shot down - glory to the Ukrainian air defense! They didn’t shoot down, the missiles fell in all sorts of places - but look, Russian S-300s are destroying Ukrainian houses.

And a separate moment with the fall of boosters or rocket fragments. Here, the very principle of operation of air defense is such that anti-aircraft gunners simply cannot predict how a downed missile will behave after a defeat. And it’s completely normal that no one will nawang, the Caliber hit by shrapnel will explode in the air or shy away on the ground. As practice shows - not even 50/50, but 30/70. They fall and explode.

Remember last fall there were reports from Zaporozhye? Best illustration in my opinion. When, at first, the local authorities reported that the shelling was carried out only by air-launched cruise missiles, and then suddenly there was information that it was just a massive attack with S-300 missiles?


Do you understand? Upper stages from S-300 missiles are much easier to find than the remnants of what destroyed objects on the ground. Blocks are always away from the places of the explosion.

It turns out that at first they found a bunch of parts from S-300 missiles, and then, as the rubble was cleared, fragments of cruise missiles were found. And 12 originally announced cruise missiles suddenly transformed into 6 cruise missiles and as many as 16 S-300 missiles.

Of course, all of them could not fly into that destroyed entrance of the house, but where did all these two-odd dozen rockets go - that's the question.

In general, I support those who believe that shelling with S-300 missiles is an invention of the Ukrainian side. Too many "for" this theory.


Regarding missiles:
- missiles of the 5V55 type, which the Ukrainian side is demonstrating, have long been decommissioned in the Russian army;
- the use of these missiles, even if they are stored somewhere, is impractical for security reasons;
- missiles of the 48N6E, 48N6E2, 9M96 types, which are in service with the air defense forces of the Russian army and the Aerospace Forces, have never been shown as a weapon to destroy Ukrainian targets.

For the S-300 complex itself:
- the firing range of the air defense system is limited by the range of radio visibility;
- undermining the warhead also occurs on command from the guidance station with the help of a radar for illumination and guidance. Therefore, the firing range is limited to approximately a range of 25-30 km;
- the illumination and guidance radar should be located at a distance of 25-30 km from a ground target fired by air defense systems, within the limits of enemy artillery;
- a missile can be effective against stationary ground targets or against accumulations of manpower.

Thus, the discussion on the topic that “the Russian army still uses S-300 missiles against Ukraine” can be closed here.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

151 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. +35
        26 February 2023 07: 45
        GD took a lot of things, life just didn’t get better for some reason ..
        1. +21
          26 February 2023 09: 32
          Quote: not the one
          GD took a lot of things, life just didn’t get better for some reason ..

          Don't tell me... But from the last one:
          The State Duma allowed the government not to disclose statistics.
          https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/63f5eb2c9a79474bcd973dd8
          Decisions of the Government of the Russian Federation on updating
          (on adjustment) of the federal plan of statistical work, specifics of access to official statistical information may be established, including in terms of temporary suspension of its provision and dissemination

          Well isn't it great? The less you know the better you sleep. Life will become better and more fun. Without any "~20% below the poverty line", failed import substitution and other "insignificant" information that makes it difficult to be proud of "prosperity" and "victories".
          1. +9
            26 February 2023 12: 14
            Quote: Hyperion
            Life will become better and more fun.

            In modern conditions, it sounds a little different:
            The horror will get better, the horror will become more fun. laughing
      2. +14
        26 February 2023 07: 47
        Quote: LIONnvrsk
        DG and accepted

        As for the State Duma of the Russian Federation, retired deputy and colonel general Gurulev clearly demonstrates the general level of our top generals, to which he recently belonged.
        “S-300 and S-400 hit ground targets effectively. They got used to interacting with the air defense system, the deviation from the target is no more than three meters - that is, exactly in its essence, ”the legislator emphasized.
        1. +15
          26 February 2023 08: 26
          Well, Gurulev, a well-known specialist, deputy for defense, whose duties included monitoring combat readiness, now complains that everything is missing
        2. +20
          26 February 2023 08: 35
          Gurulev is the same grief general, like those who commanded at the beginning of the NWO, and who continues. Who prevented him from improving the provision of the army? When he was an acting general and now he is a deputies? An empty liar who wants fame.
          1. +16
            26 February 2023 09: 25
            Quote from Cartograph
            Gurulev is the same grief general, like those who commanded at the beginning of the NWO, and who continues. Who prevented him from improving the provision of the army? When he was an acting general and now he is a deputies? An empty liar who wants fame.

            The point is not at all in the filthy generals, but in the system that gave birth to them. Here and in addition to the generals, "wherever you throw a wedge everywhere.")))
        3. +5
          26 February 2023 11: 43
          Believe the wedding general from the State Duma! Yes, for them to bang out of the SS 20 and destroy a pickup truck with a machine gun with it - it’s already a victory, as well as destroying an enemy armored personnel carrier while putting down a company of their soldiers!
          1. +4
            26 February 2023 15: 49
            Absolutely right ! Gurulev, judging by his statements, "the miracle of the great Manitou! The "wedding" general! Lord! Was he really an acting general? Then one should not be surprised that "generals" who are not capable of intelligently commanding a company are appointed to command "fronts"! Lord! Have pity on Russia, hasn't she suffered enough?
            1. +2
              27 February 2023 09: 15
              What do you mean? belay In no way did they follow in his footsteps in Transbaikalia, Chechnya, Syria ... I envy your sofa, it contained everything. And it’s weak to go to Red Square, take off your pants and, in protest, show the State Duma your proletarian ass. Here you are all heroes. And to the front? Fight against a hated enemy.. Ah, not iron genitals...
      3. +2
        26 February 2023 09: 21
        Quote: LIONnvrsk
        Quote: Roman Skomorokhov
        to like this cosplay

        That is why the State Duma adopted amendments to the Federal Law on the State Language of the Russian Federation Yes

        I don’t know about you, but I can’t find synonyms in Russian for the word cosplay (cosplay). The words "imitate, portray, repeat, imitate" do not convey the essence of this concept.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +11
          26 February 2023 11: 55
          Completely convey. This is your inferiority complex - to believe that the Russian language is worse than English.
          1. +3
            26 February 2023 12: 49
            Quote: Scaffold
            This is your inferiority complex - to believe that the Russian language is worse than English.

            And where did you get the idea that I think Russian is worse than English? Where did I write this? Only alternatively gifted characters can see the comparison of the two languages ​​in my comment.
            Quote: Scaffold
            Completely convey.

            What is being transmitted?
            Quote: aleksejkabanets
            The words "imitate, portray, repeat, imitate" do not convey the essence of this concept.

            The word "casplay" means a game in which the participants dress up as characters from anime, manga, comics, etc., imitate the speech and characteristic gestures of the characters they have chosen. Find in Russian the word corresponding to the borrowing "casplay".
            1. +5
              26 February 2023 14: 14
              buffoon? wink
              ........................
              1. 0
                2 March 2023 19: 43
                Quote: stankow
                buffoon?

                Clownery.
                Although the word is from Latin.
            2. +4
              26 February 2023 18: 22
              Quote: aleksejkabanets
              in Russian, the word corresponding to the borrowing "kasplay".

              Imitation
              1. 0
                27 February 2023 23: 10
                You need to start by stopping imitating the English language, provided that the language has enough of its own words. Without any translations!
        3. +5
          26 February 2023 12: 32
          How is it not passed on? The literal translation of the English abbreviation "costume game".
          1. +2
            26 February 2023 13: 27
            Quote from Alex
            The literal translation of the English abbreviation "costume game"

            It does not reflect the essence, and these are two words. For example, "The Communist Party of the Russian Federation is a crappy casplay of the late CPSU," so to speak, and it will not be far from the truth. But to say "the Communist Party is a costume game in the late CPSU" is impossible, because this expression will not reflect the essence of the phenomenon.
            1. +2
              26 February 2023 13: 59
              There is an opinion that initially a foreign word becomes part of the Russian language if it is unambiguous in meaning and at the same time shorter than its analogues by two syllables. Therefore, "cosplay" as a parody of external forms without understanding the meaning - correctly in the phrase "Ukraine cosplays the Third Reich" - since the borrowing of paraphernalia is not accompanied by the borrowing of the education and management system.
              In the case of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, IMHO, the term "parody" is needed, since the CPSU had the property of parallel management and control of local officials.
              Quote from Alex
              "costume game"

              At the same time, there is a difference between "historical reconstruction", for example, a group of young men at the festival portray the ancient Romans, setting up a Roman tent, dressed as legionnaires and cooking porridge for dinner according to a 2500-year-old recipe in a cauldron copied from an ancient one. And then he shows the tactics of the battle of the Romans against the same fans of the ancient Gauls. And despite the fact that all this company knows about the tactics and history and the objective world of Rome seriously more than an average school teacher. And "cosplay" when someone just dressed up in a character's costume, and that's it, the girls with huge plywood swords who don't know how to fence will especially laugh
              1. +2
                26 February 2023 15: 16
                Quote: eule
                And "cosplay" when someone just dressed up in a character costume, ...

                As for me, the word casplay has a slightly different meaning, in Russian anyway. The word parody is apparently the closest word, but has a broader meaning.
            2. fiv
              +3
              26 February 2023 19: 16
              Do you remember the joke - "a miserable likeness of the left hand"? Here is your "cheesy cosplay".
            3. +1
              27 February 2023 16: 55
              Quote: aleksejkabanets
              It does not reflect the essence, and these are two words.
              Isn't "cosplay" in English from costume play? Then it is also two words, and literally, - "costume game". If in Japanese コスプレ, and we in Russian can literally write the pronunciation itself, like "kosupure", try to do it in Latin in English.

              The beauty of Russian is that it is multifaceted, and the grammar is comparable to the signs of phonetic transcription, any foreign word can be written in "Russian letters". This is impossible in English, where the grammar is so stupid that without transcription marks in the dictionary, and the English themselves are unlikely to read the word correctly. It is amazing how this language of "troglodytes" with their animal atavisms of sounds could become international, moreover, the Anglo-Saxons even managed to make a fetish out of it. The songs on it are good, so the more indistinct the words, the easier it is to sing, such a "solfeggio" ...

              Cosplay... How would a Brit translate "starley"? How to say "darkness" or "shitty" in English? An interesting translation for the Anglo-Saxon "Masha is good, but not ours" - I really like this girl, but, unfortunately, she is not mine.
              Why the "bazaar", we should not advertise English and somehow admire it, but Russian. The Soviet Union fell in no small measure because we were outplayed by Hollywood, pop and rock bands with English, the hypocrisy and duplicity of "gentlemen", which in fact covered up their pirate essence of colonial criminals with expensive tuxedos and prim etiquette. We will not understand this, we will lose Russia, we will be finally "formatted" under the capitalism of the Anglo-Saxons.
        4. 0
          26 February 2023 16: 41
          Quote: aleksejkabanets
          I don’t know about you, but I can’t find synonyms in Russian for the word cosplay (cosplay). The words "imitate, portray, repeat, imitate" do not convey the essence of this concept.

          According to the text, it will be "pretend to be", but "cosplay" is shorter and is already clear to everyone) The language is not static, it changes.
      4. The comment was deleted.
    2. +5
      26 February 2023 10: 06
      Quote: LIONnvrsk
      Quote: Roman Skomorokhov
      The Russian version is easier. Since Ukrainian air defense is located mainly in large cities, in pockets, and his bones...

      On whose, sorry, bones? On the bones of air defense? laughing Finally we destroyed it?

      Ну ochepyatka, well, "X" slipped instead of "K", so what, shoot the author?
      I don’t know if it’s a fact or an anecdote, but during that war in some newspaper in EMNIP, Central Asia, in the phrase, for a minute, “Supreme Commander” the letter “L” was omitted. Essno opened a case, started an investigation - there were such times before and after the war, and even more so military ones, and there is no need to say who personally was the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, everyone knew. Experts were attracted, including in the Russian language. And ... they didn’t shoot anyone, and they didn’t even rot in the camps, and that, according to the liberals, was then done with anyone, for any reason, and even for no reason. An expert on the Russian language showed that the indecent word that turned out, if they had in mind to write it, then, according to the rules of the Russian language, it is written through "O", and by no means through "A". And, characteristically, no one makes mistakes in writing profanity, for some reason even the last losers knew the correct spelling of these particular words. Accordingly, what happened is not malicious intent, but in the worst case, negligence. Another thing is that those responsible for the incident were fired, but they were not shot!
      1. +8
        26 February 2023 12: 19
        Quote: Nagan
        Well, a little mistake, well, "X" slipped instead of "K", and what, shoot the author?

        Chilawek is ashebazza! laughing
      2. +2
        26 February 2023 18: 04
        Accordingly, what happened is not malicious intent, but in the worst case, negligence.

        You can also recall the moment when the introduced errors confused the enemy's decryption system, leaving the text of the message clear for the addressee. Blonetransporter, Ovtamat, Plozhektor ...
        In my case, the changers entered the "tarmaz shield" into the warehouse accounting program and the program did not allow it to be found and written off.
    3. +10
      26 February 2023 12: 59
      I am wildly sorry, but then how do I perceive the VO article for 2017?
      https://topwar.ru/116903-v-habarovskom-krae-s-300-primenili-protiv-nazemnyh-celey-uslovnogo-protivnika.html
      1. +12
        26 February 2023 14: 13
        According to the comments, it seems to me that no one here is interested in the topic of the article, everyone is only concerned with the word "cosplay".
        1. +3
          26 February 2023 18: 30
          + If in the comments about the rules of the language, scandals and showdown, then the article inspires confidence :)
      2. +3
        27 February 2023 21: 02
        It is possible to use S-300 missiles against ground targets. It is even provided. But the range is short. In general, there is a good analysis of this topic in Yandex Zen, the channel is called "as it really is" is called. The author is a colonel who served in air defense.
  2. +13
    26 February 2023 04: 39
    Thanks for the article, interesting.
    about the same 9M55F from Smerch, the warhead weight is 250 kg, and there are 95 kg of explosives and 55 kg of submunitions.

    If we take the warhead of the 9M55F Smerch missiles - 258 kg, of which 95 kg of explosives and 1100 submunitions weighing 50 grams each.


    Which of these is true in terms of mass, or is a rocket a rocket discord, even if they are of the same type ?? And that's in one post... recourse
    1. +4
      26 February 2023 05: 46
      Quote: RVAPatriot
      Which of these is true in terms of mass, or is a rocket a rocket discord, even if they are of the same type ?? And that's in one article.
      Typos have not been canceled ... This is normal.
      And at the command of the guidance station, the warhead is undermined.
      On command, they detonate the rocket in case of a miss, in other cases, non-contact fuses work, even in the event of contact))).
      1. +7
        26 February 2023 07: 42
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        On command, they detonate the rocket in case of a miss, in other cases, non-contact fuses work, even in the event of contact))).

        1. SAM in the mode of firing at ground targets flies along a rather flat trajectory; that is, it turns out that it is not high ... In this case, the proximity fuse (HB) can interfere and it is better to "turn it off"! And then there remains a forced detonation by radio command ...
        2. NV does not work "on contact"! The NV fires when the missiles fly "past" the target ... in the "head-on" situation, the contact (!) Fuze works just right!
        1. +3
          26 February 2023 09: 03
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          1. SAM in the mode of firing at ground targets flies along a rather flat trajectory; that is, it turns out that it is not high ... In this case, the proximity fuse (HB) can interfere and it is better to "turn it off"! And then there remains a forced detonation by radio command ...
          The author tried, wrote about the radio horizon, but to whom, not to you for sure, it is interesting ...

          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          2. NV does not work "on contact"! The NV fires when the missiles fly "past" the target ... in the "head-on" situation, the contact (!) Fuze works just right!
          The fuse itself may not be there (although it is elementary to build the simplest fuse into a more complex one), but the safety-actuator mechanism is like this:
          Safety actuator ensures the detonation of the missile warhead upon receipt of the appropriate commands from the radio fuse or touch probe systems, as well as the safety of handling the missile in combat and operation conditions.

          So the author's obligatory "undermining on command" is nonsense.
          1. 0
            26 February 2023 16: 18
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            The author tried, wrote about the radio horizon, but to whom, not to you for sure, it is interesting ...

            What is the Andromeda Nebula? Nicht fairstein! Or maybe .as in a joke? Like: "Don't be smart! Show me with your hand!"...
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            The fuse itself may not be there (although it is elementary to build the simplest fuse into a more complex one), but the safety-actuator mechanism is like this:

            Lord! Again the same anecdote came to mind! That's why, according to the tricky "safety-actuator mechanism" to mention, when this PIM can be a "banal", regular, electric detonator! Connect the electric detonator to the "battery" in 2 "ways"...1. Through the contact (push) "button" and ... 2. through the photorelay! I stepped on the "button" ... they will write in the report: the contact (pressure) fuse worked! Crossed the light (infrared) beam (barrier) ... the report will be: the proximity fuse (NV) worked!
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            So the author's obligatory "undermining on command" is nonsense.

            "Detonation on command" may be provided ... or maybe not provided ... (this is even more likely!) But according to the "state", almost always, there are: 1. Proximity fuse (NV); 2. contact fuse; 3. self-liquidator ... Such a mode is also not excluded, when the installation of the HB drawdown is carried out by radio command!
        2. +3
          26 February 2023 19: 29
          Only when is there a "contact" of a missile defense system with a target? Usually, a rocket is always blown up by a proximity fuse. Moreover, taking into account the fact that the main missile for missiles is not high-explosive, but fragmentation of a target, it is just more profitable to blow up a missile at a distance from the target in order to increase the area of ​​its destruction by fragments
      2. Eug
        +7
        26 February 2023 09: 36
        And is it the same for 200x complexes? I'm talking about the situation with the Tu-154 shot down over the Black Sea in the early 2000s ... it turns out that the calculation did not then give the command to self-destruct the missile after a miss on the target?
        1. +3
          26 February 2023 11: 04
          Quote: Eug
          And is it the same for 200x complexes?

          I am not an expert, I operate with publicly available information. But most likely so.

          Quote: Eug
          I'm talking about the situation with the Tu-154 shot down over the Black Sea in the early 2000s ... it turns out that the calculation did not then give the command to self-destruct the missile after a miss on the target?
          Hihly sir!
        2. +8
          26 February 2023 13: 00
          Quote: Eug
          it turns out that the calculation did not then give the command to self-destruct the rocket after a miss on the target?

          There is no such command and there is no "self-liquidation" button.
          During flight tests, when the product is wet:
          "install independent systems that ensure the issuance of a command to the actuator for self-destruction of missiles in the event of emergency situations."
          everything is on board.
          In the event of a miss, the detonation of the warhead is provided by the self-liquidator after XXX seconds of flight, or by the magnitude of the velocity head (V), or by the generation of the BIP, the ROC signal disappears
          Shot down over the Black Sea Tu-154: 5V28 was supposed to self-destruct, after turning off the ROC, or at 240 seconds of flight.
        3. +2
          27 February 2023 09: 49
          did the calculation not then give the command to self-destruct the rocket after a miss on the target?

          The calculation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine could well take a civilian aircraft precisely for its purpose. And confidently reported that the target was hit.
          1. 0
            27 February 2023 21: 30
            The S-200 missile cannot lock onto a target if it is not illuminated.
        4. 0
          27 February 2023 21: 25
          Even worse. The S-200 missile has a semi-active guidance head. That is, she sees the target due to the illumination and guidance radar. The aircraft was initially taken for escort by the illumination radar and was flown to the very end. The S-200 simply does not have an active head that can itself capture a target. And on those modern rockets that are, it works only at the final stage of the flight. Because the rocket radar is small, weak and does not work for a long time.
    2. 0
      27 February 2023 01: 49
      The warhead can be the same in mass, but the rocket is different.
  3. +11
    26 February 2023 04: 57
    Thus, the discussion on the topic that “the Russian army still uses S-300 missiles against Ukraine” can be closed here.

    Yes, by and large it did not make sense to open it. Trying to justify oneself before the Ukrainians is a disastrous thing. They live in their own world of illusions.
  4. KCA
    -1
    26 February 2023 04: 59
    Yes, all the calculations are understandable, but only the S-200, 75, 300, missiles with tactical nuclear weapons are included, but what if the outskirts keep such a stock in the bins? They destroyed it, maintaining it in combat readiness is expensive and you need to have a technological process, but what if? They are not so easy to find in the bins, but you can, and if there is one, in the presence of research reactors and nuclear power plants from which U235 and Pu239 come out, this is PPC, the first thing is to accuse us, the second one will immediately go there with TNW, I have no doubt that tactical nuclear weapons are ready in the jump zone, strategic nuclear weapons have flat trajectories in tasks, this is much less than the 5500 km limit of SVO-3, and access to orbital trajectories, only a ban on weapons in space, but what kind of agreements in case of war? A new flight mission is on the punched tape, and warheads from Voevoda or Sarmat fly to the target after a couple of circles from orbit, in which case, there will be no ban
    1. Eug
      +4
      26 February 2023 09: 40
      Voevoda definitely does not have an orbital option, the Chief Designer of the control system Ya.E. Aizenberg wrote about this in his memoirs published on buran.ru
      1. KCA
        -4
        26 February 2023 11: 36
        Sorry, but there are facts about testing R36, not even 36M, namely in the version of the orbital flight of the BG, I don’t think it’s a lie, and both Voevoda and Sarmat have enough power to bring the bus into and out of orbit
        1. +3
          26 February 2023 16: 52
          Sorry, but there are facts about testing R36, not even 36M, namely in the BG orbital flight variant,

          R-36 (8K67) is not Voyevoda/Satan.
          This is Scarp
          R-36orb (8K69) on its base LV "Cyclone"
          On the basis of the R-36M2 there could not be an orbital combat module.
          OSV-2 was already operating there and all 8K69s were sent to the scrap.
          OSV-2 was controlled very tightly
          DATA FOR 2023 (standard replenishment)
          missile R-36M / 15A14 / RS-20A - SS-18 mod.1-3 SATAN
          R-36M UTTH / 15A18 / RS-20B - SS-18 mod.4 SATAN
          And especially
          R-36M UTTH / 15A18 / RS-20B - SS-18 mod.4 SATAN (voivode)
          THIS IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT missiles than the R-36.
          Well, as an example:
          Tu-22 and Tu-22M (especially M3)
          It seems to be the Tu-22 here and there, but it's not that. At all
    2. +2
      26 February 2023 12: 11
      On punched tape? Probably nonsense. Perforated tape is a technology of the 60s that has already been forgotten.
      1. +4
        26 February 2023 12: 50
        They come from the 60's and before. But some products using perforated tape were produced back in the mid-80s.
      2. KCA
        +2
        26 February 2023 14: 06
        In the 90s, it was not completely forgotten, it was the transmission of flight missions by telegraph and punched tape at the output, of course, there are digital technologies, but telegraph transmission cannot be surpassed in reliability, UHF nuclear submarines say that
      3. +2
        26 February 2023 18: 27
        Quote: Alexey Lantukh
        Perforated tape is a technology of the 60s that has already been forgotten.

        Ural-1 was used for a long time at Baikonur
        Photographic film was used as perforated tape.

        And in the ICBM / INF Treaty they used "punched tape" (as a rule) or a magnetic drum or manual input for quite a long time.
        this part was abandoned only in the 90s

        under the feet of perforated tape with a flight mission

        The flight mission (PP) is calculated in the computer centers of the Headquarters of the Strategic Missile Forces and formations of the Missile Forces, where it is checked for feasibility (see Control of the feasibility of target designation) and recorded on a special storage medium. The PZ is delivered to the troops along with a combat document issued in the form of a book (or two books), which is an order from the Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces to set up the control system, automation of warheads and aim the missile according to this P.Z. The input of PZ into the equipment of a combat missile system is carried out by the relevant commission when the missile is brought into readiness for combat use or when combat missions are changed - when re-aiming the missile. For missiles with current motion programming, the PZ is calculated by means of the digital computer complex of the combat missile system according to target designations in the process of pre-launch preparation after pressing the "start" button.
    3. 0
      26 February 2023 17: 38
      Sorry, I'm not a specialist, but a simple electrical engineer, with a history of service in the Airborne Forces. A simple question: the old air defense systems are listed, but why the hell are nuclear weapons in air defense?
      1. KCA
        +1
        26 February 2023 18: 52
        A point is a signal, there is no point, there is no signal, everything is simple, it’s very easy to kill a point / no, but set the coordinates for one / two, they are already in the flight task, just different, you just need to turn it on
      2. +4
        26 February 2023 19: 13
        Quote from: chk28k38
        and why the hell is nuclear weapons in air defense?

        What a question? They were used as a technical possibility was realized.
        Each anti-aircraft missile regiment of the S-25 "Berkut" air defense missile system had three SAMs equipped with SBCs. These SBCs were created to provide the ability to repel massive enemy air raids carried out in dense battle formations.

        1. When there are many group targets (a flock of B-52 or krbd is flying)
        2. When the target is a BR warhead (conventional is difficult to hit)
        3. When the target being defended is very important and the defenders are in the bunker.
        SBC for missiles is a non-trivial task, and not a whim.
        SBC C2 was an RDS-9 nuclear warhead adapted for missiles, created for the first Soviet 533-mm nuclear torpedo T-9. Since the diameter of the ZUR 215 was 650 mm, and the warheads of the V-300 family had a diameter of more than 500 mm, such a solution seems quite possible. Indirect confirmation of this is the same explosion power of SBC C2 and RDS-9, equal to 10 kt in TNT equivalent. Obviously, SBC S2, like its analogue RDS-9, was made according to the implosive scheme. The mass of SBC C2 was 380 kg. In order to ensure its functioning, the SBC compartment in the ZUR 215 was thermally insulated and equipped with an electric heater with automatic heating on and off.
        SBCh S2 was supposed to ensure the destruction of air targets during a massive enemy air raid in dense battle formations, when the resolution of the B-200 station did not provide guidance to an individual aircraft.

        SBCh RA-6 "marry" with S-75M SAM
    4. +1
      27 February 2023 09: 54
      and if it is, in the presence of research reactors and nuclear power plants from which U235 and Pu239 come out,,

      Uranium 235 is not produced in reactors at nuclear power plants, but "burns out" in fuel assemblies from 5-6% to 1-1,5%, and plutonium, which was formed during the irradiation of fuel assemblies, still needs to be separated from the whole other array, and there are no opportunities for this at Ukraine.
  5. +3
    26 February 2023 05: 36
    Some Russian media recently burst out with "accusatory" articles on the topic of the destruction of infrastructure facilities by Russian S-300s. Say, everything that was said by Ukrainian media is the true truth and the Russian army is really shelling targets on the territory of Ukraine with the help of anti-aircraft missiles of the S-300 complex.

    First of all, it is necessary to deal not with missiles, but with "some Russian media" who have taken an anti-Russian position.
    Secondly, what difference does it make how the RF Armed Forces beat the Ukronatsiks. A missile from an S-300 is no worse / better than a missile from a Caliber or Iskander. And in principle, it is impossible to prove at least something to the enemy media, because. they're just sticking to their line.
    Example: the fake about Bucha has long been exposed. But this absolutely does not prevent the Ukrainian authorities from bringing presidents and prime ministers of states hostile to Russia there.
    PR is everything!
    1. +4
      26 February 2023 11: 17
      Secondly, what difference does it make how the RF Armed Forces beat the Ukronatsiks. A missile from an S-300 is no worse / better than a missile from a Caliber or Iskander.

      Unfortunately, the difference is big. The pointing accuracy is much lower, so the probability that the missile will not hit the intended target, but somewhere in a residential building or other civilian object in the neighborhood, is much higher.
  6. +1
    26 February 2023 05: 38
    But in general, the Ukrainian media almost cope with the task of the prosecution, talking about the arrival of the S-300 from Tokmak, Zaporozhye region, to the Dnieper. That is, 150 km.

    According to uk-ditch, they can fly much more.
    In the autumn in Poland, according to the categorical statement of Ukrainian propaganda and the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, a Russian S-300 missile fell. Two farmers died.

    It turns out that the anti-aircraft missile first flew over the whole of Ukraine, then crossed the border with Poland and fell there.
    And interestingly, the Poles eat it.
    1. 0
      26 February 2023 05: 45
      Quote: Comrade
      According to uk-ditch, they can fly much more.

      A bullet from a machine gun also does not fly 400 meters laughing Another thing is that hell where you get
    2. -2
      26 February 2023 08: 29
      Quote: Comrade
      In the autumn in Poland, according to the categorical statement of Ukrainian propaganda and the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, a Russian S-300 missile fell. Two farmers died

      A bad example is contagious.
    3. +5
      26 February 2023 12: 55
      Quote: Comrade
      And interestingly, the Poles eat it

      In fact, about the first day, the Russian missile was overwritten, and then more by semi-officials like Arestovich. On the second day, everyone agreed that yes, the Ukrainian jamb. I don’t know if the Poles were paid compensation there or not.
      1. +2
        26 February 2023 20: 45
        Quote: Negro
        In fact, about the first day, the Russian missile was overwritten, and then more by semi-officials like Arestovich. On the second day, everyone agreed that yes, the Ukrainian jamb ..

        Okay you...
        Latvian Foreign Minister Rinkevics officially stated that “Russian missiles falling on the territory of a NATO member country are a very dangerous escalation by the Kremlin”
        Is he semi-official too? This is the minister of foreign affairs of an EU member state.

        The official position of Zelinsky, expressed by him in a telephone conversation with the Americans, is that the rocket is Russian.
        The Americans told him that according to their information, this is not so, but Zelya, citing the Ukrainian air defense, insists on the opposite.
        Ukraine did not pay any compensation, because the rocket is “Russian”, which means that Russia should pay.
        The lack of claims against Russia from Poland adds to the comic. And it would seem, given the Polish Russophobia, why not go to court demanding compensation?
        There is a problem, in court you have to prove that the rocket is Russian. Here they are silent in a rag.
        And why the Poles do not shake Ukraine, it is clear - they are partners.
  7. +5
    26 February 2023 05: 39
    Well, don’t give a damn for yourself to fire at the city’s air defense missiles, even the cheapest ones, it’s like giving homeless people expensive 12-year-old brandy to drink)
    1. +13
      26 February 2023 06: 43
      Well, don’t give a damn for yourself to fire at the city’s air defense missiles, even the cheapest ones, it’s like giving homeless people expensive 12-year-old brandy to drink)

      Cognac only gets better with time, and expired ammunition is of no value.

      Home do not kill yourself when you run such an old firecracker
  8. +4
    26 February 2023 05: 43
    It has long been clear that firing S-300 missiles at ground targets, how to fire shells at sparrows, there is a lot of roar, but little sense! But tame everything with wound up stupidity - S-300, S-300 ...
    1. +5
      26 February 2023 06: 32
      This is not stupidity, but propaganda. In this way, they denied in advance that their own air defense systems hit their own homes in order to blame us for this.
  9. +8
    26 February 2023 06: 00
    Thanks to the author! The text of my comment is short and small
  10. +10
    26 February 2023 06: 02
    From the point of view of organization and military significance, even the disposal of old SAM missiles in this way looks doubtful.

    But purely technically, turning an S-300 into a V-2 is much cheaper than launching an Iskander
    the firing range of the air defense system is limited by the range of radio visibility;

    The flight range along the ballistic trajectory will be like any Dot-U
    the detonation of the warhead also occurs on command from the guidance station with the help of a backlight radar ... should be located at a distance of 25-30 km from a ground target

    Even the most primitive rockets are equipped with an inertial guidance system, gyroscopes

    INS allows flight in the selected direction in V-2 or U-point mode

    Accuracy is enough to get through the territory of a city or a factory with an area of ​​tens of square meters. km. Why the Russian army might need this is another question. I only speak for technique

    If on the other side they learned how to launch the AGM-88 from the MiG-29 and adapted the SeaSparrow as regular anti-aircraft missiles for the Buk air defense system -

    Then to carry out the degradation of the S-300 to the V-2 level looks more than a simple task

    Perform a timed detonation without a command from the guidance station and fly along a ballistic trajectory in the selected direction - like an ancient point
    1. +7
      26 February 2023 07: 28
      Quote: Santa Fe
      Even the most primitive rockets are equipped with an inertial guidance system, gyroscopes

      5V55 missiles are not equipped with INS!
    2. +16
      26 February 2023 08: 21
      The use of anti-aircraft missiles on ground targets, I'm lying around as a regular one. originally designed by the developers.
      There are no management issues. The radio horizon of ~140 km will be at an altitude of ~1 km i.e. almost the entire flight of the rocket is corrected, and this achieves the accuracy of the hit. Flying a couple of kilometers without control will not give a high deviation.
      Regarding the range of the missile, in the reference books it is indicated for hitting air targets. Accordingly, if you launch along the optimal, ballistic trajectory, the flight range will be greater.

      1. +2
        26 February 2023 13: 48
        At the rate of the rocket will be guided by the RKU. In range, it is similar - in elevation to the engine shutdown point, and then along a parabola (can be calculated). turn off the proximity fuse. And if you cheat, put a simple guidance system on the descending section. This solves the problem of disposal.
    3. +4
      26 February 2023 17: 53
      Quote: Santa Fe
      From the point of view of organization and military significance, even the disposal of old SAM missiles in this way looks doubtful.

      The consumption of ammunition for missiles is very significant.
      If you carefully "look closely" at the reports of Ukrainians, Where they are "fired" by S-300 missiles (5V55 ??), then it is clear that the "attack sites" are < 100 km -150 km from the border of the Russian Federation-Ukraine or from LBS.
      The casket opens simply:
      in order to save more expensive missiles, they upgraded the expired 5V55 ?? stored in storage, so that it would be possible to launch them from newer air defense systems.
      If you can drag it to the SVO T-62, then why not use the stock 5V55 ?? who have nowhere to go.
      and dispose like this:
      -SAM to be removed from the TPK.

      - on the rig, disassemble into blocks
      -either burn out the turbojet engine, or for recycling
      - to undermine warheads in a ditch, or for processing.
      All this is dangerous, it requires a lot of paperwork and control.
      The only + is the color and the gem. But they steal, the probability is high
      long and hard.
      It is not so dangerous to launch "expired" missiles: The rocket was thrown out of the TPK pipe using a gas catapult to a height of 20 m. Those. already very far away. Calculation, almost nothing threatens. PU- there is a chance to hurt, yes. But the probability of this is small.

      Quote: Santa Fe
      The flight range along the ballistic trajectory will be like any Dot-U

      Shooting at ground and surface targets is the regular mode of almost any air defense system, of any manufacturer, including Western ones.
      No need to dilute starch in jelly, for a long time all smart people have already chewed

      Quote: Roman Skomorokhov
      This means that the maximum firing range of the S-300 at a ground target is somewhere in the region of 30 km, no more.

      This author does not understand either firing from missiles at the NC, or anything at all.
      Stupid people in Ukraine, like Trukhan and Aristovich, pour into their ears that the RF Armed Forces use long-range 48H6...
      For their inflamed mind, the key here is "48", and they themselves have already forgotten, their own from 2020:
      director of the "Pavlograd Chemical Plant" Leonid Shiman in the plot "ALDER pastor" or the Rocket program of Ukraine of the program of the 5th channel With Your Own Eyes, on which work was carried out on the engine 48D6 from the 5V55 S-300 air defense system.


      The 48D6 solid fuel engine of the 5V55 series has already passed a number of ground tests:




      Quote: Santa Fe
      Even the most primitive rockets are equipped with an inertial guidance system, gyroscopes

      what nonsense.
      Primitives are equipped with an autopilot.
      Not every SAM needs an INS. and navigation systems are not all inertial.
      look
      ISU control and navigation device
      Block DB 100M ASN


      Quote: Santa Fe
      Why the Russian army might need this is another question.

      except for the ability to shoot 5 V55 from new air defense systems ....
      - it can be assumed that intercepting a missile defense system in the form of an OTR, which has a speed of almost 6m ... is difficult
      - I can offer the second option: to overload the air defense of Ukraine, or to identify the active radars, in order to then cover them with the help of OTR and CRBD.

      Quote: Santa Fe
      If on the other side they learned how to launch the AGM-88 from the MiG-29 and adapted the SeaSparrow as standard anti-aircraft missiles for the Buk air defense system -

      -AGM-88 on the MIG-29 is done, worked out for a long time. still in Romania. and this task is not so trivial. APU replacement is not enough
      -SeaSparrow has also been mastered for a long time (like Poles, or Czechs). From the air defense system there remained only the chassis, launchers and radars.
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      SAMs 5V55 are not equipped with INS

      the navigation system is on the launcher.
      This is enough to launch missiles at the NC.
  11. +2
    26 February 2023 06: 06
    Thus, the discussion on the topic that “the Russian army still uses S-300 missiles against Ukraine” can be closed here.

    These discussions can only arise due to the lack of a SUFFICIENT NUMBER of Iskanders, Calibers, Zircon ground systems and other necessary missiles and ammunition for this purpose.
    Yesterday, the news showed the production of anti-tank missiles, similar to a workshop for tailoring outerwear with the involvement of migrants. Excuse me, but in the first quarter of the XNUMXst century, the production of such weapons MUST look different, because the mass production of products from such and similar industries is a necessary condition for achieving victory ...
    * * *
    And the idea of ​​​​a certain universality of air defense systems is attractive. Do we have anti-tank systems capable of hitting low-flying targets? Why not unify the S-300 systems? Indeed, in Russia in this line there are already S-400 and even S-500 ...
    It's up to the manufacturers, but (in my opinion) an installation with four missiles with a range of up to 300 km in the OTRK line would be in demand.
    1. +2
      26 February 2023 07: 43
      Quite a lot of Iskander complexes were produced, the point is "cartridges" ...
      A universal launch complex would really be good, but a rocket is needed for it. Miscellaneous.
      Yes, and the S-400 launcher is heavy compared to the P78 launcher.
      But we practically don’t have an analogue of the chimera, except in theory, experimental versions of Tornado C on different chassis. But the issue of target designation for them remains practically unresolved.
      1. +1
        26 February 2023 10: 39
        Quote: Oleg Ogorod
        But here we have practically no analogue of the chimera, except in theory experimental versions

        We don’t have a true union state just because (my belief) that some Russian managers and leaders without a proper technical education “west of Lo” share with Belarusians both fat and developments ... But we have a DECLARED UNION STATE WITH A MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT! !!
        B-200 "Polonaise" - Belarusian 301-mm multiple launch rocket system (MLRS).
        The system is designed for high-precision destruction of openly located and sheltered manpower, unarmored and armored military equipment, and other objects. firing range initially was up to 200 km, in 2017, due to the use of new missiles, it was increased to 300 km.

        The war has been going on for a year ... YEAR !!!! And this collusion, sabotage at the state level continues ...
        Why can't co-production be organized? Why can't complexes be purchased in exchange for hydrocarbons? The ones that flow to the West ...
      2. +7
        26 February 2023 12: 41
        Guided missiles for Tornado-S exist and are used, max. range -120 km. There are guided missiles for Tornado-G and are beginning to be used. What analog of a chimera do you need? To launch operational-tactical missiles? We have an Iskander for this. Perhaps there are still few guided missiles and Tornadoes.
        The issue of target designation is for such INS + GPS / Glonass missiles. They strike at stationary and inactive objects, at coordinates. Such objects can also be detected from a satellite. Or, if something is in the building - according to intelligence (undercover, DRG, etc.)
      3. +3
        26 February 2023 14: 32
        Why experimental? A rather long report was shown on TV yesterday. Owls routinely the Tornado-G crew fired back with a half-package of RS with GPS guidance. They lay down exactly in line, every one of them into the forest plantation, the deviation is only a few meters, as it should be. So there is, and quite practically applicable. The crew even assigned its own name "Vedmochka" to the car and scrawled it, the talisman dangles in the cockpit. They have been fighting for a long time, no experimental equipment, you can immediately see. You can't confuse a warrior with a recruit
        wink
    2. +6
      26 February 2023 11: 00
      Quote: ROSS 42
      the idea of ​​some kind of universality of air defense systems is attractive. Do we have anti-tank systems capable of hitting low-flying targets?

      This idea is bad primarily at the cost of missiles. The need to quickly fly to a maneuvering target leads to the layout of the rocket "at the limit" in terms of acceleration during launch, maneuvers, and so on. An expensive and difficult to manufacture GOS, an expensive proximity fuse, which is also essentially a weak rangefinder radar, and many other details that are simply not needed for firing at ground targets. For OTRK, smooth acceleration is needed, the speed is optimal in terms of the ratio of air resistance to flight time, at least some kind of wings for aerodynamics are desirable. And most importantly, these types of missiles have fundamentally different warheads, which are optimal for guessing into an aircraft made of thin aluminum somewhere nearby with at least some kind of rod at the missile defense system, or demolishing a concrete structure or a steel installation at a factory, or something else solid to defeat at the OTRK. To make a universal warhead ... even more expensive and stupid. Only nuclear weapons at 180-200 kt will be universal, but the military of the whole world is still afraid to use them.
      1. +1
        26 February 2023 23: 18
        Here it is as if it is important to understand what is meant by universality. If the universality of the rocket for all cases is a good idea, but poorly implemented. Usually it turns out so-so .. If universality means the ability of launchers to fire "left" missiles, then there is already something in this. The question of reasonableness and price.
  12. +4
    26 February 2023 06: 37
    For the year of the SVO, there are already so many materials, with flights and arrivals of everything that is in service: Iskanders, Calibers, X-101 and so on. And not a single one with S-300 missiles as a means of attacking ground targets, except for fixed crossbows. Kick tick?

    This is propaganda designed for those deprived of critical thinking, and, as practice shows, there are most of them.
    1. +5
      26 February 2023 06: 48
      Kick tick?

      What language is this

      How do you know the language of the enemy. Your comment should be taken care of by the competent authorities
      1. +4
        26 February 2023 11: 01
        Santa Fe

        What language is it in?

        How do you know the language of the enemy. Your comment should be taken care of by the competent authorities !!!
        1. +1
          27 February 2023 03: 32
          What language is it in?

          In spanish
          How do you know the language of the enemy.

          We do not wage any war with the Spaniards, Venezuelans, Argentines
  13. +5
    26 February 2023 06: 44
    From the article:
    discussing two positions: Ukrainian, ... and Russian, which says that all this is nonsense.

    Maybe I missed something (I don’t watch TV), but when did our MO disprove such an application? Let them officially declare that this is nonsense, so as not to produce suspicions that they are hiding something.
    1. +4
      26 February 2023 08: 48
      This is not nonsense. The work of the S-300 on ground targets was used, but not as a means of destruction
  14. 0
    26 February 2023 07: 05
    Some Russian media recently burst out with "accusatory" articles on the topic of the destruction of infrastructure facilities by Russian S-300s. Say, everything that was said by Ukrainian media is the true truth and the Russian army is really shelling targets on the territory of Ukraine with the help of anti-aircraft missiles of the S-300 complex.
    These media are by chance not the ones included in the list of foreign agents?
  15. +6
    26 February 2023 07: 26
    I agree with the author of the article that it is not advisable for us to use missiles from the S300 and there is the possibility of using air defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
    The possibility of firing at ground targets with air defense missiles is available. Only the KVO is such that it is guaranteed to declare the impossibility of getting into the football field.
    As a confirmation of my words, I can give an example of shooting at Kapustin Yar with a C25 rocket. A young and zealous flyer almost ruined the C75 calculation by not fixing the target mark on the 3rd coordinate and leaving the missile control on the handle. It's good that the missile did not reach the position of the C75 division.
    1. +5
      26 February 2023 08: 46
      I agree, but in this way, that is, by launching S-300 missiles, the enemy’s air defense was fired to work and the missiles were disposed of at the end of their service life. These actions cannot be considered from only one point of view.
      1. +5
        26 February 2023 12: 18
        Well, the s300s are used as targets! And why not as a decoy during a missile attack?
  16. +9
    26 February 2023 07: 33
    How many words, how many cod ..
    In general, Iskander has already been invented. And it flies further, and most importantly - more precisely, because it was originally designed for this - for ballistic flight.

    The Iskander has a quasi-ballistic flight controlled by gas-dynamic rudders. And Ikander-K are cruise missiles that have nothing to do with ballistic flight at all.
    The Russian army has more than a decent range of missile weapons at its disposal, from Smerch and Tornado-S to Iskander and Caliber.

    A lot of Kh-101s fly to Ukraine, which are launched from strategic aircraft.
    And others...
  17. +5
    26 February 2023 08: 02
    I didn’t fully understand something, but why such a huge article, when all sane and even slightly technically savvy people, and even the regulars of the site understand that the statements of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are nonsense ???
    The author, maybe about more acute problems?
    1. 0
      26 February 2023 14: 44
      And how can technically trained people get on the site if there are no such competent articles? wink Well done author!
    2. +1
      26 February 2023 23: 22
      I communicate with Ukrainians, there really are a lot of talks that we shoot S300. So we have to answer, no one has canceled the information war. Many of ours also watch "enemy channels", like me, if not to refute, then people gradually begin to believe. Not all experts.
  18. +2
    26 February 2023 08: 11
    1. The Slovak S-300PMU air defense system is an export version of the S-300PS ...
    2. ZUR 5V55RM there is a marine version of 5V55R ... Of course, it can shoot the S-300PS ... But when the S-300PS were delivered to Armenia, the 5V55RM ended up in Russia in very small quantities ... Where did the Krajina turn out to be a lot of "marine" missiles?
    3. The mention of the 5V55U SAM with a range of up to 150 km is occasionally found on the Internet, but there is no reliable confirmation of the real existence of this SAM ... however, like the "nuclear" 5V55S! ! (It looks like they "blurted out" on Wikipedia; and others wrote off from there!) Mentioned in connection with the 5V55U S-300PT air defense system ... but this complex is designed for a firing range of up to 100 km
    1. +8
      26 February 2023 11: 14
      The nuclear version was designed and probably even tested, but never entered the army.
      And so the nuclear version was not intended at all to work on ground targets, but to repel a massive NATO air raid.
      As for the work actually on ground targets, the mode of operation is provided, but its range is not more than 40 km. If we talk about how missiles can be far from the launcher (and quite intact), then this is only one option - loss of contact and uncontrolled flight without self-destruction.
      Such cases happened and sometimes the missiles flew far enough (up to 300 km).


      The article also contains an inaccuracy about the use of missiles. In the entire line of complexes, missiles are backward compatible, i.e. any newer complex can fire ANY old missiles.
      But old complexes can also fire new missiles (which correspond to its characteristics in terms of range), if these missiles are registered in the software of the complex.
      This was the case with the first missiles and complexes: At first, the complex was accepted only with missiles of the 5V55K type (only command guidance and a range of 50 km), then the P type was added (with a range of up to 70 km), then other missiles were registered.
      Therefore, all new S-400, S-350 systems can fire even old 5V55K missiles.
      Another thing is that the warranty period for their use has long expired (it was originally 8 years), even taking into account a possible extension.
      And it seems to me that this is precisely the reason for the S-300 missile fall in Ukraine - the failure of missiles due to an overdue period of use.
  19. +4
    26 February 2023 08: 16
    But the radio horizon does not coincide with the optical one, because the planet's magnetic field deflects the waves somewhat of the same radar from a perfect straight line
    The author, what does the magnetic field have to do with it? Are you familiar with the phenomenon of diffraction, or is it the first time you hear it?
    1. +2
      26 February 2023 21: 16
      Aviator_
      Do you know the phenomenon of diffraction?

      The literacy of this author has already become legendary.
      But diffraction has nothing to do with it: SAM radars use centimeter-range radio waves, which propagate exclusively in a straight line
      1. +1
        26 February 2023 23: 25
        Well, not so that it would be quite exceptional, but in a straight line. Waves of any range are distorted in the atmosphere, some more, some less.
  20. +7
    26 February 2023 08: 42
    Author, why is this article? The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has repeatedly confirmed and carried out launches of S-300 air defense missiles against ground targets. and not just once for ground targets.
    1. +1
      26 February 2023 09: 33
      Do you have any material on the topic?
      1. +4
        26 February 2023 11: 10
        There is such an article on VO
        https://topwar.ru/116903-v-habarovskom-krae-s-300-primenili-protiv-nazemnyh-celey-uslovnogo-protivnika.html
        Completely refutes all the calculations of the author. Shoot at the coordinates.
        1. 0
          27 February 2023 22: 18
          There is a good article on this topic.
          https://dzen.ru/a/Y-dVHiOueWvPCVYs
    2. 0
      26 February 2023 10: 28
      Quote: Mikhail Maslov
      The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has repeatedly confirmed and carried out launches of S-300 air defense missiles against ground targets. What else do you need

      Link please, and it is desirable that the address does not contain ".ua".
      1. 0
        27 February 2023 22: 19
        This is where it's all laid out.
        https://dzen.ru/a/Y-dVHiOueWvPCVYs
    3. +1
      26 February 2023 14: 48
      For civilian purposes? In Kyiv?
      ...............
  21. -1
    26 February 2023 08: 56
    Yes, what can we talk about? Who in their right mind would think of bombarding ground targets with air defense ammunition? It is clear that all this is the work of the Ukrainian Tsipso
    1. +5
      26 February 2023 13: 03
      So maybe VO should be written in cisso, or is it something else?
      https://topwar.ru/116903-v-habarovskom-krae-s-300-primenili-protiv-nazemnyh-celey-uslovnogo-protivnika.html
      1. 0
        27 February 2023 22: 21
        I would personally write it down.
        https://dzen.ru/a/Y-dVHiOueWvPCVYs
  22. +5
    26 February 2023 09: 32
    As an engineer, I like the challenge of converting old (unsuitable for their intended purpose for various reasons) SAM missiles into surface-to-surface missiles. This is clearly interesting and quite solvable.

    For why not? But no - because the army (including ours) is a joke that is not very flexible. It would be extremely difficult even now to do this administratively.
    1. 0
      27 February 2023 22: 23
      In this war, there is a colossal consumption of ammunition of all kinds. And air defense is no exception. After some time, old rockets may be needed for their intended purpose. And spending them like that is very stupid.
  23. +1
    26 February 2023 09: 34
    These are Orcs, during the Second World War and after they massacred entire villages and blamed the NKVD. We ourselves threw them such a stupid thought for specialists when they hit enemy ships with anti-aircraft missiles. Well, based on the launch ranges, the orks would have demonstrated our captured S-300s long ago.
  24. +5
    26 February 2023 10: 14
    Surely ours are used, but not in cities ... But in field fortifications (in trenches), with an air blast, this makes sense ... True, most likely, it’s not the air defense of the Aerospace Forces that works, but army air defense, with the same letters and in theory s-300v ... Although it may be the air defense of the Aerospace Forces. But obviously not in the cities, urban development will not let you get anywhere, and there are not enough explosives to demolish buildings ...
    In general, modern missiles for long-range air defense are quite expensive, certainly not cheaper than calibers, which are just as simple and cheap as possible.
  25. +7
    26 February 2023 10: 22
    I had something to do with air defense, though not the S-300, but the much older S-125. And yes, as we were taught, in principle, shooting at ground or surface targets is possible, but inefficient, expensive, and you need a lot of luck to cause any damage to the target. The radar does not observe the target on the surface, its ability to observe began, EMNIP, from 50 m. not a fraction of a second earlier or later, otherwise it would have rushed too far from the target, and the price of a rocket is like two Volga (in Soviet times, the Volga was the pinnacle of prosperity, accessible to very few).
  26. +3
    26 February 2023 10: 42
    Yandex Zen has many articles on this topic by rocket specialists, here is one of those who are interested:
    https://dzen.ru/a/Y26h-U2TMRnX8Fop
    "The use of S-300 air defense missiles against ground targets."
  27. +5
    26 February 2023 10: 48
    ...the management decided to remember this experience. If there is such an opportunity, it should be implemented. Moreover, we have a lot of rather old missiles for the S-300 systems,

    Missiles for the S-300 lay in warehouses, were used as targets during combat training for firing practice. So why not use them to destroy objects in Ukraine?

    This is much more productive than simply disposing of them in old age. Therefore, it was decided to use mainly S-300 air defense systems of earlier modifications of the “PS” type and partially “PM” for work on ground facilities in Ukraine ...


    November 1, 2022 Moskovsky Komsomolets
  28. +8
    26 February 2023 11: 08
    The article is long and it is not clear what the author is proving.
    For the S-300, firing at ground targets is a regular mode of operation, it is practiced during exercises - there is nothing to discuss there. What they also wrote about in VO.
    In the Khabarovsk Territory C-300 used conditional enemy against ground targets

    ... It is especially emphasized that the S-300 air defense systems have extensive functionality that allows you to destroy not only air, but also ground targets. To do this, it is necessary to transfer the coordinates of the target to the calculation of the complex, which in the end will be hit with the help of the S-300. Intelligence receives coordinates ...

    https://topwar.ru/116903-v-habarovskom-krae-s-300-primenili-protiv-nazemnyh-celey-uslovnogo-protivnika.html
    It is written in black and white on the VO that it is especially emphasized that the S-300 is capable of firing at ground targets at coordinates, and not in the radio command guidance mode, that the author is trying to prove his entire long article - accordingly, all his arguments about the range are far from truth.
    As for the cost, the Ukrainians write that they fire S-300 missiles, the service life of which is coming to an end and they will still need to be decommissioned, so they cost nothing, it’s even economically profitable - you won’t have to dispose of them.
    In terms of range, moreover, they just declare that they are used against targets near the line of contact, such as Zaporozhye or Nikolaev.
    Concerning
    became the foundation for the Ukrainian version, according to which Russia has so few missiles, because if they haven’t run out, they will soon run out, and then the Russian military genius came up with the idea of ​​​​using an air defense system to shell the front-line cities.

    that is, Strelkov's big speech with an analysis of the president's speech and Chinese peace initiatives, he says almost the same thing - there are serious problems with the replenishment of the missile stock, and in general there are serious problems with ammunition.
    And in general, his speech is much more interesting and relevant than the speech of the president, even if there are some controversial points in it, it is at least on the case
    1. +4
      26 February 2023 13: 01
      Quote from solar
      The article is long and it is not clear what the author is proving.

      )))
      Here is a funny incident. The political reflexes of the current leadership of the Russian Federation (we are not there / it is not us) again conflict with military logic.

      From a military point of view, due to the complete lack of precision weapons in the units, using the old S-300s in this role looks like a great idea. Fast, cheap and mass solution. To put it bluntly, little good can be said about Russian weapons and military ingenuity, but here, well done, they got out. However, since the Ukrainians are talking about this, propaganda will simply prove from a principle that this is not the case.
  29. +1
    26 February 2023 11: 31
    Well, if you really "strained" with missiles, then it's all the more stupid to spend what you have on shooting them into residential areas, is there no military purpose? Unless the Ukrainians "hid" something military among the houses.
  30. -2
    26 February 2023 11: 39
    I see no reason for us to be so sophisticated. Our stake in the conflict is still to try to use (on the rear) precisely precessional strikes. That is, as accurately as possible to hit where they were aiming. Is some kind of budgetary alteration of antediluvian air defense missiles suitable for this? Don't think. It would already be a weapon of a completely different approach to the war, a la Adolf Aloizovich with his nightmare of London.
    As soon as we had the task of methodically splash-loosening the Ukrainian rear, these missiles (if they were used) would be used in much wider streams along with other weapons that were not too confused for accuracy. Then it would be a phenomenon of action strategy.
  31. +5
    26 February 2023 11: 46
    And so, the 5V55K (V-500K) or 5V55KD (1) missile, the 5V55R (V-500R) or 5V55RM (2) missile and the 5V55U (3) missile have a speed of about 2 m/s after the end of the turbojet engine (this is 000, Mach 6) and the maximum ballistic flight range (i.e., when it is directed by radio commands along a ballistic trajectory) no less than 66 km. (at the Iskander BR - 500 m / s and 2 km).
    These are the facts...
    And about the author of this large and detailed article, one can only say with a proverb: "I heard a ringing, but I don't know where it is ..."
  32. +1
    26 February 2023 12: 32
    The main objective of this operation is a political one, not a victory over the Ukrainians. Make more noise and see how the world community will react to it.
    For this, any missiles are good, as long as they explode somewhere.
    And the second aspect is economic. Shoot cheap missiles, and say that they are spending the most expensive weapons.
  33. +2
    26 February 2023 12: 45
    Guilty. Many letters. Didn't make it.
    And by and large, do not care what to wet the enemy. If it works.
  34. +5
    26 February 2023 13: 27
    What is the point of perverting over old anti-aircraft missiles with their weak high-explosive warheads - probably, unless everything is really bad and there is nothing more to shoot with.


    There is only one rationale for using old S-300 missiles, this is the installation of radio homing units on missiles to destroy enemy radars.
    The main advantage of missiles is their speed of 5-6 max.
    I would use anti-radar missiles according to the following strategy:
    1. Several subsonic Calibers are launched against targets in Ukraine.
    2. NATO airspace control systems provide information to air defense units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
    3. Air defense systems include radar to detect Caliber.
    4. These radars are fixed by our surveillance equipment.
    5. SAMs are launched into this area that catch up with Caliber, since they have a speed of 5-6 times more.
    6. SAM homing units capture the signal from the Ukrainian radar stations, they no longer need the control (guidance) signal from our air defense systems.
    7. SAMs successfully hit the Ukrainian radar stations, the air defense system was neutralized, and Caliber freely hit the intended targets, arriving there a little later.

    These are just my logical assumptions on how the old missiles could be used.
  35. -2
    26 February 2023 13: 57
    Did Skomorokhov write the article? Atypically for him - a very competent article. And the style is different, and Russia is not scolded ...
  36. 0
    26 February 2023 14: 18
    Quote: aleksejkabanets
    The word "casplay" means a game in which the participants dress up as characters from anime, manga, comics, etc., imitate the speech and characteristic gestures of the characters they have chosen. Find in Russian the word corresponding to the borrowing "casplay".

    I would have written in normal Russian words and would not have had to waste time on bickering and explanations.
  37. 0
    26 February 2023 15: 04
    Thus, the discussion on the topic that “the Russian army still uses S-300 missiles against Ukraine” can be closed here.
    Great article. Did not understand the purpose of the article, justifying or excluding? For example, I don’t see anything fervent in the fact that missiles are used against ground (surface) targets, this is also in the performance characteristics of air defense systems. Another thing is the effect of this mode, the "EARTH" mode. The product itself, an anti-aircraft guided missile, is sweetie, it is a finished product, and writing off and disposing of them is at least stupid. Even if the complexes on which they were used and outdated are out of production, out of service, missiles can be used in different versions, this is a guided missile, this is a powerful ammunition capable of solving a lot of tasks, the same checkpoint if it accepts one missile with a warhead weighing 100 kg, it will not seem a little. One thing is bad, the old proverb that there are a lot of oak trees in the army, that's why our defense is strong, sometimes comes to mind. War is also a business, and in business one must not give to others, but the cuckoo itself does not pull, unfortunately.
    Conclusion: It is bad that instead of using "obsolete" missiles, we are looking for reasons why they cannot be used, then the range is not the same, then the charge is rather weak, no, brothers, we did not convince. I do not believe! Yes, and it’s a sin to launch a guided missile like a blank.
  38. +2
    26 February 2023 16: 06
    In general, even our military correspondents rarely, but make publications about the use of air defense missiles by the RF Armed Forces against enemy ground targets. Usually we are talking about the S-300, but in the last (February) video material, the commander of the Buk air defense system spoke about the successful hitting of the target by a missile of his complex.
  39. +4
    26 February 2023 17: 27
    This is idiotic! It has long been known that the S-300/400 can fire at coordinates. The author proves that it is impossible to shoot at ground targets in radio command mode, and this is not necessary hi .
    Some Russian media recently burst out with "accusatory" articles on the topic of the destruction of infrastructure facilities by Russian S-300s.
    VO just refers to such media: https://topwar.ru/116903-v-khabarovskom-krae-s-300-primenili-protiv-nazemnyh-celey-uslovnogo-protivnika.html soldier
  40. 0
    26 February 2023 19: 19
    The article is not bad, but the author made some mistakes. "Earth's magnetic field bends radio waves." How is that? The centimeter-range radio waves used in the SAM radars propagate only in a straight line.
    For some reason, the author does not write that not only is the earth round, but it is also uneven, and there are buildings on it that significantly limit the range of the radar beam. Moreover, it is for this very reason that only radar antennas located on VERY HIGH masts (there are some) can irradiate ground targets, the rest of the rays will go into the sky. Theoretically, it is possible to attach percussion fuses from shells or MLRS rockets to rockets, and allow an uncontrolled final section where the rockets fall on the target. But it's a no brainer that the QUO will be gigantic
  41. 0
    26 February 2023 20: 34
    Ich frage mich, was dieser "Artikel" in DIESER Zeitung überhaupt für
    einen Sinn macht...?!?

    Und wenn wir Kiew mit den abgetrennten Gliedmaßen von Kämpfern
    Assow-Regiments beschiessen würden, wäre das immer noch absolut
    in Ordnung!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!
    Diese verdammten Schweine beschiessen im Donbass von Morgens
    bis Abends vor allem ZIVILISTEN, FRAUEN und KINDER...!!!

    Ich hätte diese ganze Ratten-Brut in Kiew schon längst mit Mann
    und Maus komplett ausgeräuchert und hätte dabei auch nicht eine
    Sekunde Gewissensbisse und zwar ganz gleich mit welchem
    Waffen System...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    1. 0
      27 February 2023 22: 52
      Kiew ist die Stadt, in der die russischen Menschen leben. Wir müssen alles sorgfältig tun, damit gewöhnliche Menschen nicht verletzt werden!
  42. 0
    26 February 2023 21: 29
    on the issue of accusations from the Ukrainians: of course this is complete crap. They drop their own rockets. and for some reason our old points are not used.

    In general, the S-300 can, of course, regularly shoot at the ground, but it is difficult and the range of 30 km for 5v55k and r. here you need an external target designation. but there is such a mode.

    s-300f has a full-fledged ability to shoot at sea targets.

    """""In general, the logic is simply fantastic and it's just impossible to understand it. Why replace less expensive, but more effective cruise missiles with more expensive and less effective anti-aircraft missiles?""""

    maybe you have some kind of crooked logic? because the old 5v55k and r missiles and the old 48n6e cost NOTHING. 0. ZIRO. and they should be in bulk. installing a glonass receiver and a data input module on them is a penny and can be done within a couple of months.

    """ The whole problem is worth nothing. The Russian army has more than a decent range of missile weapons at its disposal, from Smerch and Tornado-S to Iskander and Caliber. Disadvantage? Then it would definitely be possible to reactivate those in storage "Dots U", and that would not be the worst option. """

    Have you seen a lot of tornadoes??? here I am not. what other CHEAP high-precision means are there ??? Here's what I can't remember.

    use hypersonic Iskander for each target? and starve 5v55 and 46n6e are quite "free" for themselves. to put a satellite signal receiver is a penny.


    "" And a rocket of the 5V55 family - there the warhead has a weight of 133 kg, of which 47 kg of explosives. The number of fragments is also many times less.

    Right? as far as I remember, there is a purely fragmentation warhead, with thousands of fragments. this is ideal against manpower and unarmored vehicles. and if you remove the semi-active head and shove an additional warhead, then it will be absolutely beautiful.

    here's a cheap high-precision tool for you. I think it will fly away at 100-150 kilometers.
    1. 0
      27 February 2023 22: 55
      It is undermined by radio command. The radar must see the missile. Therefore, the range is not very large.
      Here in more detail:
      https://dzen.ru/a/Y-dVHiOueWvPCVYs
      But most importantly, with such a consumption of ammunition as in this war, these old missiles may be needed after some time for their intended purpose.
      1. 0
        28 February 2023 17: 06
        no, I think this junk cannot be used for its intended purpose. I think two options: target and ersatz otrk.
  43. -1
    26 February 2023 21: 48
    Close the question early. First we need to fill the face of our media, cat. repeated bullshit.
  44. The comment was deleted.
  45. 0
    26 February 2023 23: 36
    So I didn’t understand whether ours fired or didn’t shoot ...., one thing is clear that this is possible, not only possible, but once it was massively used (remade) by the Americans and Koreans.
    https://topwar.ru/169154-amerikanskie-zenitnye-i-protivoraketnye-kompleksy-semejstva-najk.html
    I see no reason why ours could not do this, if it is justified, it makes sense.
  46. -1
    26 February 2023 23: 49
    And what rocket shot down the Polish tractor?
  47. +2
    26 February 2023 23: 57
    1. Konashenkov destroyed all Ukrainian S-300 complexes long ago.
    2.In the fall, they wrote in the MK about the firing of our old S-300 complexes at ground targets:
    https://www.mk.ru/politics/2022/11/01/obyasnilos-ispolzovanie-rossiey-zenitnykh-raket-s300-po-nazemnym-celyam-na-ukraine.html
    This question was answered by one of the current air defense specialists, whose name is not known for this reason.
    ... it was concluded that our air defense systems can perfectly work on columns of tanks, on protected equipment and fortified structures ...
    ... it was decided to use mainly S-300 air defense systems of earlier modifications of the "PS" type and partially "PM" for work on ground facilities in Ukraine ....
    It was decided to use air defense systems of previous modifications purely for ground targets. For work by air, we have new complexes, and most importantly, more modern missiles.
    1. +1
      27 February 2023 08: 30
      This question "MK" was answered by one of the current air defense specialists, whose last name is not given for this reason..
      the author poured so much water, you didn’t get it.
      To shoot at the ground The illumination and guidance radar should see ground targets. The maximum height to which the RSL for illumination and guidance can be raised is 38 meters.

      Therefore, it is possible and necessary to shoot missiles on the ground when the enemy has broken through into the depths of your defense, but only if the radar station sees ground targets (on the right on the tower). In a rocket, the homing head is aimed at the target by the radio emission reflected from the target, which creates the illumination and guidance radar. The author of the article could say this and close this issue in 1 paragraph.
      Low-altitude detector 76N6 (left) and 30N6 guidance illumination radar (right) on 40V6M towers

      Another thing is that the S-300PMU complex has over-the-horizon missiles in which the Active GOS is installed, so it can be used to fire beyond the radio horizon, because. it can hit radio contrast targets. But here again there is a snag - against the background of the earth - a tank or an airplane - the target is radio-contrast, and if a rocket flies into a city, there all radiocontrast - all roofs of houses, all cars, etc.
      Missiles with Active GOS use special. algorithms to distinguish a radio-contrast ground target (car/tank) from a radio-contrast low-flying target against the background of the ground (cruise missile) selecting/filtering/selecting them by speed. If a column of tanks is moving across the field, then you can get into it, and if a column of tanks is moving around the city, you definitely won’t get through it. too much passive interference in the city.
      1. 0
        27 February 2023 17: 08
        And they wrote in MK. that even when designing missiles, the possibility of firing at pre-entered coordinates was laid:
        Initially, even during their development, the S-300 systems were designed to fire not only at air targets, but also at ground targets. In the mid-90s, our troops were given the task of studying in more detail the possibility of working "on the ground." We made calculations, trained specialists and carried out such shooting at the Ashuluk training ground in the Astrakhan region. For this, the S-300 complexes of modifications "PT", "PS" and "PM" were used.

        The first such shootings were carried out in 1996. At the very edge of the range - almost outside it, there is still a "cemetery" of containers from under missiles - transport and launch containers. Of these, then lay out on the ground mock-ups imitating various objects that served as targets for firing our complexes at ground targets.

        They fired like this: on command, combat crews entered the coordinates of a fixed target, the rocket launched, flew up to this ground target and was blown up at a certain height.
  48. -1
    27 February 2023 08: 24
    Without nuclear warheads, any missiles with a range of more than a hundred kilometers are a waste of money.
    By the way, a bunch of ICBMs were removed from our arsenal. If they have not yet been cut, then maybe their remaining resource will be enough to deliver a ten-ton warhead with conventional explosives to the Kyiv bridges? Here you can not count the money, anyway, the equipment is for recycling.
    1. 0
      27 February 2023 14: 40
      Without nuclear warheads, any missiles with a range of more than a hundred kilometers are a waste of money.

      Nothing is certain in this life!

      there are very important targets for which you need to shoot anti-aircraft missiles, and even decommissioned ones. For example, all types of self-propelled guns, MLRS, the same HIMARS positions of all types of air defense systems from Beeches to Patriots and Hawks. Everything that has weak booking and yavl. an important target, you need to fire decommissioned missiles, if possible, otherwise they will need to be disposed of, and even money to pay.
      Another thing is that no one will take responsibility for using ready-made missiles after a small modification. Any cell phone yavl. control on-board computer with unprecedented capabilities for the time when the missiles for the S-300 were created. If they announced open competition then, there would be those who made a business out of this and modified the rocket for a penny using the aliexpress store and would still make money. But the generals have a disposal business for their wives and children, and missiles worth billions of rubles fly into a black hole





      Business then - they wrote a technical task for modernization, and if the RF Ministry of Defense did not have money, then they would announce a collection of money, like for a uniform, radio stations, first-aid kits, thermal imagers, sights, etc.
      1. 0
        1 March 2023 09: 24
        And who, I wonder, will chip off for the Moscow Region? I will not give a penny to this department through official structures. Only through volunteers and directly to those units who use these funds, as I am doing now. And since there are none, then figurines to you, gentlemen, generals.
  49. 0
    27 February 2023 10: 41
    "The target can maneuver and evade. And at the command of the guidance station, the warhead is detonated." (With)
    If I'm not mistaken, the guidance station does not take part in the final part. On-board automation works. She also gives the command to undermine
  50. 0
    27 February 2023 12: 12
    Thank you, Roman!
    Like everything else, UA-people project on the Russian Federation what they do themselves.
    Recall at least their ersatz-MLRS from the S-8 on Matalyg :) I assume that they themselves may well shoot from the S-300 at ground targets.
  51. 0
    27 February 2023 18: 42
    I think that sometimes the actual use of the S-300 on the ground by Russian air defense units in the LBS area up to 40-60 km in depth is mixed with crossbows from Ukrainian air defense, which, to be honest, is sometimes inevitable. Mixing is for propaganda purposes. All 5B55 hits further than 50-60 km from the LBS and especially in the western parts of Ukraine are crossbows.
  52. 0
    1 March 2023 08: 44
    It’s a pity that our generals don’t read topvar. A lot of stupid phrases could have been left unspoken. And so, I wouldn’t be surprised that one of them might give the order to fire at ground targets from the S-300.
  53. 0
    6 May 2023 07: 29
    a rocket of the 5V55 family - the warhead there weighs 133 kg, of which 47 kg are explosives. The number of fragments is also several times smaller.


    To destroy Ukrainian radars that are not protected by armor of such power, warheads with a large number of damaging elements will be sufficient.

    The main advantage of using missiles against ground targets is their supersonic speed, due to which the probability of hitting the radar increases significantly compared to the slower Caliber and RS Smerch.
    The whole trick and effect lies in the integrated use of missiles, cruise missiles and rockets.
    Ukrainian air defense, having received information from the US satellite constellation about the launch of cruise missiles and missiles in such and such a direction along their path, turns on the radar to detect targets and issue target designations to its anti-aircraft missiles.
    As soon as our electronic reconnaissance means detect the activation of Ukrainian radars, they are used to launch missile defense systems, which themselves are aimed at enemy radar signals....
    Thanks to its supersonic speed, the missile defense system catches up with slower missiles and hits enemy radars while they are busy “hunting” for Russian missiles and missile systems.
    Analyzing the information coming from Ukraine in precisely this way, their air defense is knocked out.
    Residential buildings are destroyed by Ukrainian missiles, which lose control after their radar is hit and fly wherever they please...
  54. 0
    6 November 2023 08: 18
    Well, the only thing that made me laugh was the author’s lack of understanding of how a radio fuse works. It is not command, but cumulative in impulse.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"