S-300P air defense missile system and its modifications

7 409 33
S-300P air defense missile system and its modifications


History of the S-300 complex


By the end of the 1960s, experience in combat use of various systems Defense in Vietnam and the Middle East, in particular the S-75 complexes, showed their low survivability when working with an enemy that has a significant amount of modern aviation, high toxicity and imperfect design of liquid missilesThe use of liquid-propellant SAMs with toxic fuel and a corrosive oxidizer required highly skilled personnel and specialized equipment to fuel the missiles. It's important to note that the first systems were single-channel, unable to effectively counter massive enemy air raids and highly vulnerable to jamming.



In this regard, in 1969, the USSR Air Defense Command set the task of developing a multi-channel air defense system capable of simultaneously firing at multiple targets regardless of the launcher's position, as well as high mobility of the system by placing all components on a towed chassis.

As early as 1978, the S-300P anti-aircraft missile system entered service, along with the 5V55K solid-fuel radio-command SAM, which was capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 47 km.


5P85-1 S-300PT launcher on a towed chassis

The first production version of the S-300PT incorporated many innovations: the missile was solid-fueled, requiring no ongoing maintenance and being safer than its liquid-fueled predecessors. The 5V55K SAM was launched vertically from a transport launcher, propelling the missile to a height of 20 meters by a propellant catapult. The booster motor then ignited, and the SAM was directed toward its target.

Composition of the anti-aircraft missile division of the S-300PT/PS complex


1) 5N63S target illumination and guidance radar


5N63S target illumination and guidance radar

The S-300PS self-propelled multifunctional illumination and guidance radar (RPN) for the battalion consists of a trailer-mounted cabin (transported by a tractor). Its antenna, a phased electronically scanned array (PESA), folds onto the roof of the equipment shelter. Its key feature was the key limitation at low altitudes—the radio horizon. Typical geometric limits: a target at 50-100 meters in altitude is detected at approximately 42-67 km with an antenna post altitude of 10 meters. The primary functions of this radar are target tracking, illumination, and guidance of S-300PS SAMs; target selection, information filtering, and jamming and firing results assessment. To increase the target detection range, the 5N66 NVO was introduced.

2) Low-altitude detector (LAD) 5N66/5N66M


Low-altitude detector 5N66M

Its primary mission is to search for and acquire targets at low altitudes and provide target designation to the S-300P(T/S) battalion's radar. It operates in the following frequency ranges: X-band (IEEE), I-band (NATO); type - FMCW. Instrumented range: up to ~120 km. The actual range against low-flying targets is limited by the radio horizon and installation altitude. Later, a modernized version, the 5N66M, was developed (NPO Utes, headed by L. Shulman); it was routinely installed on the 40V6(M) together with the S-300PS battalion.

3) S-300PT 5N64S command post 3-coordinate surveillance radar


5N64S detection radar

This radar performs long-range surveillance and air situation monitoring (3D), and provides target designation to the 5K56 combat control post. The information is distributed via the command post between up to six 5Zh15 air defense missile systems in the battalion (combat fire assets). It functions as a "combat control radar" (for the detection unit/combat control point in the early S-300PT/PS family of systems). It features a passive phased array (PA), electronic scanning in altitude, mechanical rotation in azimuth; simultaneous search in two 90° sectors (for the 64N6/5N64 family). Its distinctive feature was integration with the air defense automated control systems: Senezh-M, Baikal, Baikal-1 via interface cabins (5F20/5F24, 53L6).

The detection range was: for the early 5N64/64N6, various sources indicate up to ~300 km for large targets.

4) Three-coordinate combat mode radar ST-68U


ST-68U mobile three-coordinate decimeter-range radar

It was a mobile three-dimensional combat-mode radar for detecting and tracking targets at low and medium altitudes in challenging jamming conditions. It was used as a surveillance/reconnaissance radar for air defense units and could operate in conjunction with the S-300P family of air defense missile systems. Antenna/scanning: cylindrical-parabolic reflector, electronic scanning in elevation (multiple beams/"zones"), mechanical rotation in azimuth. Rotation speeds were 6 or 12 rpm. It could detect targets at a range of up to 150 km at an altitude of 20,000 m. Deployment by a trained crew took an hour, sometimes longer (depending on the situation).

The use of the ST-68U radar in the S-300 system complements the RPN 30N6, increasing the target detection range and depth and reducing the speed required for the 30N6 to automatically track targets, allowing for faster SAM launches against detected targets. Another significant advantage of using this radar is increased survivability and resistance to electronic countermeasures due to the spacing of its radar posts.

5) Up to 12 5P85-1 self-propelled launchers: a semitrailer with four missile containers (TPK) in a 2x2 unit; a hydraulic drive lifts the unit vertically at the firing position. In the traveling position, the semitrailer is pulled by a tractor (usually a KrAZ-255/260); in position, the launcher is leveled using jacks. The 5P85-1A was produced in several variants, which differed in the design of the frame, hydraulics, and drive rack layout. The unit consists of 4 TPKs on a semitrailer - in the traveling position and in the vertical position when on the firing position (museum examples 5P85-1/5P851A).


Hardware container for the S-300PT 5P85-1/1A air defense missile system

This complex undoubtedly surpassed all existing air defense systems of the time, including the famous S-75 air defense system, and determined the vector of development of air defense systems around the world for decades.

However, despite all its advantages, the system also had significant drawbacks: despite its high level of automation, the 5V55K missile's firing range did not exceed 47 km, which was even shorter than that of the S-75. To rectify this, the 5V55KD SAM was adopted in the early 1980s, increasing its firing range to 75 km. The warhead is detonated by a proximity radar fuse upon entering the kill zone. This allowed it to effectively engage large, slow-moving targets such as the B-52 or KS-135, as well as E-3 AWACS aircraft. The low engagement range, even for such a large target, was due to the fact that the longer the range, the greater the missile's guidance error. Consequently, increasing the distance from the guidance station made it impossible to accurately determine the missile's position relative to the target. To address this shortcoming, the 5V55R SAM, with radio-command guidance via the missile, was adopted in 1982: the radio signal reflected from the target is received by the missile and then transmitted via a repeater to the 5N63S RPN guidance station. On the ground, the RPN computer, with precise data on both the target and the missile, calculates the optimal intercept trajectory. Course corrections prior to target engagement are transmitted to the missile via radio commands; detonation is triggered by a proximity fuse/command.

Compared to a pure radio command, the 5V55R missile offers significantly higher accuracy at long ranges, as its calculations rely on the signal received by the missile, which is "closest" to the target. The main drawback of this guidance system was the need for a stable, two-way "missile-to-RPN" channel. The 5V55R SAM's launch range was initially limited to 75 km, but after the introduction of the modernized 5V55RM variant in 1984, this increased to 90 km.

In the mid-80s, the modernization of the S-300PT system continued, reaching the S-300PT-1A version. This system featured improved guidance and processing equipment, which generally improved the combat performance of the PT-1A system compared to the earlier PT. The S-300PT-1A remained in service with the Russian army until 2014, after which it was replaced by the newer S-300PS/PM. This system is currently in service with the armies of Armenia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus.

Further development of the S-300PT complex and its modifications


In 1983, a new modification of the system, the S-300PS, entered service. Its main difference from the previous version was the mounting of the launchers on a mobile, self-propelled MAZ-543M chassis, which reduced deployment time to five minutes. This type of air defense system became the most widely used in the USSR, and later in post-Soviet Russia. This modification of the air defense system continues to be in service in the Russian Federation (approximately 300 S-300PS launchers) and other post-Soviet countries.

The S-300PS battalion includes three batteries, each consisting of three SPUs on the MAZ-543M chassis, as well as an F1S RPN cabin and a combat control module for the system. Compared to the S-300PT, this modification: the trailer-mounted 5N63 RPN has been replaced with a self-propelled 5N63S/30N6 on the MAZ-543M chassis, which has reduced the time it takes to put this radar into combat position (up to 5 minutes under ideal conditions) and maintained simultaneous guidance of up to 12 SAMs on 6 targets; the 5N64K RA was replaced with the 5N64S, a self-propelled road train on the MAZ-7410 chassis, increasing autonomy and mobility and reducing deployment time; The 5N66M low-altitude detector on the 40V6 mast was replaced with the 76N6 with 40V6M masts, which increased the range of operations against ground targets to 90 km at an altitude of up to 500 m and up to 120 km at an altitude of 1000 m or more, and the algorithms for suppressing interference and false signals were also improved.


NVO 5N66M (left) and RPN 30N6 (right) on 40V6M towers

A 5T99 loading vehicle was used to reload the system's launchers and load the transport and launch vehicles at the battalion and warehouses. It was a KrAZ 6x6 flatbed truck with a hydraulic boom-manipulator on a frame with outrigger jacks at the rear and sides for stabilization during crane operation.


Loading vehicle 5T99

The PBU 5K56S combat control post was capable of tracking up to 100 different targets and determining their nationality, interacting with other air defense missile systems, and issuing target designations to engage the most dangerous targets in conditions of strong interference.


RџR'RЈ 5Рљ56РЎ

Production of the S-300PT/PS systems proceeded rapidly in the USSR. As early as the mid-1980s, a decision was made that more modern systems would replace the outdated first-generation S-75 systems. As a result, before the collapse of the USSR, the armed forces received approximately 150 air defense missile systems or over 1600 launchers of various S-300PT/PT-1/PT-1A/PS systems. Currently, the S-300PS are still in service with the Russian Aerospace Forces (several dozen divisions with approximately 200 launchers). After the collapse of the USSR, Ukraine also received approximately 43 S-300PT/PT-1A/PS air defense missile systems, of which at least 30-35 were considered conditionally combat-ready and were on combat duty in limited numbers. Since the hardware of these systems is significantly outdated, and the service life extension for the 5V55R/RM SAMs ended 15 years ago, these systems are gradually being decommissioned and transferred to CSTO allies after minor modernization. For example, two S-300PS systems were transferred to Armenia after major repairs, and four battalions were also delivered to Belarus in 2005. As payment for the barter agreement, Belarus supplied chassis for the RS-12M1 Topol-M strategic missile systems. Later, in 2016, deliveries of four more S-300PS battalions began. In addition to Belarus and Armenia, Kazakhstan also received this SAM system: in 2015, Russia transferred five S-300PS anti-aircraft battalions, along with 170 5V55RM SAMs for them.

S-300PM/PM1/PM2 air defense missile systems and their export modifications


In 1993, after protracted testing, the S-300PM system was accepted into service. This resulted in an increased level of automation, which positively impacted its combat capabilities. In this modification of the air defense system, the developers were able to increase the target detection range by using the new 64N6E radar: special sector scanning modes for tracking ballistic targets were added, the detection range of aerodynamic targets increased, jamming immunity was enhanced, and a dual-sided, hydraulically elevating PFAR antenna and standard "sectorization" of modes were added.


64N6E long-range early warning radar

Perhaps the most significant change to the S-300PM system is the new 48N6 SAM: its range against aerodynamic targets has increased from 75 km to 150 km, while the minimum engagement altitude has been reduced from 25 m for the 5V55RM to 10 m for the 48N6. The warhead has been increased to 143 kg. This makes it possible to intercept highly maneuverable ballistic missiles (TBM/OTBM) at a range of up to 40 km, while the SAM's targeting accuracy has been increased and its flight speed has been increased to 2100 m/s.

After the S-300PM system entered service in 1993, it remained on the production line for a short time due to the crisis in the country. Production ceased in 1994, after which the company began producing the export version, the S-300PMU-1, for export to Vietnam (12 launchers), Greece (12 launchers), and China (64 launchers). The Russian Armed Forces received five regimental sets (10-15 air defense missile systems), which were deployed around Moscow. By 2014, all battalions of this modification had been upgraded to the S-300PM1 standard.

S-300PM2 – further improvement of air defense systems


In 1997, the S-300PM2 system and its export counterpart, the S-300PMU-2, were accepted into service. 15 divisions (120 launchers) were delivered to China, 4 divisions (32 launchers) to Algeria, 4 divisions (32 launchers) to Iran, 3 divisions (24 launchers) to Azerbaijan, and 3 divisions (24 launchers) to Syria. These systems only began to enter service with the Russian Armed Forces in 2012.

The S-300PM2 modification now has the capability to simultaneously engage 36 targets, guiding 72 SAMs (two missiles per target). Furthermore, the 64N6E radar was upgraded to the E2 level, which allowed for increased resistance to EW, improve performance against small/low-observable targets, refine the ballistic missile modes, and generally improve processing performance—all while maintaining the same class range. A new three-dimensional, all-altitude detector, the 96L6E, was also introduced. It is designed to improve autonomous all-round visibility and target designation. While taking over some of the 64N6E(E2) radar detection functions, it detects and identifies targets, and provides target designation for detected aerial objects. The 96L6E detection range is approximately 5-300 km (against aerodynamic targets); coverage: 360°; the lower zone is updated approximately every 6 s, the upper zone—approximately 12 s; sector and low-altitude modes are available.


R'SЃРµРІС ‹СЃРѕС‚РЅС‹ Р№ РѕР ± РЅР ° ружитель 96Р› 6Р •

A significant advantage of the system was the use of the 48N6E2 SAM with an increased flight range of up to 190-200 km versus 150 for the 48N6E/E2, the range of hitting ballistic targets at range was also improved - more than 40 km, the warhead increased from 143 kg to 180 kg.

The division can use additional radars: a low-altitude detector 76N6 and a mobile three-coordinate radar of the ST-68UM 36D6 family, which allows for the detection of all kinds of air targets by several radars, including low-observable cruise missiles flying at low altitudes.

At the beginning of 2016, the first regimental set (3 anti-aircraft missile systems and a command post) took up combat duty in the Central region of the country, and already in the middle of 2017, the second regiment armed with the S-300PM2 air defense missile system took up combat duty in the Krasnoyarsk Territory.

Combat use of the S-300PT/PT-1A/PS air defense missile system and its modifications


1) Following the downing of a Russian Su-24 tactical bomber and the further escalation of tensions between Syria and Turkey in the northern regions, a decision was made to supply three battalions (8 launchers each) of the S-300PMU2 system to the Syrian Arab Republic, and the S-300/400 system was deployed at the Khmeimim Air Base. The S-300 system performed virtually unnoticed during the continuous Israeli airstrikes against Iranian targets in Syria. Only in May 2022 was there information about an attempt to intercept Israeli F-16s using 13 S-300PMU2 SAMs; however, no aircraft were damaged or shot down as a result of this attack.

2) The first combat use of the S-300 system in almost 50 years of its operation was the second war in Nagorno-Karabakh. Before the war, Armenia had obsolete S-300PT/PS systems in its arsenal, consisting of approximately 5 battalions (12 launchers each), delivered from Russia after repairs and minor modernization. Azerbaijan also had the most modern modification of the S-300PMU2 systems - 3 battalions (8 SPUs each) and 200 48N6E2 SAMs. Armenia made limited use of the S-300PT/PS in combat, which allowed it to shoot down numerous Azerbaijani dronesHowever, the systems also suffered significant damage from UAV strikes: five 5P85 launchers, two 5N63S RPNs, and four 36D6 radars were confirmed destroyed. The use of the S-300 family of systems prevented either the Azerbaijani or Armenian sides from actively using aircraft, further confirming the high effectiveness of these systems.

3) The Russian-Ukrainian war was the largest use of air defense systems in history. history their existence. The S-300 complex was not spared from this share. Ukraine and Russia were the largest operators of these systems at the beginning of 2022: Russia had approximately 570 launchers and about 7-8 thousand SAMs for them, including 5V55KD/R/RM and 48N6E/E2, while Ukraine had about 280 launchers of the earlier S-300PT/PT-1A/PS complexes and about 3000 5V55K/KD/R/RM SAMs. Already in the first days, Ukrainian S-300 systems suffered significant losses (approximately 80-100 5P85S launchers, 16 5N63S RPNs, and approximately 16 36D6 radars were lost). However, a significant number managed to leave their bases in time and survived, allowing them to close their airspace to Russian air strikes and prevent Russian Aerospace Forces from achieving air superiority. During the war, the S-300PT/PS systems were quite effective against modern cruise missiles (with a kill probability of approximately 30%), but were unable to shoot down high-speed aerodynamic and ballistic targets, resulting in heavy losses from Iskander OTRK strikes.

In all conflicts, the S-300PT and its modifications have demonstrated high effectiveness against various aerial targets, including aircraft, helicopters, UAVs, and cruise missiles, provided they have a sensor network, maneuverability, and concealment. However, against modern SEAD/EW systems and massive UAV/cruiser swarms, single battalions quickly lose their effectiveness; today, only echeloned groups with the assistance of other air defense systems offer real results.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    2 December 2025 04: 27
    The article is very interesting! And it confirms the air defense slogan: we don't fly ourselves, but we won't let others do it either! But seriously, the transition from the S-75 to the S-300 seems somehow illogical. The S-125 and S-200 have "disappeared" somewhere. I'd like the author to fill this gap!
    1. +4
      2 December 2025 06: 10
      If you're interested in the history of Soviet/Russian air defense systems, I recommend the "PVO Bulletin" website at http://pvo.guns.ru. Very interesting!
      1. 0
        2 December 2025 06: 22
        Quote: Amateur
        If you're interested in the history of Soviet/Russian air defense systems, I recommend the "PVO Bulletin" website at http://pvo.guns.ru. Very interesting!

        Thanks! I will definitely look!
      2. 0
        2 December 2025 21: 18
        That's not true, colleague. There's a very good author on this site with over 800 articles, many of them on air defense and missile defense. His name is Sergei Linnik, and he goes by the nickname Bongo.
        1. 0
          3 December 2025 05: 03
          Wrong colleague

          What's wrong? One doesn't preclude the other. Linnik's articles are truly good, and no one disputes that. I just don't understand what and why you're accusing me of.
          1. 0
            3 December 2025 13: 29
            The information on the website is presented superficially, but Sergey’s is deep and very precise, just right for gourmets like me.
            I hope I didn't offend you.👍
            1. 0
              3 December 2025 13: 40
              The information on the website is presented superficially.

              What is the "superficiality" of the information posted on the website? S. Azimov, one of the developers of the air defense missile system, worked for many years at specialized research institutes.
              P.S. Speaking of gourmet, some people like Roquefort cheese. I hope I didn't offend you.
    2. +4
      2 December 2025 06: 54
      Quote: Traveler 63
      confirms the air defense slogan: we don’t fly ourselves, but we won’t let others fly either!

      There are also other slogans: "The effectiveness of air defense is like that of women's pubic hair: they cover, but do not protect."
      1. 0
        2 December 2025 07: 06
        Honestly, I've never heard of anything like that. Maybe because I'm not an air defense specialist? By the way, the downvote isn't mine.
        1. +5
          2 December 2025 07: 08
          Quote: Traveler 63
          To be honest, I have never heard of such a thing.

          All military men are terrible vulgarians...
          1. +4
            2 December 2025 07: 13
            Well, that's a question! In the barracks, there's a lot of swearing and jokes... But when we got out into the city, you'd hardly recognize us! Everyone was so polite and spoke in literary English! I was surprised at myself, but it happened!
            1. +1
              2 December 2025 07: 19
              Quote: Traveler 63
              In the barracks there's a lot of swearing and jokes...

              It's not about using foul language, but about themes for jokes; it all comes down to sexual intercourse, no matter with whom, whom, or the number of participants.
              1. +1
                2 December 2025 07: 37
                That's exactly what I'm talking about! And four years in the barracks... what kind of masterpieces don't you hear!
            2. +2
              2 December 2025 21: 25
              [QuoteIn the barracks, there was swearing and jokes... But when we got out into the city, you couldn't recognize us! Everyone was so polite and spoke in literary language! I was surprised at myself, but it was true.!][/quote]
              Until the first blow to the leg or someone accidentally spills your glass of beer, and that's it, the resident's turn is revealed.
    3. +3
      2 December 2025 11: 23
      Quote: Traveler 63
      Seriously, the transition from the S-75 to the S-300 seems somewhat illogical. The S-125 and S-200 have "disappeared" somewhere.

      Yeah... just like the fact that the "three hundred" was originally designed as a unified, cross-service system—for the Ground Forces, Air Defense Forces, and Navy. However, as the design progressed, it became clear that crossing a hedgehog with a viper wouldn't work—and the unified air defense system was split into three branches, with less than 50% commonality between them.
  2. 0
    2 December 2025 09: 42
    Low-altitude detector... low-altitude detector... low-altitude detector...
    Can anyone explain why the description of the system's components always includes a component called "low-altitude"? Are the system's conventional radars so poor that they can't see anything against the background of the underlying surface?
    The firing range of the 5V55K missile did not exceed 47 km, which was even less than that of the S-75... the 5V55KD SAM was adopted, which made it possible to increase the firing range to 75 km... the increase in range from the guidance station did not make it possible to accurately determine the position of the missile in relation to the target.
    Then why didn’t the 75th complex have this problem, considering that its initial firing range was higher?
    1. 0
      2 December 2025 14: 34
      Because the S-75 always worked in tandem with the S-125, whose SNR worked as this very detector at low altitudes.
      1. +2
        3 December 2025 05: 29
        Quote: Owl in the forest
        Because the S-75 always worked in tandem with the S-125, whose SNR worked as this very detector at low altitudes.

        The combined use of the S-75, S-125 and S-200 air defense systems made it possible to significantly increase the effectiveness and sustainability of the air defense target group, but these systems did not work together always, and even more so, the SNR-125 was not a "low-altitude detector." The P-15 and P-19 radars were used to detect low-altitude aerial targets.
    2. 0
      2 December 2025 16: 52
      A low-altitude detector is usually raised on a special mast, thereby increasing the horizon
      1. 0
        2 December 2025 17: 23
        So, raising the antenna is only half the battle; you also need to be able to detect targets against the underlying terrain. Do you think that by raising the "P" cabin on the 75th system, you'll be able to increase the detection range of a low-altitude target (not just 100 meters in altitude, but much lower, and even smaller)?
        1. +1
          2 December 2025 17: 55
          Well, it's unlikely that the *P* cabin has a special mast, but the low-altitude detector has a 40v6 (height up to 39 m)
          I'm not an anti-aircraft gunner, this information is from Yandex (in all the pictures, for example, the low-altitude detector is mounted on masts (if nothing changed, then there would be no point in installing it on masts)
        2. 0
          Yesterday, 22: 47
          Quote: Hexenmeister
          So, raising the antenna is only half the battle; you also need to be able to detect it against the background of the underlying surface.

          The NVO uses continuous-wave radiation with a chirp and establishes a minimum target radial velocity. Incidentally, due to its low power and very broad spectrum, for airborne anti-aircraft defense systems of that time, the NVO signal was nothing more than the now-fashionable LPI.
    3. 0
      Yesterday, 22: 43
      Quote: Hexenmeister
      Can anyone explain why the composition of the complex is always described as having a component called "low altitude"???

      If I remember correctly, in air defense, a low-flying target is a target (not to be confused with a low-altitude target!) that is not visible to the radar of a higher command post and cannot be provided with target designation by the air defense missile system. The task of detecting such targets is assigned to the air defense missile system's electronic warfare systems. To detect such targets, the air defense missile system was assigned a corresponding radar with a corresponding designation.
      Quote: Hexenmeister
      Are the complex's conventional radars so bad that they can't see anything against the background of the underlying surface???

      The S-300P uses a quasi-continuous signal, and the probing time of the S-300PS (as an example) of a 4x12 degree sector is comparable to the probing time of the ST-68U in a 6x360 degree sector with a short launch.
      Quote: Hexenmeister
      Then why didn’t the 75th complex have this problem, considering that its initial firing range was higher?

      It's simply written incorrectly. With command guidance, the linear miss along the normal to the target's line of sight from the guidance radar increases proportionally to the range to the target. Accordingly, as the range to the target increases, the probability of hitting it for a given type of engagement decreases. This is independent of the system type. The 75th has a more powerful warhead.
  3. +1
    2 December 2025 17: 05
    I've read a lot about how we have the best air defense and missile defense, but the US has good Aegis and THAAD. Someone in the know can post an article about the real state of affairs.
    1. +1
      2 December 2025 21: 31
      Read Sergey Linnik's articles here on the site, or on the Zen site, "How It Really Is," a series of articles about US air and missile defense, including the naval component.
      1. +2
        3 December 2025 05: 35
        Quote: merkava-2bet
        Read Sergey Linnik's articles here on the website

        Andrey, hello!
        Thanks for your kind words and advertising!
        Regarding this article, despite some inconsistencies, it left an overall favorable impression. However, the S-300P air defense missile system has been well-worn, and the author borrowed some material from my previous publications.
  4. +1
    2 December 2025 18: 31
    The Russian Aerospace Forces failed to achieve air superiority due to their meager numbers. 120-130 strike aircraft is nothing. For such an "armada," the loss of 7-8 aircraft is a significant blow, and 10-12 downed aircraft is an unacceptable loss rate.
    After all, they imagined fighting against ragamuffins in slippers with AKMs and RPGs, and they forbade even a hint of clashes with modern armies, but then—bang!—there are SAMs, dozens and hundreds of launchers. This war turned out to be the wrong one. Apologists for the "compact contract army" are screaming and howling, saying, "What the hell is this? The notorious "omnipotent" BTG didn't work; a couple of Su-34 flights couldn't defeat the enemy." And yet they thought they'd arrive, quickly defeat everyone with a couple of flights, and proudly fly away. And then—splat! SAMs hit them. This war is the wrong one, the wrong one.
    1. 0
      Yesterday, 22: 44
      Quote: Tank DestroyerSU-100
      The Russian Aerospace Forces failed to achieve air superiority due to their meager numbers.

      The Russian Aerospace Forces have air superiority in the SVO zone. This is according to the definition of the term "air superiority."
  5. 0
    2 December 2025 19: 05
    In Ukraine, there were about 280 launchers of the earlier S-300PT/PT-1A/PS systems.
    That's not enough: there was a Western District there, there should have been a ton of them, but when it came down to it, there weren't even 300 of them. Where did they put them? Oh, and not "B," but "Na."
    1. +2
      3 December 2025 05: 40
      Quote: bk0010
      That's not enough: there was a Western District there, there should have been a ton of them, but when it came down to it, there weren't even 300 of them. Where did they put them all? Oh, and not "B," but "Na"

      Calculating the number of SAM systems based on the number of launchers is a very superficial approach. Ukraine inherited a very significant air defense force—about a hundred site-based SAM systems of various types, including more than 40 of the most modern S-300Ps as of 1991—a very significant force. We currently have just over a hundred S-300P/S-400s in service. As for the S-300V military systems, this system had only just entered service at the time of the collapse of the USSR, and approximately ten times fewer of them were produced than the S-300P.
  6. 0
    2 December 2025 22: 18
    However, against modern SEAD/EW and massive swarms of UAVs/cruisers, single divisions quickly lose their effectiveness; today, only echeloned groups using other air defense systems offer real results.

    As I understand it, this statement does not require confirmation.
  7. 0
    3 December 2025 13: 27
    Quote: Tank DestroyerSU-100
    The apologists of the "compact contract army" are screaming and howling, saying, what is this? The notorious "all-powerful" BTG didn't work; a couple of Su-34 flights couldn't defeat the enemy.
    Who are you talking about? Conscription has never been abolished in Russia. Conscription alone, and even mass mobilization, doesn't increase the number of Su-34s.
  8. 0
    Yesterday, 23: 02
    Perhaps the most significant difference of the S-300PM system was the new 48N6 SAM

    This is a very misleading statement.
    In 1997, the S-300PM2 system was accepted into service.

    S-300PM2 is not from 1997.
    and its export analogue S-300PMU-2, which was delivered to China - 15 divisions (120 launchers), Algeria - 4 divisions (32 launchers), Iran - 4 divisions (32 launchers), Azerbaijan - 3 divisions (24 launchers), Syria - 3 divisions (24 launchers).

    The countries listed do not have the S-300PMU-2 that was introduced in 1997.
    Following the downing of the Russian Su-24 tactical bomber, as well as the further escalation of the situation between Syria and Turkey in the northern regions, a decision was made to supply three divisions (8 launchers each) of the S-300PMU2 system to the Syrian Arab Republic's armed forces.

    This is incorrect. The decision to supply the S-300PMU-2 to the Syrian Arab Republic was made after the incident with the Russian Il-20. Syria had already requested the S-300PMU-2 and Iskander-E in the mid- to late 2000s.
    Armenia made limited use of the S-300PT/PS in combat, which allowed it to shoot down numerous Azerbaijani drones.

    It's unclear how they managed this. The S-300PT/PS missiles have a target radial velocity limit of 50 m/s.