Military Review

About the possibilities of C-300, C-400 and C-500 - Chinese expert

28
About the possibilities of C-300, C-400 and C-500 - Chinese expert



Military expert, PLA Air Force Chief Engineer Yang Jian shared his thoughts on the combat effectiveness of modern Russian anti-aircraft missile systems, mil.news.sina.com.cn writes today.

- What features does the C-300 system have?

- C-300PS is a third-generation all-weather multi-channel anti-aircraft missile system designed to intercept airplanes, cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. The system is highly efficient, capable of directing 12 missiles at the same time on 6 targets, is placed on high-traffic vehicles, the launch of missiles is made from transport-launch containers in an upright position.

The range of high-altitude targets in modern versions of the C-300 reaches 200 km, the system is capable of destroying low-flying targets such as cruise missiles. If the opponent uses non-stealth planes, the C-300 will be an effective shield against them.


However, the C-300's firing efficiency is highly dependent on the accuracy of target designation, the radar is not effective enough to counter stealth aircraft using anti-radar missiles. Therefore, the effectiveness of C-300 depends entirely on the availability of advanced detection, tracking and guidance systems, without them the combat capabilities of the complex will be very limited.

- In what conditions was the C-300 system developed?

- In the late 60s of the last century, the military aviation leading countries of the world began to abandon the breakthrough of air defense at high altitudes, instead began to practice methods of overcoming the enemy defense system at supersonic speeds at low altitudes ("low-altitude supersonic jumps"). In the former Soviet Union, work began on the creation of the S-300.

The system went through two stages. At the first stage, the C-300 was designed to destroy aerodynamic targets, that is, aircraft, which was a fairly simple task. But with the widespread use of tactical ballistic missiles, more powerful modifications of the C-300PMU-1, C-300PMU-2 and C-300PMU-3 appeared.

Currently, a C-300 system has been created on the basis of the C-400 system, which solves the tasks of regional air defense and missile defense. The capabilities and vitality on the battlefield of this system are greatly enhanced.

- How do you assess the capabilities of the C-300 family compared to other similar foreign systems?

- The C-300PMU-2 system will be slightly more efficient than the American Patriot PAC-2 in terms of the interception of ballistic targets, since it has a more powerful warhead. During the Gulf War, the explosion of the Patriot missile fragmentation warhead was not effective enough to destroy Iraqi ballistic missiles in flight. But the American complex has more advanced radar tools and EW system. C-300 does not have the ability to quickly adjust the operating frequencies to counteract the enemy EW.

In general, it can be said that C-300 and Patriot are among the leading world-class air defense systems in the world; they have both disadvantages and advantages in relation to each other.

- What work is being carried out in Russia on promising anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems?

- The Russian developer of air defense systems, Almaz-Antey, is working on two types - C-400 and C-500. There have been reports that R & D (research and development) at C-500 will be completed by the end of 2015.

The C-500 complex, being developed on the C-400 base, has enhanced anti-missile capabilities, will also hit satellites in near-earth orbit. The new system will be an integrated complex of air defense, missile defense and PKO (anti-space defense) for all types of armed forces of Russia.

- After adopting new systems, will C-300 remain in service?

- Judging by the results of firing at the landfills, modern versions of the C-300 meet the requirements set for them, in addition, they have a reserve for further modernization. The adoption of the C-400 does not preclude further use of these systems, since the C-400 can control the combat assets of the C-300PMU-1 and PMU-2 complexes. Their combination will give more combat effectiveness in building a defense system against an air enemy.

C-500 is also compatible with C-400. In the foreseeable future, the basis of the Russian air defense system will be C-400, while C-500 with its interceptor missiles will perform missile defense tasks. Modern C-300 versions will also perform their tasks.
Originator:
http://www.militaryparitet.com/
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Denis
    Denis 17 September 2013 06: 44 New
    +1
    The C-500 complex, developed on the basis of the C-400, has enhanced anti-missile capabilities and will also hit satellites in low Earth orbit
    He probably received information from Buddha. The designers are only working, but he already knows
    Chinas, what else to say
    1. kenig1
      kenig1 17 September 2013 11: 37 New
      +4
      I’ll tell you a secret, weapons are not developed from the bulldozer, 3 p, but first, military developers are given the task of what characteristics the weapon should meet. The Chinese in short and answered.
      1. Igarr
        Igarr 17 September 2013 11: 53 New
        0
        And I would add -
        I have never seen design bureaus that are developing deterioration in combat systems.
        Only improved options.
        The nameplate was painted in a different color - combat effectiveness tripled.
        So ... Chinas is a model of conciseness. Is silent. Like a partisan.
  2. vvvvv
    vvvvv 17 September 2013 06: 52 New
    +4
    Let's put it this way: a very modest description of systems, even meager ... Although for a Chinese expert.
    Any user of this site can write "C" -s even better ...
  3. svskor80
    svskor80 17 September 2013 07: 30 New
    +1
    A Chinese expert would share his thoughts on Chinese systems. It seems they really only care about grabbing the original and cutting copies. And if the patriot would be better than the C-300, the Chinese think I would make copies of it, but they do with the S-300. The conclusion is simple in the overall set of factors S-300 is better.
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 17 September 2013 14: 33 New
      0
      The overall combination of S-300 factors is better.

      I would say cheaper.
  4. 123tank
    123tank 17 September 2013 07: 36 New
    +1
    Where did the Chinese comrade get such information?
  5. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 17 September 2013 07: 38 New
    0
    Who heard about C-600? What kind of complex will it be?
    1. Denis
      Denis 17 September 2013 08: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: Mikhail M
      Who heard about C-600? What kind of complex will it be?
      Probably so far only this Chinese, he knows everything and will tell
    2. Alvin
      Alvin 17 September 2013 11: 30 New
      0
      Well, very scary wink ! Good day hi
  6. Vitali-46
    Vitali-46 17 September 2013 07: 59 New
    0
    What is the general comment of a Chinese expert about our weapons ??? He did not discover anything new! It is not clear at all !!!
  7. left-wing
    left-wing 17 September 2013 08: 43 New
    +1
    If satellites were shot down by the Americans, their vaunted army would go blind and could not do anything, so soon the S-500 would be put into service. By the way, they promise that the new generation of the "Voyevoda" (Satan) rocket, which is now highly classified, will be able to quote: "Deliver a charge to a neighboring planet" what would it be ...
  8. Nitarius
    Nitarius 17 September 2013 08: 44 New
    0
    Quote: xasharat
    WAS A BAD SYSTEM, WE WOULD NOT COPY THE CHINESE.

    Amer and so are trying in every possible way. MAGNIFICATION in his pocket - to ditch the weapons manufacturing plants!
  9. 787nkx
    787nkx 17 September 2013 08: 45 New
    +2
    However, the C-300's firing efficiency is highly dependent on the accuracy of target designation, the radar is not effective enough to counter stealth aircraft using anti-radar missiles. Therefore, the effectiveness of C-300 depends entirely on the availability of advanced detection, tracking and guidance systems, without them the combat capabilities of the complex will be very limited.


    I do not agree, Stealth F-117 sees normally under conditions of interference, anti-radar missiles fortunately do not
    Such problems as target designation accuracy from a standard radar are not.
    Through other channels, targeting accuracy may be insufficient. For this, there are reconnaissance stations that roughly transmit coordinates to the corresponding control unit, the control unit with its reconnaissance means updates the coordinates and transmits it with the accuracy necessary for the S-300 air defense system.
  10. rugor
    rugor 17 September 2013 08: 50 New
    +2
    while the S-500 with its interceptor missiles will carry out missile defense


    Lavrov is handsome, tinkering with mattresses for withdrawing from the ABM agreement, while ours are already preparing their answer to Chamberlain.
  11. Sunjar
    Sunjar 17 September 2013 09: 00 New
    +3
    By the way, the same F-117 was shot down by a "cube", so here's an invisible plane.
    In general, a Chinese expert answered questions as if he was on an exam. According to old soviet estimates, I learned it on 4: I spoke in general terms, but without hesitation. You can’t put the top three because you know enough about the system, but it’s a bit poor for an excellent mark.
  12. Druid
    Druid 17 September 2013 09: 06 New
    +1
    Plus article - a clear and balanced assessment of the weapons system. Chinese, everything is said simply and easily.
  13. darksoul
    darksoul 17 September 2013 09: 33 New
    0
    Quote: xasharat
    Why read so many letters from the Chinese when you can briefly answer so. WAS A BAD SYSTEM, WE WOULD NOT COPY THE CHINESE.


    A plus. You can’t better say how you removed it from your tongue. Here are the Chinese arguments about the S-400 and S-500 do not like, probably already put an eye
  14. not good
    not good 17 September 2013 09: 41 New
    0
    If only our merchants did not start selling the S-400 to China before they saturate their aircraft and did not accept the S-500, it would be time to introduce a moratorium on the sale of new types of weapons until they saturate their troops.
    1. takojnikuzheest
      takojnikuzheest 17 September 2013 10: 43 New
      0
      It is not a matter of businessmen at all, but of the state. The state will allocate money for the purchase — there will be new weapons in the service of our army.
  15. Yuriwhite
    Yuriwhite 17 September 2013 09: 56 New
    +1
    Well done Chinese! Perfectly weaves truth and lies laughing Like, he wants to say that the S-300 in honesty is about the same as the Patriot .... What can I say - about the same thing, if you take the S-300 of the first stages and the Patriot of the last - then yes - no doubt :) The article is nothing but disgust does not call (another author -> author -> author stupidly retells) for its main goal is to sell us your new systems for nothing, otherwise we will buy from amers - and after that we will copy and we will sculpt our own
  16. Nitup
    Nitup 17 September 2013 10: 27 New
    0
    S-300 are still being produced?
  17. Gur
    Gur 17 September 2013 10: 42 New
    0
    An interesting article I had to ask the Papuans about the capabilities of the S-300
  18. major071
    major071 17 September 2013 10: 46 New
    +5
    The Chinese do not want to cooperate with the amers, everyone is looking at Russia - where to steal something. We conclude: our weapon is all the same better than Amerovsky.
    1. Nitup
      Nitup 17 September 2013 10: 58 New
      0
      Quote: major071
      The Chinese do not want to cooperate with the amers, everyone is looking at Russia - where to steal something. We conclude: our weapon is all the same better than Amerovsky.

      The Chinese may want it, but the West has introduced a ban on military cooperation with China and the supply of weapons to it.
  19. Samy
    Samy 17 September 2013 10: 51 New
    +1
    Quote: YuriWhite
    The article, except for a feeling of disgust, does not cause anything (other information the author -> the author -> the author stupidly retells) because its main goal is to sell us your new systems for a gift, otherwise we will buy from amers - and then we will still copy and sculpt our own


    This is a translation of the interview, and what does the author have to do with it ... A private opinion of a Chinese expert probably presented for interested students in an accessible language. And nothing more, you do not need to require numbers and analysis, where necessary, they will analyze everything.
  20. Grigorich 1962
    Grigorich 1962 17 September 2013 13: 05 New
    0
    We're the best!!!
  21. Alekseev
    Alekseev 20 September 2013 18: 49 New
    0
    Was there a Chinese?
    Quote: Samy
    A private opinion of a Chinese expert probably presented for interested students in an accessible language. And nothing more, you do not need to require numbers and analysis, where necessary, they will analyze everything.

    Very likely.
    And one shouldn't be too afraid of the Chinese "licking".
    Something not we, nor the Chinese did not lick, say the engine from the "dreamliner".
    No you understand technological capabilities
    The fact that they "lick", and others too, often has only a similar appearance, not coinciding with the original in their performance characteristics (and, especially, in terms of resource and reliability)
    This should be borne in mind when considering beautiful military vehicles produced (or modernized) in China and in many "former" countries trying to compete with the recognized "giants" of the military-industrial complex.
    Although, among the copies, there may be very successful exceptions.
    And there is only one way to fight such "piracy".
    And all reasonable ones use it. It is simple: do not sell crucial technologies and raise the technological level of your enterprises.