Military Review

NI: with the adoption of the C-500, the sky over Russia will become almost invulnerable

194
If in the Russian Federation they tie together C-500 systems preparing for deliveries to the troops with other types of air defense systems, then Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft, writes The National Interest. Article leads RIA News.


NI: with the adoption of the C-500, the sky over Russia will become almost invulnerable


“Some samples of these new systems are so perfect that many American commanders fear that even such invisible airplanes as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them,” the newspaper notes.

At the same time, “the US military is surprised by the fact that Russia, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was able not only to preserve the combat capabilities of air defense elements, but also to improve them,” the author points out.

“The new complex will occupy the upper tier of the echeloned unified air defense system of Russia, and will be able to fight against targets at altitudes of about 200 kilometers. This will allow the C-500 to hit the enemy’s approaching ballistic missiles at a distance of 640 kilometers ”,
Says the article.

In April, the commander of the Aerospace Defense Forces, Victor Gumenny, reported that "the Russian Space Forces will soon receive the first samples of the C-500 air defense system." According to him, the new "complex will be able to detect and simultaneously hit up to ten ballistic supersonic targets."
Photos used:
RIA News. Artem Zhitenev
194 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. St Petrov
    St Petrov 5 May 2016 10: 51
    +117
    Yes. You can then spank directly on Washington and not take a steam bath

    my hat now covers the white house. Hooray comrades!


    Yakov Kedmi:

    Any war against Russia will be on American territory


    any gamble against Russia will result in a blow not to American satellites that have proliferated along the Russian borders, but to the United States itself and its facilities around the world. The States will no longer be able to hide behind a "shirmochka" from the "allies" - the Russians will beat the "headquarters"


    1. cniza
      cniza 5 May 2016 10: 55
      +74
      Nobody needs war in Russia, but if we warned you ...
      1. ,
        , 5 May 2016 11: 21
        +44
        And what kind of liberals are minus such important news? belay
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 5 May 2016 11: 49
          +7
          Quote: andre
          And what kind of liberals are minus such important news?

          And what is important in them? If this
          If in the Russian Federation they link together the C-500 systems preparing for delivery to the troops with other types of air defense systems, then Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft
          I would have their confidence.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 5 May 2016 12: 06
            +2
            Et yes. Wunderwaffe does not exist. Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

            So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.
            1. iConst
              iConst 5 May 2016 12: 38
              +30
              Quote: Spade
              Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

              So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.

              - And is it necessary? Cover, IMHO, you need the most important strategic goals. More precisely, if the structure of the retaliatory strike is preserved, then the Yankees will sit quietly and continue to generate small and not very dirty tricks.

              Obviously, there will be no blow to the village of Gadyukino and the bayan factory (well, if only from impotent revenge).
              1. _Vladislav_
                _Vladislav_ 5 May 2016 13: 14
                -5
                Yes. You can then spank directly on Washington and not take a steam bath

                my hat now covers the white house. Hooray comrades!

                The USA has long had such a component. And there are opportunities for intercepting targets at altitudes of about 200 km above sea level. This device is called Aegis combat system. Aegis - from the word Aegis.
                This Aegis is capable of targeting other devices, for example, such as Standard missile 3 (SM-3 in the common people).

                The Americans have had such a system for quite some time. And the Americans (with their multi-billion dollar infusions) have been training this system for a very long time. Although to train her so much that she learned to intercept all Russian ICBMs, they didn’t know all the secrets of such art.

                Russia is a novice in this business. Russia has never had its Aegis before. With the advent of the S-500, Russia will have to go a long way to bring its Aegis to the American degree of readiness. To bring down more than a dozen blanks in space, aircraft and many other good things during tests, before saying - that, here, we have our own modern missile defense system.

                I watched it here at VO, the people chuckled sarcastically when information appeared about the successful missile defense tests by the Americans. We remember that the Americans conducted tests and intercepted ICBMs in space more than once or twice. And we said - fools, all missiles still can not be brought down. Do you think that Russia will be able to bring down everything?
                You are naive.
                1. Berber
                  Berber 5 May 2016 13: 57
                  +30
                  Aegis is a system developed in conjunction with an instant disarmament strike strategy. But the concept itself, of this blow, is untenable. It is proved more than once. Air defense and missile defense should be focal, otherwise it makes no sense. To cover a territory like ours, with the current level of technology, no one will succeed.
                  1. andj61
                    andj61 5 May 2016 21: 26
                    +4
                    Quote: BerBer
                    Air defense and missile defense should be focal, otherwise it makes no sense. To cover a territory like ours, with the current level of technology, no one will succeed.

                    Of course, with current approaches it will be so! And there is justification - it cannot be otherwise! Only now, the current "focal" air defense system (we still have missile defense, with the exception of one conditionally covered object) is not until the Soviet air defense system of the 1991 model is like cancer before Paris! And there, the object-territorial principle of air defense was actually implemented with a continuous radar coverage of both the territory of the Union and neighboring countries and territories. If we implement exclusively the object principle, then in our airspace the enemy aircraft will undividedly dominate - between the covered objects there are always "gaps through which a breakthrough can be made. And there are a lot of objects that need to be covered, especially in the European part of Russia. if you want, you don't want to, but inevitably you will have to implement, in addition to the object principle of building air defense, also the territorial one.
                    So we have an example to be achieved - this is soda, but at a new technological level. If the S-75, S-125, S-200 air defense systems planned to be retired in this system were replaced by the more modern S-300 and S-400, then we would still have an air defense system that would provide reliable cover from an aerodynamic attack. And no F-22 and F-35 weather would have done: none are invisible, the modern radars that we are armed with can clearly see them.
                    And the S-500 has not yet been accepted into service, and has not even really been finalized. And, frankly, something is not believed that he will be able to successfully shoot down strategic warheads flying along a ballistic trajectory with hypersonic speed ...
                    1. [comment-show]
                      Trom
                      Trom 6 May 2016 16: 52
                      +7
                      [quoteAnd, frankly, something is not believed,]

                      I am not a specialist in air defense, but I appreciate sound (with argumentation), even critical notes, tk. I think that criticism, something of the topic "insulting for the state", is more useful than "shabby" slogans, although I myself hate the amers !, maybe due to the fact that they competently took advantage of my ignorance and in 1991, in fact , with my hands they destroyed such a country! The only one in the whole world that opposes it and can do it constantly ... By the way, I am grateful to Putin for the fact that he was able to carry out this confrontation, even when, formally, Russia, for everyone, was on its knees ... But in general, thank you for the comments, which are more likely to help you concentrate than relax, especially in the area of ​​the security of your Russia. Thanks....
                      [/ comment-show] [comment-deleted]
                      The comment was deleted.
                      [/ comment-deleted]
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 7 May 2016 20: 38
    0
    Quote: andj61
    will successfully shoot down strategic warheads flying along a ballistic trajectory with hypersonic speed ...

    no, this is pure physics. To shoot down, you need to maneuver at a higher speed, but they still do not have hypersound at all. Ours further advanced in this matter. We have ALREADY experienced and POSSIBLE do. Therefore, IM so it is important to have means of destruction of our missiles at launch. A surprise awaits them at the end of the journey.
  • yehat
    yehat 6 May 2016 10: 43
    +2
    and yet, a similar auspices system is needed and it was developed in the USSR, but did not manage to bring to mind. Moreover, it is needed not only in global air defense. No less it is needed to ensure the protection of communications, ship groups.
    it’s just that the USA has 10 strike fleets and the need to control half the ball, but we have none. It would be strange if they were not the first to develop.
    And the S-500 is an element of an air defense system, it does not matter on the basis of which system is being built.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 6 May 2016 11: 43
      +2
      Quote: yehat
      it’s just that the USA has 10 strike fleets and the need to control half the ball, but we have none.

      US fleets are not only an instrument of force impact, but also the main component of the missile defense system, and this imposes some restrictions on the movement of sea strike groups with an eye on their shores. Unlike our fleets, which have missile defense elements, but far from the bulk of the Russian missile defense .
  • Ivan Ivanych
    Ivan Ivanych 5 May 2016 17: 11
    +1
    From the naive I hear)
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 5 May 2016 17: 50
    +24
    Here is this Aegis, with a hole from a subsonic target rocket on board. He will surely see the goals. But to shoot down .. For this we need to sit closer to our shores.
    You just compare the goals of the military.
    We did not develop 132 plans for the destruction of the United States in such a way as to remain with minimal losses. Our doctrine is different - striking back, with guaranteed irreparable damage in the event of an attack on the USSR / RF. And then even one missile hit the target enough to half of California crawled into the ocean. We were not fools involved in nuclear planning.
    Air defense in the Russian Federation is much better than in the US and it did not start yesterday. Ballistic missiles in the United States are relatively old, but a large fleet of cruise missiles, this is supposed to be the main striking force.
    Another thing - after the collapse of the USSR, we for a long time exposed the Arctic and lost a lot. But not development in air defense.
    1. Sartorius
      Sartorius 6 May 2016 06: 43
      +3
      Does my vision fail or is a really brave sailor trying to close a hole with a piece of plywood?
  • Cer59
    Cer59 5 May 2016 21: 44
    +1
    Vladislav, YOU are right, the aegis has been brought up for a long time, but here is the hitch. in 1968, approximately, someone destroyed two Soviet satellites, felts the satellite of the satellite, felts both of each other, felts at once. the debris then flew for a long time.
  • Oleg14774
    Oleg14774 5 May 2016 21: 59
    +1
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    The USA has long had such a component.

    Vladislav, you are reading the wrong liter! Tell me that the Americans still flew to the moon and generally ahead of the rest! If this system worked, they would already try to crush us, but alas, their gut is thin. And you forgot why your grandfathers fought and your spirit is not fighting but the spirit of a slave, which you formatted to the fullest!
  • Tusv
    Tusv 5 May 2016 23: 13
    +6
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    Russia is a novice in this business. Russia has never had its Aegis before.

    Yes of course. They just don't talk about it at every corner. ABM systems on "A" begin
  • dvina71
    dvina71 5 May 2016 23: 50
    +4
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    The USA has long had such a component.


    USSR / Russia also have a pro system. A-135. Only the approach is different and in my opinion more promising. Although it requires a more qualified approach, for errors are unacceptable.
    1. Zvon
      Zvon 6 May 2016 12: 54
      0
      A-235 system is already being developed
  • dima mzk
    dima mzk 7 May 2016 03: 27
    -1
    and we have for a long time, I’ve been surprised for a long time by people who think that the same S-300 complex carries bk. for decades, there have already been rockets close to s-400, and on s-400 missiles have been practiced for s-500. everyone is sitting in the design bureau ...
  • Operator
    Operator 7 May 2016 21: 01
    -2
    Aegis combat system + Standard missile 3 are atmospheric kinetic interceptors of ballistic targets. In the event of an overload, false targets become completely useless.

    S-500 air defense systems are universal atmospheric / transatmospheric fragmentation interceptors for ballistic, aeroballistic and aerodynamic targets. After the targets enter the atmosphere, they are automatically eliminated from false targets and interrupted by C-500 anti-ballistic missiles.

    ACS / SM-3 to C-500 as before Paris doggy style am
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 5 May 2016 17: 31
    +2
    NATO usually bombes infrastructure, in other words, water and heat supply, energy, so that the survivors turn from resistance forces into forces that interfere with their military, and even their own, how to beat them?
  • D. Dan
    D. Dan 6 May 2016 22: 18
    0
    Table tsu in the Urals and close the Urals and production one hundred percent ...
  • lopvlad
    lopvlad 5 May 2016 12: 45
    +8
    Quote: Spade
    So far, only focal air defense


    and in the US is not focal air defense? .Main important is the reliability with which air defense covers its area of ​​responsibility.
    If it is impossible to break through the enemy then he will not go for aggression.
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 5 May 2016 18: 01
      +2
      and in the US is not focal air defense?

      they have with Canada since 1958. - NORAD
      1. Idiot
        Idiot 6 May 2016 07: 57
        +1
        NORAD is a tracking system to a greater extent than an effective air defense system. Our VKS performs the same functions and copes without Canada, despite the fact that the controlled territory is an order of magnitude larger. And IJIS, in my opinion, is the same scarecrow as the SDI at one time. It has a lot of practically fatal flaws.
  • Stas157
    Stas157 5 May 2016 17: 17
    +10
    Quote: Spade
    Et yes. Wunderwaffe does not exist. Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

    So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.
    Why cover the entire territory of Russia? We have a huge country and huge undeveloped territories on which no one is going to beat! They will only hit strategically important targets, they must be covered, but no one will hit "milk", Siberia and the tundra.
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 5 May 2016 18: 04
      -3
      And why cover the entire territory of Russia?

      belay Do you CLOSE entrance doors in your apartment or ... only in the bedroom? wassat
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 5 May 2016 20: 26
        +6
        Quote: Lieutenant Izhe
        Do you CLOSE entrance doors in your apartment or ... only in the bedroom?

        Our missile defense covers only vital objects of military, strategic and state significance and cities, such as Moscow and St. Petersburg. First, cover Taigu with nothing, since no military commander will give an order to hit ICBMs through forests and swamps, and secondly: even the USA will not have enough budget to cover the whole territory of Russia with an umbrella. The mattresses also came to the same conclusion as we and the concept of their missile defense is built on the same principle.
    2. Bayonet
      Bayonet 5 May 2016 20: 07
      -1
      Quote: Stas157
      And why cover the entire territory of Russia? We have a huge country and vast undeveloped territories on which no one is going to hit!

      Nobody will hit the empty territories, and it is quite possible to enter from the areas not covered by air defense, to the carriers of the same cruise missiles.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 5 May 2016 20: 13
        +1
        Quote: Bayonet
        Nobody will hit the empty territories, and it is quite possible to enter from the areas not covered by air defense, to the carriers of the same cruise missiles.

        In what quantity of carriers? If in large or maximum, then do not forget that at the same time the US coast is exposed, since the same Berks are part of the ABM mattresses.
        If in small quantities, the forces of our fleets will not allow the adversary’s launch vehicles to reach Toporov’s launch range, and no one will play at us in a small salvo, due to the fact that our missile defense must be passed, which is not possible with small forces.
    3. Zvon
      Zvon 6 May 2016 12: 57
      0
      Enough to place around the perimeter!
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 6 May 2016 13: 20
        +1
        Quote: Zvon
        Enough to place around the perimeter!

        There is such a thing as a layered missile defense, and this suggests that the line of defense should not only be along the perimeter, but also not even one kilometer in depth. In addition, the same systems, for example, S-400, require cover on the nearest approaches to them, for this there are Buki, Torah, Armor, etc., since the minimum range of 400 is 50 km. And if a rocket or the same drone breaks into this blind zone, then the S-400 will be defenseless.
  • BARKHAN
    BARKHAN 5 May 2016 18: 52
    +5
    Quote: Spade
    Et yes. Wunderwaffe does not exist. Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

    So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.

    Well, they’ll not block all the space. They don’t close the taiga. There will be a network of domes over important objects and large cities.
    I’m more worried about a network of saboteurs in place. Which will be wool on our rear. Gnawing the defense from the inside. From the precise elimination of senior officials and life specialists in various fields, to the disruption of important objects (water supply sources, gas and electricity networks. Also not excluded sabotage at enterprises and factories of special danger ... chemical and nuclear industry.
    It may seem that I am talking nonsense from the category of fantasy, but remember what the Germans did in our rear in 1941 ("Brandenburg 800") ...
    Imagine not for a second what will happen if the mobile connection is cut off? And if the electricity? I personally witnessed a "blackout" in Moscow and in the Moscow region on May 25, 2005. Who saw all this will not let them lie, how to live without electricity in a densely populated area .. ...
  • Shurik70
    Shurik70 5 May 2016 23: 15
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    Wunderwaffe does not exist


    This is so.
    Unfortunately.
    Zerg-rush attack beats any sophisticated complex.
    Launch several thousand cheap drones, hiding drone UAVs among them - and these UAVs will destroy the entire defense.
    The only hope is that the answers will be afraid. Will have time to answer.
    Because absolute protection against missile zerg rush does not exist.
    Luckily.
  • yehat
    yehat 6 May 2016 10: 36
    0
    problems and for their own purposes.
    if it’s cruise missiles with a speed of 0.7-2 Mach - this is one,
    and if it’s a ballistic missile warhead with a speed of 5+ max, this is completely different.
  • iConst
    iConst 5 May 2016 12: 30
    +7
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    If in the Russian Federation they link together the C-500 systems preparing for delivery to the troops with other types of air defense systems, then Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft
    I would have their confidence.

    - It's impossible?

    The future, of course, is network-centric systems.

    Of course, I am not a specialist in armaments, but some specialist in information technology.

    And in this context, it is not difficult to upgrade (expand) a specific software module with an additional interface - only material and time costs.
    In fact, you only need to include existing systems in a single information space.

    Theoretical amateurish reasoning (and the same question for specialists): if active detection stations are targets for anti-radar missiles, then the conclusion suggests itself: saturate with cheap, at the price of a simple loaf, autonomous sources of "illumination" that can be switched on according to a certain algorithm.

    Then the missiles do not stock up. And if you save yourself, you’ll be left without pants - there will simply not be enough money for other weapons. Even the Americans.
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 5 May 2016 13: 20
      +2
      Quote: iConst
      The future, of course, is network-centric systems.

      what Network-centric systems are not only a plus, but also minuses following this due to the danger of infection with the virus, the receipt by all of incorrect (thrown) information, etc. Will the deliberate failure of one system add up like domino figures?
      Regarding false goals - the idea is very robust, the main thing is to make the highlighting as close as possible to reality, but here you need to understand the main US strategy - to hit the infrastructure, in the event of a protracted war (if this continues after the exchange of nuclear power supplies) - they will beat the hospitals , reservoirs and power plants, their military strategy is built on the destruction of enemies not with their own hands (they will not be taken prisoner for sure), but epidemics and hunger are very powerful assistants in this.
      1. iConst
        iConst 5 May 2016 13: 49
        +6
        Quote: Corsair
        Network-centric systems are not only a plus, but also minuses following this due to the danger of infection with the virus, the receipt by all of incorrect (thrown) information, etc. Will the deliberate failure of one system add up like domino figures?

        Unreasonable fears. To run a virus (if at all possible - it’s not Windows there) you need to physically penetrate the unit of military equipment and use the handles to get to the processor unit.
        I don’t think that on military equipment there is a yuesby port for a flash drive laughing

        The data exchange protocol does not allow running anything other than the interface data format in the system - and these are the coordinates and a couple of dozen system statuses (I think so!), Since any mess is ignored.

        The network-centric is not a house of cards, but a web where the loss of one node, ten nodes, or any number of nodes will not interrupt the operation of the entire system.
        Efficiency will decrease, some specific functions will be chopped off - yes, but each module is self-sufficient. Of course, subject to an existing communication channel with the network.

        And therefore, the most vulnerable place is communication channels.


        Ext .: Other threats, such as bookmarks at the enterprise by a secret CIA spy, as in the centrifuge management software for Iran, we do not consider the traitors generals. This is not directly related to the reliability of network-centric systems.
        1. Corsair
          Corsair 6 May 2016 11: 51
          0
          Quote: iConst
          Efficiency will decrease, some specific functions will be chopped off - yes, but each module is self-sufficient.

          good Well, thank gods, if everything is so, the main thing is not to wait for commands from above and act on their own if something happens. So that it would not work out with Matthias Rust, when the tops could not be decided, the lower classes were waiting for the command from above.
    2. Foxmara
      Foxmara 5 May 2016 18: 02
      0
      Quote: iConst
      Satisfy cheap, at the price of a simple loaf, autonomous sources of "illumination", which can be switched on according to a certain algorithm.

      Yugoslavia. Microwaves
    3. Cer59
      Cer59 5 May 2016 21: 51
      0
      perfectly analyzed the situation. also add to your vision - any flying object at any speed causes disturbances in the atmosphere and also regardless of the height and speed of the disturbance in the electromagnetic field of the earth. Do not forget about heating the case. loaf triumphs ....
  • lopvlad
    lopvlad 5 May 2016 13: 04
    +5
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    I would have their confidence.


    network-centricity and separation is a concept of the development of not only Russian air defense but also the control system of our entire army.
    The entry into service of the S-500 will close a hole in the Russian air defense in the range of application altitudes between the S-400 and the expensive 53T6 Gazel missile missile defense system whose service life is already expiring.
    In essence, the S-500 will be the first mobile missile defense system in history (the S-400 is only an air defense system).
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 5 May 2016 16: 33
      +2
      Actually, the 53T6 production was resumed - new missiles will be included in the new Moscow missile defense system A 235.
  • ver_
    ver_ 5 May 2016 13: 17
    +4
    ..only one defense - a losing event .. defense must be combined with attack-
    like in boxing .. I believe that the development of space platforms has long been underway ..
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 5 May 2016 18: 15
      +2
      I believe that the development of space platforms has long been underway ..

      "space platforms" move along .. space orbits, like a tram on rails!
      And, for the Papuans they represent an unattainable level of military power, HOWEVER ...
      EVEN the Chinese (almost) learned how to intercept spaceИScreaming, at the same time, near-Earth outer space.
      Therefore, mobile "space platforms" located on mobile LAND, AIR, ABOVE / UNDERWATER carriers will be less vulnerable in the event of a "preventive disarming" strike "partners" ...
  • Petr1
    Petr1 5 May 2016 14: 55
    +1
    Comrade Romanov, I wish you could get a job in the White House, with your fears and doubts, the United States would never attack anyone, never !! laughing
  • gg.na
    gg.na 5 May 2016 15: 48
    +2
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    I would have their confidence.

    Yes, but it’s much better than nothing in the 90s! Well, there will be more developments more advanced than the s-500 !!!
  • MaksoMelan
    MaksoMelan 6 May 2016 07: 09
    0
    As far as I understand, a full coverage of the territory of the radar is created. I don’t know how this could be possible. But I heard that they want to do this. And on it you can direct any missile to any target. The resolution of ours at the beginning of 90 was better than that of the United States. Now I do not know.
  • kuz363
    kuz363 5 May 2016 12: 03
    +2
    Well, I set a minus, because it looks like hatred. First, the US Standard-3 missiles have almost the same characteristics. Secondly, any defense breaks through a simple increase in missiles by the attacking side or a change in the flight algorithm. If, for example, the number of US cruise missiles reaches 5-6 thousand, then who is stopping them, for example, to double their number? With their defense spending 10 times that of Russia, this is not a problem. When attacking, you can calculate the number of attacked missiles or warheads so that the S-500 does not have time to reload new missiles. So, you have to increase the number of launchers. But you can certainly say that it will be much more expensive than the cost of cruise missiles.
    1. Dmitry 2246
      Dmitry 2246 5 May 2016 12: 26
      +7
      In this case, the quantity does not go into quality since a huge number of missiles are compensated by nuclear weapons. That is the whole point.
    2. KazaK Bo
      KazaK Bo 5 May 2016 12: 26
      +29
      kuz363 (1)
      Well, I set a minus, because it looks like hatred

      You need to be an optimist! ... You posed legitimate questions! But they were also put before the creators of the air defense systems ... And ... believe me ... there is a lot that has been taken into account and something about which you ... because you are not involved in this topic ... until you know ...
      Well, the fact that they have 5-6 thousand KR ... Well, what? A primitive example is when you go hunting, you have a full bandolier of cartridges ... but this does not mean that you will immediately shoot 20 shots ... trunks, then you only have 2! So with the KR and BR! OUR PROBABLE OPPONENT IS NOT 5-6 thousand launchers ... which at one moment will launch in one direction ... And they will not be able to increase them 2 times! Launchers are not slingshots or trampolines! These are the most difficult units! All this is taken into account ... and is solved both due to the separation of the means of PKO, missile defense, air defense and electronic warfare ... and the variety of these means ... tactics of their use .. and also due to the use of missiles not only with a conventional charge ... but also with enhanced ...
      This topic is not for public discussion ... but BELIEVE ... a lot of options have been thought out for a possible strike by a probable enemy in our country ...
      1. Good_Taxist
        Good_Taxist 5 May 2016 12: 51
        +3
        Effective, sensible and SURE. You "+"!
      2. mav1971
        mav1971 5 May 2016 16: 49
        +4
        Quote: KazaK Bo

        Well, the fact that they have 5 - 6 thousand KR ... Well, and what? A primitive example - when you go hunting, you have a full bandolier of cartridges ... but this does not mean that you will immediately shoot 20 shots ... barrels, then you only have 2! So with the KR and BR! NO OUR PROBABLY OPPONENT 5 - 6 thousand launchers ... which at one moment will launch in one direction ...


        You wrote a lot, but did not take into account the most important thing - knowledge about someone else’s technique.
        The list of carriers with a total capacity of exactly Toporov.
        Elk - Xnumx Rockets.
        Nuts - 600 missiles.
        Sivulfs - 150 missiles.
        Virgi - 100 missiles.
        Berks - for the shock version of 60, PUs from 90 will be with axes - 3600 missiles.
        Ticks - for the shock version of 80, PUs from 120 will be with axes - 1600 missiles.

        There are also Angles with their own submarine as ax carriers. A hundred and a half.

        There are 60 B-52 bombers - this is a total of 1200 KR.

        As a result, our opponents have the fundamental ability to simultaneously hit at least 7700 missiles !!!

        Seven thousand seven hundred missiles at once!

        Teach materiel!
        1. Manitoo
          Manitoo 5 May 2016 18: 07
          +13
          Quote: mav1971
          Seven thousand seven hundred missiles at once!

          Do not say nonsense - you have counted everything in the limit and have added.
          According to the Burkes: they had a maximum load of 56 axes, and at the same time there can be no talk of any serious air defense, anti-aircraft defense, and even more so missile defense with such a load. About Tiki, everything is the same - a maximum of a dozen 2 ships will be fully loaded, and the rest will go in the standard (8 axes for arli and 26 for tiki). We also do not forget that there are problems with a salvo launch - something I don’t remember that mattress mats in one salvo from 1 ship would shoot more than 16 axes. And do not forget that for a massive salvo it is necessary to approach at a distance of less than 2000 km to the target on the territory of the Russian Federation, and this is 62 arli + 27 tiki - while exposing your borders and leaving aircraft carriers without escort. About 60 B2 simultaneously lifted into the air, I generally keep quiet. Very "fast" and "inconspicuous" operation will be.
          As for the loading of submarines - the same garbage, Ohio has 22 launchers with 7 axes in each - I somehow strongly doubt that it will withstand a simultaneous salvo of all 154 missiles, and in total there are 4 boats. As a result, we have 1500-2000 missiles, which will shoot down not with the S-500, but with the Mig31 (for this sharpened), beeches, tori, armor and the same C300 of which there are a lot. And there will be enough anti-aircraft missiles - even the S400 already has 200 launchers with 4 loaded missiles in each, and the S-300 has about 650 divisions of 4-8 launchers in each, and the launcher has 4 missiles)) - and this is just a "long arm".
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 5 May 2016 19: 55
            +7
            Quote: Manitoo
            Do not say nonsense - you have counted everything in the limit and have added.
            According to Burke: they had a maximum load of 56 axes and at the same time there was no question of any serious air defense, anti-aircraft defense, and even more so missile defense. About Tiki, everything is the same - a maximum of a dozen 2 ships will be fully loaded, and the rest will go in the standard (8 axes for arly and 26 for tiki). We still don’t forget that there are problems with salvo launch - I don’t remember something for more than 1 axes to bullet mattresses in one gulp from 16 ship. And do not forget that for a mass volley it is necessary to approach a distance of less than 2000 km to a target on the territory of the Russian Federation, which is 62 arly + 27 ticks - while exposing your borders and leave aircraft carriers without escort. About 60 B2 simultaneously lifted into the air, I generally keep quiet. It will be a very "fast" and "inconspicuous" operation.
            As for the loading of submarines - the same garbage, Ohio has 22 launchers with 7 axes in each - I somehow strongly doubt that it will withstand a simultaneous salvo of all 154 missiles, and in total there are 4 boats. As a result, we have 1500-2000 missiles, which will shoot down not with the S-500, but with the Mig31 (for this sharpened), beeches, tori, armor and the same C300 of which there are a lot. And there will be enough anti-aircraft missiles - even the S400 already has 200 launchers with 4 loaded missiles in each, and the S-300 has about 650 divisions of 4-8 launchers in each, and the launcher has 4 missiles)) - and this is just a "long arm".

            Moreover, even if all Tics, Arly and other carriers expose the coast of the United States, the mattresses in fact lose most of their missile defense. And with our answer, mainland North America, from our salvo! 10 years so turn into a lunar surface. If you don’t go under water at all.
            1. aikon1974
              aikon1974 5 May 2016 21: 00
              +2
              There will be a strait named after I.V. Stalin. bully
          2. aikon1974
            aikon1974 5 May 2016 20: 57
            0
            God bless your words. good
          3. mav1971
            mav1971 5 May 2016 21: 07
            +4
            Quote: Manitoo
            Quote: mav1971
            Seven thousand seven hundred missiles at once!

            Do not say nonsense - you have counted everything in the limit and have added.


            Do not carry nonsense ...

            Initially, I replied to an illiterate person who screamed
            NO OUR PROBABLY OPPONENT 5 - 6 thousand launchers
            .

            They are and there are many more.
            That's why UVP, in order to be able to have as many needed missiles as is needed for the task. Here we do not take into account peacetime with 15-20 Axes on board. Potentially, the calculation may be 30% more than even I indicated. as a shock option. But this potential is given to air defense and missile defense missiles. For the distance of 500 miles from the coast for air defense they will be enough, due to the insufficient number of our naval anti-ship aircraft.

            And further. The aircraft carriers will go with the Berks - They provide AWACS and air defense. Do not be silly and leave them in the form of lonely barges hanging out like rafts in the ocean.

            About volley.
            You apparently do not know at all that modern tactics are calculating (not just massive, but monstrous amounts) the use of missile simulators like MALD. You know a dangerous thing.
            In addition to imitating the RC, whether the aircraft, it also opens all air defense systems (both ground and airborne) and manages to transmit all the coordinates of the revealed "far, far".
            With air defense tactics - 2 missiles at the 1 target, almost the entire ammunition will be released on simulators.
            In the meantime, reload ... and not the fact that they will have time, because it is not fools who calculate the coordination of attacks on targets.
            Therefore, All potential and real coordinates of the Air Defense Objects will simply be strewn with axes.

            Mig-31 - against the Kyrgyz Republic - fetish and filkin diploma.
            A maximum of one, well, the edge - he will be able to bring down two missiles.
            This has already been discussed and clarified more than a dozen times.

            In the same Iraq, the object PVO showed near-zero results against the Kyrgyz Republic.
            Almost everything was lost either by MANPADS or by barrel artillery.
            And only because they were sitting on the reference points, of which there were few in the desert, well, it’s difficult there with orientation.
            There are no deserts on our theater. The terrain profile allows you to have reference points anywhere.
            The detection of RS flying at an altitude of 30-60 meters with the relief envelope in the horizon and altitude, taking into account the shading zones (and they are already known to everyone) is an extremely difficult task.
            And only the AWACS plane comes to the rescue. He perfectly sees from the height of the Kyrgyz Republic, if they are not subtle. hardly noticeable either. but alas. from a shorter distance.
            And it seems to be the solution, but.
            The absence of the Link-16 system in our country does not allow us to automatically control the launch and guidance of missiles of different complexes from the aircraft, without the participation of the guidance and control systems of these complexes themselves. I really hope. that ours will still come up with a full-fledged analogue. and not what is called the "R-999" system, which supposedly can do something.
            Everything written about the Kyrgyz Republic is not about tomahawks, it’s the same about our Caliber.
            One thing is bad. we have few of them. Very little. Hundreds not even.
            And there are no similar simulators in the amount of several thousand. not heard and not visible even in layouts. I believe. that work is going on, for a terribly useful thing.
        2. mvg
          mvg 5 May 2016 23: 38
          +1
          Plus, but this, as Athos said, is too little and too much ..
          A lot - because NEVER there is 100% combat readiness, neither in the submarines (Los Angeles, Ohio, Wulfs, Virginia, it never happens that everything is in order), nor in the B-52 air force (B-1V, B-2 50 -60% of the total number of summers suitable), as well as OrlyBerki and Tikanderogs and the Little British Vanguards .. And if all possible carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic reach the launch line, then GOD himself ordered a preventive strike ..
          And it is not enough that you did not consider such soyuznikoff as Japan, France, Germany, Turkey, Israel, Australia, Sweden, Norway, Italy and hedgehog with them .. Each named country has its own means of delivery .. Not much worse than AGM \ BGM \ RGM-109 of various letters .. The same Jewish variants from RAPHAL
    3. Grenader
      Grenader 5 May 2016 12: 35
      +7
      Quote: kuz363
      Well, I set a minus, because it looks like hatred.

      You should pay attention to which edition of this article is published. The National Interest is an American analytical magazine, so there is likely to be intimidation of its own layman to increase military spending.
    4. umah
      umah 5 May 2016 12: 36
      +6
      US Standard-3 missiles have virtually the same characteristics

      And not at all the same! The SM-3 is designed to intercept ballistic missiles in the upper part of the flight and has a kinetic damaging element (blank), and we have all the anti-ballistic interceptors (from C-300В to C-500) focused on interception in the final flight section and use a fragmentation cloud .
      Interception at the initial and final stages of flight is a huge difference in speeds and overloads of maneuvering.
      In an attack, you can calculate the number of attacked missiles or warheads so that the C-500 does not have time to reload new missiles. So, you have to increase the number of launchers. But you can certainly say that it will be much more expensive than the cost of cruise missiles.

      C-500 is created to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles; to intercept cruise missiles, we have medium and small radius complexes. No need to interfere in one pile.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 5 May 2016 20: 05
        +1
        Quote: umah
        C-500 is created to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles; to intercept cruise missiles, we have medium and small radius complexes. No need to interfere in one pile.

        The main objective of the S-500 complex is to control near space, and then intercept ICBMs and their warheads.
        At the same time, everyone is interested in the topic of so-called contactless air defense systems based on electronic warfare systems. And if sclerosis doesn’t fail me, there was such an infa about the development of such systems in our country. interception, and radio waves, jamming and destroying electronic systems of rockets and satellites.
    5. Samoyed
      Samoyed 5 May 2016 13: 17
      0
      So they will concentrate over, for this time - a gap on the decision.
    6. lopvlad
      lopvlad 5 May 2016 13: 30
      +2
      Quote: kuz363
      First, the US Standard-3 missiles have almost the same characteristics.


      the maximum speed of the SM-3 2700 rocket is m / s (2.7km per second and the C-500 rocket will be capable of shooting down targets flying at speeds up to 7km per second.
      The speed of 2.7 km / s and 7 km / s are clearly not "almost the same characteristics".

      Quote: kuz363
      If, for example, the number of US cruise missiles reaches 5-6 thousand, then who is stopping them, for example, to double their number?


      US cruise missiles do not fly in space but fly in airspace where instead of the S-500, air defense systems (Buk-M2 (3), S-300, S-350, S-400, Shell-S1, Tor-M1 will successfully deal with them (2)).
      1. mav1971
        mav1971 5 May 2016 16: 52
        +4
        Quote: lopvlad


        the maximum speed of the SM-3 2700 rocket is m / s (2.7km per second and the C-500 rocket will be capable of shooting down targets flying at speeds up to 7km per second.
        The speed of 2.7 km / s and 7 km / s are clearly not "almost the same characteristics".


        You knowingly wrote such a heresy?
        You have attributed the speed of a ballistic missile to the C-500. Don't you think that this is beyond good and evil?
    7. Achilles
      Achilles 5 May 2016 13: 31
      +6
      If, for example, the number of US cruise missiles reaches 5-6 thousand, then who is stopping them, for example, to double their number?


      To launch such a quantity of cruise missiles, it is necessary that a large number of military equipment accumulate near our borders (ships, submarines, airplanes), and of course we will notice them (and bring the armed forces to full combat readiness), and what do you think someone will simply allow them to release all these rockets as soon as they move along them an answer will be issued, which means they will think a hundred times before doing so, they just don’t have enough darling, they want to live
      When attacking, you can calculate the number of attacked missiles or warheads so that the S-500 does not have time to reload new missiles.

      The S-500 will most likely only work against ballistic missiles, and the rest of the small cruise missiles and planes will work on them our other systems (shell, BukM2, S-300 (against aircraft), maybe S-400)
      But do not you think that they also need to recharge (if we are talking about cruise missiles). And what was released by us will be immediately for direction finding and subsequently destroyed.
      You write such a scuffle here that in order to go to such a thing you must first of all be prepared to be destroyed yourself, and they are most afraid of this. In any case, with a mess, they will be destroyed, regardless of the number of missiles they have, and they understand this and will not go for it.
  • Homo
    Homo 5 May 2016 13: 07
    -1
    Quote: andre
    And what kind of liberals are minus such important news?

    Like who! And the all-proslavers, it’s all gone, the West is getting better, the USA is the world leader. These will always remain with their opinion.
  • gispanec
    gispanec 5 May 2016 13: 34
    -3
    Quote: andre
    And what kind of liberals are minus such important news?

    and where did they see the news ?? fool a wishlist was posted here and no more .... this is not news but dreams ... well, we don’t have a c500 ... no, but there is wishful thinking, we can assume that the first prototype may appear in 2020 ..... and they will learn it in the field for another year or two ... we must face it ...
  • gg.na
    gg.na 5 May 2016 15: 45
    -4
    Yes there are noobs here! And they do everything in Tihari!
  • Backfire
    Backfire 5 May 2016 16: 05
    0
    Not paying attention to them is all!
  • although
    although 5 May 2016 19: 38
    +2
    the first post said much more, check how many S-400s we have in service before hooting over this bravado. And what for the Yankees are struggling to create missile defense, so many years, and we bang! and done ...
    Quote: c-Petrov
    Yes. You can then spank directly on Washington and not take a steam bath
    my hat now covers the white house. Hooray comrades!
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 5 May 2016 19: 58
    +1
    Quote: andre
    And what kind of liberals are minus such important news?

    Maybe not "liberasts", but sensible people? The total length of the borders of the Russian Federation is 60 km. The title of the article states - "with the adoption of the S-932, the sky over Russia will become practically invulnerable." The question is - how many systems need to be put on constant alert for this statement to become reality?
  • dima mzk
    dima mzk 7 May 2016 03: 15
    0
    guess! and by the way there are more than you think
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 5 May 2016 14: 24
    0
    Quote: cniza
    Nobody needs war in Russia, but if we warned you ...

    We are peaceful people, but our armored train stands on a siding! yes
  • Butchcassidy
    Butchcassidy 6 May 2016 07: 55
    +1
    It's old Dave Majumdar that burns like always. This is a common story - "these terrible Ryusians again created a wunderwaffen, ui niid mooo mani fo Pentagon ..."))
  • vodolaz
    vodolaz 5 May 2016 10: 56
    +4
    Interestingly, we are developing very strong defensive weapons, and mattresses and henchmen are all howling that we are moving closer to the borders of NATO.
    1. mihasik
      mihasik 5 May 2016 11: 51
      +7
      Quote: vodolaz
      Interestingly, we are developing very strong defensive weapons, and mattresses and henchmen are all howling that we are moving closer to the borders of NATO.

      Russia is like a magnet, everyone is attracted). By this standing, we are approaching the borders of NATO).
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Vend
    Vend 5 May 2016 11: 03
    0
    If in the Russian Federation they link together the C-500 systems preparing for delivery to the troops with other types of air defense systems, then Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft
    But without such advice, you wouldn’t have thought of it yourself. laughing
  • vlad66
    vlad66 5 May 2016 11: 03
    +23
    “Some examples of these new systems are so perfect that many US military leaders fear that even invisible planes such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them.”

    Well, yes, yes, yes, we have seen these "invisibles" for a long time. yes
    1. CORNET
      CORNET 5 May 2016 11: 24
      +10
      At the same time, “the US military is surprised by the fact that Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union managed not only to maintain the combat capabilities of air defense elements, but also to improve them

      This is Russia Karl ..! Not everything is measured in money with us ..
      When there was collapse and robbery in the country, many design scientists were actually starving, but they did not sell their designs (they kept them in the table, believing that the time would come when the Motherland would call them again) And they waited .... We are now seeing the result!
      And how many wonderful surprises the spirit of enlightenment prepares for us (our military-industrial complex ..)))) and Putin is the son of difficult mistakes, and so on. hi
    2. Andrey K
      Andrey K 5 May 2016 11: 55
      +7
      Well, yes, this is the same invisibility that the Serbs apologized for - they did not know that the F-117 was invisible laughing
      And they shot down an old, Soviet, SAM S-125 "Neva" ... good
  • NEXUS
    NEXUS 5 May 2016 11: 58
    +1
    Quote: s-t Petrov

    Yakov Kedmi:

    Any war against Russia will be on American territory

    any gamble against Russia will result in a blow not to American satellites that have proliferated along the Russian borders, but to the United States itself and its facilities around the world. The States will no longer be able to hide behind a "shirmochka" from the "allies" - the Russians will beat the "headquarters"

    Absolutely for sure. At the same time, the development of the new Sarmat ICBM to replace the VOEVODE looks very interesting. And any missile defense is not an obstacle at all.
  • Kibalchish
    Kibalchish 5 May 2016 14: 19
    0
    Comrades, if this information is at least half true, then this is sooo good! When our whole sky will be under reliable protection, then it will be possible to deal closely with the elimination of enemies within the country, without fear of external ones.
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 5 May 2016 14: 21
    -1
    “Some samples of these new systems are so perfect that many American commanders fear that even such invisible airplanes as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them,” the newspaper notes.

    Well, finally it began to reach. This is already good. Will not rock less! good
    1. GSH-18
      GSH-18 5 May 2016 23: 09
      -1
      Quote: GSH-18
      Rock the boat less not will be! good

      "not" accidentally bubbled, I'm sorry. Read without "not" yes
  • GSH-18
    GSH-18 5 May 2016 14: 29
    0
    The article is great! +++! Already the mood has risen good
  • Foxmara
    Foxmara 5 May 2016 17: 29
    0
    Well, why? Screens will also leave a trifle.
  • soroKING
    soroKING 5 May 2016 10: 51
    +7
    Duc like their invisibility has long been visible negative
    1. Corporal Valera
      Corporal Valera 5 May 2016 11: 01
      +10
      Quote: soroKING
      Duc like their invisibility has long been visible

      I remember about 10 years ago I read a book about our volunteers in Yugoslavia. The book, of course, is fiction, but I liked one point: the negotiations of the SU-27 pilots.
      - Oh, and what is it on our radar?
      - Yes, this is Amersky V-2.
      - Ah! Well let them fly. They still think that they are invisible.
      Not literally, but somehow it was laughing
      1. Leto
        Leto 5 May 2016 12: 02
        +2
        Quote: Corporal Valera
        Not literally, but somehow it was

        What does fiction have to do with reality? Or do you believe everything written as a child?
        1. Corporal Valera
          Corporal Valera 5 May 2016 14: 00
          0
          Quote: Leto
          What does fiction have to do with reality? Or do you believe everything written as a child?

          Oh, don't be smart. What does the National Interest's analytic efforts have to do with reality?
    2. DMB_95
      DMB_95 5 May 2016 11: 05
      +2
      Quote: soroKING
      Duc like their invisibility has long been visible negative

      Even in Yugoslavia, Soviet missiles felled them. And the S-500 ... S-400 plus S-300 is already quite a shitty option for aircraft and cruise missiles.
      1. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 5 May 2016 11: 48
        0
        Interestingly, Americans really believe in the invisibility of these "miracle" planes ... ??? laughing
    3. kotvov
      kotvov 5 May 2016 11: 41
      0
      Duc like their invisibility has long been visible,
      so let them continue to think that they are invisible. like children, they closed their eyes and think that they are invisible.
    4. GSH-18
      GSH-18 5 May 2016 14: 36
      +1
      Quote: soroKING
      Duc like their invisibility has long been visible negative

      They are visible, but this is a matter of distance. No one canceled the EPR parameter. That's why we will also have T-50 stealth in units.
  • brodyaga
    brodyaga 5 May 2016 10: 51
    -3
    Already underpants get dirty.
  • iliya87
    iliya87 5 May 2016 10: 53
    +4
    No need to slap anyone. It’s just one more argument in the piggy bank about a guaranteed retaliatory strike if necessary. Which of course warms the soul.
  • guzik007
    guzik007 5 May 2016 10: 54
    -1
    it turns out that for complete safety, about 100 of these complexes are needed. For the money, it seems, pull.
    1. Tibidokh
      Tibidokh 5 May 2016 11: 58
      +1
      Kindly, the detail of your calculations. hi
      I'd like to know how you established the need for 100 complexes?
      How many TPU 77P6 and 51P6M in the complex?
      What is the cost of the complex?

      Sorry for the importunity, but it is completely unclear to me how you calculated. An example is even suitable for the Sverdlovsk region. what
      1. guzik007
        guzik007 5 May 2016 12: 47
        0
        Kindly, the detail of your calculations.
        ----------------------------------------------
        Could themselves calculate, without cons. One complex can hit up to 10 ballistic missiles. In the arsenal of the potential adversary there is something about 3000 ballistic. Considering that not all complexes will work equally successfully. That’s how it turns out with a small margin. True on paper. Not considering the ravines: =)
        Yes, by the way, maybe you thought that they would work on aviation. I doubt very much that there are s-300 and s-400 for this. And the S-500 was initially positioned, at least in the press, as a factor in the defeat of ballistic targets. And about the cost, I think a little more expensive than earlier versions. And they have already riveted be healthy. Both for export and for yourself. By the way, their cost is available in the open press. For example, in contracts with Iran.
        1. Tibidokh
          Tibidokh 5 May 2016 13: 55
          +1
          Quote: guzik007
          Could themselves calculate

          I think that there are too many unknowns in this task. Therefore, I turned to you.
          Quote: guzik007
          without cons

          I haven’t set any minuses or pluses. This is the evaluation of members of the forum.
          Quote: guzik007
          One complex can hit up to 10 ballistic missiles

          That's why I asked how many anti-ballistic missiles will be in one complex, because, in addition to ballistic, the S-500 will be able to shoot down aircraft and UAVs, acting as the first echelon of air defense. This is evidenced not only by the presence of 76T6 and 77T6 radars, but also by 91N6AM. In addition, the absence of short- and medium-range missiles was announced. But so far I have not come across an unequivocal statement about the presence / absence of missiles similar to 9M96D.
          Quote: guzik007
          about the cost

          About the cost. To calculate it, you need to know how much the country needs divisions and how many PUs are included in one division. Now it’s not even exactly stated how many missiles are in one launcher.
          Quote: guzik007
          One complex can hit up to 10 ballistic missiles. The arsenal of the potential adversary is something around 3000 ballistic

          Here it is completely incomprehensible to me. You declare the need for 100 complexes.
          We multiply 100 complexes by "10 ballistic missiles", we get ... not 3000 at all.

          In general, it seems to me that your calculations are far from true. Although, perhaps with the amount you can trite guess.
          Once again, I ask for your pickiness, Regards. hi
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 5 May 2016 20: 37
          0
          Quote: guzik007
          Could themselves calculate, without cons. One complex can hit up to 10 ballistic missiles. In the arsenal of the potential adversary there is something about 3000 ballistic. Considering that not all complexes will work equally successfully. That’s how it turns out with a small margin.

          You do not take the territory of our country and the length of borders into account? request
        3. atalef
          atalef 5 May 2016 20: 41
          0
          Quote: guzik007
          . One complex can hit up to 10 ballistic missiles. In the arsenal of the potential adversary there is something about 3000 ballistic. Considering that not all complexes will work equally successfully. That’s how it turns out with a small margin. True on paper. Not considering the ravines: =)
          Yes, by the way, maybe you thought that they would work on aviation. I doubt very much that there are s-300 and s-400 for this. And the s-500 was initially positioned, at least in the press, as a factor in the defeat of ballistic targets.

          Well, if everything is so simple, the question is backfill.
          Why is Russia so worried about the development of the Amer ABM, and I have not yet seen a single excited article (Amerov) about the s-500?
          And why America was the first to denounce the ABO treaty. giving Russia the opportunity to develop with -500?
          1. Tibidokh
            Tibidokh 6 May 2016 15: 33
            0
            Quote: atalef
            And why America was the first to denounce the ABO treaty. giving Russia the opportunity to develop with -500?

            America denounced the treaty not at all because it would give "Russia the opportunity to develop from -500."
            America denounced the contract after completion of design work on the SM-3. Immediately in 2001, she tested.
            Quote: atalef
            tricky question.

            Oh, I feel sleepy yourself, dear Atalef, with this question ...
            Quote: atalef
            but I have not yet seen a single excited article (Amerovskaya) about the s-500

            Well, they fell asleep ...
            You have not read the article, only comments ?! wink
            National Interest is not an "Amerov" article anymore?
            Or once not ...
            With respect!
            1. atalef
              atalef 6 May 2016 15: 41
              0
              Quote: Tibidokh
              You have not read the article, only comments ?!
              National Interest is not an "Amerov" article anymore?
              Or once not ...
              With respect!

              I like when they bring
              writes The National Interest. The article is quoted by RIA Novosti.

              without the most elementary reference to the original, or at least the original title of the article.
              To date, neither you nor I know whether this article was printed, and even more so - about which it was generally mentioned.
              Therefore - do not stumble. wink
              1. Tibidokh
                Tibidokh 6 May 2016 18: 21
                0
                Quote: atalef
                I like when they bring

                Dear Atalef, do not look away.
                Here is the link:
                http://national+interest.org/blog/russias-deadly-s-500-air-defense-system-ready-
                war-660000-16028
                Plus remove in the address bar.

                And here about concerns. bully
                Indeed, some of these new weapons — like the S-500 — are so capable that many US defense official worry that even stealth warplanes like the F-22, F-35 and the B-2 might have problems overcoming them.
                hi
            2. atalef
              atalef 6 May 2016 19: 02
              +1
              Quote: Tibidokh
              Dear Atalef, do not look away.
              Here is the link:
              http://national+interest.org/blog/russias-deadly-s-500-air-defense-system-ready-

              war-660000-16028
              Plus remove in the address bar.

              Thank you so much for the link, this is the first article, but as I said, the title of the article on VO has nothing to do with the content of the article
              Russians are expected to network S-500s with their S-400, S-300VM4 and S-350 and other weapons as part of a common integrated air defense network. As one US industry representative noted, while the Russian military-industrial sector was badly damaged after the collapse of the Soviet Union, somehow Moscow managed to continue developing an advanced air defense system without much impairment. In fact, some of these new weapons like the S-500 are so much so that many are capable of US Department of Defense spokesman worries that even stealth military aircraft such as the F-22, F-35, and B-2 may have trouble overcoming them.

              Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for The National Interest.

              In general, this is a summary of the last paragraph.
              The article does not say about invulnerability and the impossibility of overcoming.
              therefore I say, the link to the original clarifies a lot.
              As indicated in the article.
              If you see any panic in the text? Me not.
              Where in the original something like that in the article on VO
              If in the Russian Federation they link together the C-500 systems preparing for delivery to the troops with other types of air defense systems, then Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft, writes The National Interest. The article leads RIA Novosti

              here is the answer why there is no link
              Thank you again, you have clarified a lot and confirmed my doubts.
              1. Tibidokh
                Tibidokh 6 May 2016 19: 56
                0
                You are engaged in crocheting, perhaps even unconsciously. I suppose that the fault was initially a biased negative attitude towards RIA Novosti.
                You smoothly moved from "worried article" to "panic". Although no one but you talked about panic. Well, with the exception of individual patriots, whose opinion I propose not to consider. They have a "bias-negative attitude" towards everything that is not URYA.
                I repeat, there is no mention of panic. The US Defense Ministry is concerned that the sky of Russia MAY (so far everything is being tested, it’s from the T-50 discharge cooler than the Raptor) be reliably protected.

                Russians are expected to network S-500s with their S-400, S-300VM4 and S-350 and other weapons as part of a common integrated air defense network

                Quote: IN
                If in Russia the S-500 systems preparing for deliveries to troops are connected together with other types of air defense systems

                Then the RIA did not lie.
                In fact, some of these new weapons like the S-500 are so much so that many are able to spy on the US Department of Defense that even stealth military aircraft such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 may have problems with overcoming them.

                Quote: IN
                Russian airspace will become completely invulnerable to enemy aircraft

                Well, here I probably agree that RIA could not refrain from twisting it a little. It seems to me that the mention in the article of the "unparalleled" F-22, F-35 and B-2 automatically for a journalist from RIA Novosti means that our future "unparalleled" S-500 will be able to knock down anything, even the dollar rate. fellow
                Quote: atalef
                Thank you again

                What a blatant sarcasm. laughing
                Quote: atalef
                You have clarified a lot and confirmed my doubts.

                This phrase spoils the whole impression of your investigation.
                Now I think that you found fault with the innocent lies of RIA Novosti in order to defame anything there ... am
                But in fact, an article in which the Americans expressed concern about the creation of the S-500 saw? Saw! That's what I found fault with!
      2. Bayonet
        Bayonet 5 May 2016 20: 35
        +1
        Quote: Tibidokh
        I'd like to know how you established the need for 100 complexes?

        smile
        1. Tibidokh
          Tibidokh 6 May 2016 15: 34
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          How much do you need for complete happiness?

          Hundreds of millions.
  • Cossack Ermak
    Cossack Ermak 5 May 2016 10: 54
    0
    Uninformative article. In principle, it’s hard to call it an article. Everything was chewed three hundred times. Author minus
    1. kotvov
      kotvov 5 May 2016 11: 44
      +2
      Uninformative article. In principle, it’s hard to call it an article. Everything was chewed three hundred times. To the author minus ,,
      Of course, you need all the characteristics, quantity, locations to be laid out. Then you would deign to put a plus.
  • kebeskin
    kebeskin 5 May 2016 10: 56
    0
    I wonder how the complex will cope with hypersonic ballistic targets.
    1. dmi.pris
      dmi.pris 5 May 2016 11: 09
      -1
      It is extremely difficult to intercept anything on hypersound. The missile will not catch up with this target, it needs a sophisticated automated control system, and the corresponding missile with great accuracy to hit the object. The interceptor missile launches at the meeting point, calculated by a powerful computer. Undermining the rocket and creating a cloud of fragments near they don’t help, they need a lot of kinetic energy.
      Quote: kebeskin
      I wonder how the complex will cope with hypersonic ballistic targets.
      1. Muvka
        Muvka 5 May 2016 12: 10
        -1
        As far as I know, American missile warheads do not maneuver, so they are more accurate than ours. And to shoot down a direct target is not so difficult. It’s hard to detect.
  • Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 5 May 2016 10: 56
    +1
    "F-22 and F-35 will face problems" clowns! After the first downed Raptor, you won't get close to the Russian air defense zone, if you can move away from the psychologist at all.
    1. 4ekist
      4ekist 5 May 2016 11: 15
      +4
      "Raptors" at the beginning of hostilities and will not fly. Rather, at first, massive attacks by cruise missiles at extremely low altitudes, and of course ICBMs, will be used against particularly important facilities and infrastructure. This is where the new air defense systems come in handy. And the picture for the article is not relevant for a long time, this is something from the 60-70s. last century.
      1. DMB_95
        DMB_95 5 May 2016 11: 44
        +6
        Quote: 4ekist
        "Raptors" at the beginning of hostilities and will not fly. Rather, at first, massive attacks by cruise missiles at extremely low altitudes, and of course ICBMs, will be used against especially important facilities and infrastructure. This is where the new air defense systems come in handy.

        When ICBMs are launched, the aircraft will no longer be relevant.
      2. alicante11
        alicante11 5 May 2016 13: 12
        0
        Rather, mass cruise missile strikes at extremely low altitudes will first be applied.


        KR intercepted by all possible means of air defense. Therefore, a strike by the Kyrgyz Republic without coordinating it with the complex actions of aviation will be a waste of missiles, and, therefore, money. Even in Yugoslavia there weren’t enough axes alone (and the Yankees didn’t count on this), they had to deal the main strike with aviation. As for our air defense, there is nothing to say, the axes will be met by everyone, from fighters and interceptors to all types of air defense systems at different stages of the flight. It is also quite possible to detect a launch; missile attack warning stations are present.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 5 May 2016 16: 36
      +1
      And they are close to fly up and do not need to - they have AGM-158 JASSM cruise missiles with a launch range of 900 kilometers.
  • RUSIVAN
    RUSIVAN 5 May 2016 10: 57
    0
    “Some examples of these new systems are so perfect that many US military leaders fear that even invisible planes such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them.”
    I just have a question, in the specifications of the S-400 it is already indicated as a confrontation with such "invisible" planes, I don't understand that the C 400 is capable of shooting them down or not, as it sounds ambiguous (my personal opinion)
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 5 May 2016 13: 15
      0
      I just have a question, in the specifications of the S-400 it is already indicated as a confrontation with such "invisible" planes, I don't understand that the C 400 is capable of shooting them down or not, as it sounds ambiguous (my personal opinion)


      There are no invisible aircraft. The question is in the direction from which it is irradiated and the distance. Therefore, the question you posed incorrectly. It is better to ask at what distance the C-400 and C-500 will be able to detect stealth, whether it will be outside the range of the charms or not.
      1. Tibidokh
        Tibidokh 5 May 2016 16: 27
        +1
        Quote: alicante11
        It is better to ask at what distance the S-400 and S-500 can detect stealth, whether it will be outside the range of the charms or not.

        I apologize hi , but neither the F-22 nor the F-35 "Harm" fits in size.
        The most long-range that is (or rather, just planned) in service with the Stels MFI is the AGM-158A JASSM with a range of 360 km. Here it is necessary to take into account that, firstly, guidance is not on a passive RPGS, but on GPS \ infrared seeker, and secondly, such a range is possible only with a rather high missile flight path.
        But the B-1 and B-2 can already launch those with 980 km. This is the AGM-158B JASSM-ER.
  • 1536
    1536 5 May 2016 10: 57
    +2
    And what, is there information when the F-22 will begin to overcome our air defense?
  • Aleksander
    Aleksander 5 May 2016 10: 57
    0
    This will allow C-500 to hit enemy ballistic missiles approaching at 640 distance kilometers "

    And this is wonderful, you can shoot them down then ABOVE Europe, less consumption of its ballistic will .... yes
    1. cergey51046
      cergey51046 5 May 2016 11: 58
      -1
      It is necessary to use electronic warfare, to blame target designation, then their own missiles are not necessary.
  • RUSIVAN
    RUSIVAN 5 May 2016 11: 00
    +2
    NI: with the adoption of the C-500, the sky over Russia will become almost invulnerable
    And it (sky) is now VULNERABLE ???
    1. Dimon19661
      Dimon19661 5 May 2016 11: 13
      +3
      The Russian Federation is not completely covered, in the Far East and the North there are many open zones, which is why MIG-31 flights over the northern territories have been resumed.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 5 May 2016 13: 18
        0
        The Russian Federation is not completely covered, in the Far East and the North there are many open zones, which is why MIG-31 flights over the northern territories have been resumed.


        Most likely, all important targets of possible air strikes have been covered recently. And "holes" are where there is nothing strategically important. Of course, you can use them to go to the rear, but will there be enough range for amers to bypass the air defenses through "holes"?
    2. cergey51046
      cergey51046 5 May 2016 11: 57
      +1
      Still vulnerable.
  • godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 5 May 2016 11: 03
    0
    completely invulnerable ?? this is a joke?
    1. Dym71
      Dym71 5 May 2016 11: 25
      +2
      Quote: godofwar6699
      completely invulnerable ?? this is a joke?


      And you ask your friends whether this is a joke or not, here’s the original article: - http://nationalinterest.org/blog/russias-deadly-s-500-air-defense-system-ready-w
      ar-660000-16028
      There is still a heated discussion of US taxpayers laughing
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 5 May 2016 11: 05
    +1
    Well, again, the sadness of the parDnerov formed. Urgently need to print greens to create new invisible super-fast nuclear-neutron-hydrogen pipelines, otherwise the Russians are completely brown, but I don’t respect the very democracy in the world. laughing
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 5 May 2016 11: 08
    +3
    will allow the S-500 to hit the approaching ballistic missiles of the enemy at a distance of 640 kilometers

    In this case, it is time for NATO to create a detachment of "kamikaze" ready to fly with a one-way ticket. And dumb Europe believes that NATO (primarily the United States) will protect it. First of all, they create additional problems for Europe and expose it to attack. If you have a great desire to destroy your countries, then continue in the same spirit.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 5 May 2016 11: 43
      0
      The kamikaze detachment was created a long time ago - a KR of the "Tomogavk" type and there is a standard for breaking through our air defense, but the standard is rather conditional. it does not imply that we will drown and shoot down missile carriers and destroy airfields and communications. And if you just need to break through the defenses of the S-300-400-500, then this is a matter of mathematics and the number of missiles and interference.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 5 May 2016 11: 11
    0
    For non-military:
    Aircraft made using the STELS technology are clearly visible to early warning stations operating in the range of meter and decimeter waves. The problems are experienced by firing stations, which use a centimeter section of the range (about 3 cm) for guidance. It is minimal in this range of Stealth aircraft EPR take into account the difference of EPR in different projections. The minimum will be the front hemisphere.
  • Shick
    Shick 5 May 2016 11: 11
    +1
    Quote: vlad66
    “Some examples of these new systems are so perfect that many US military leaders fear that even invisible planes such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them.”

    Well, yes, yes, yes, we have seen these "invisibles" for a long time. yes

    especially we see (we did not support the Serbs at that time if that)
    long-withered theme
    this plane was waiting on the route ahead of time knowing that it would fly
  • 33 Watcher
    33 Watcher 5 May 2016 11: 15
    +1
    "the sky over Russia will become practically invulnerable"
    So, do not meddle.
  • iliitchitch
    iliitchitch 5 May 2016 11: 19
    +2
    F-22,35 and b-2, which joined them, are so muddy and secret muffler that they are involuntarily tormented by vague doubts: and the king, for an hour, is not naked, eh?
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 5 May 2016 11: 19
    +5
    The main difference between the S-500 and Aegis is that the S-500 is designed to defeat BR in the final part of the trajectory, and Aegis in the initial one. Those. we do not need to place the S-500 at the borders of the USA, England, France and China.
    But there is a threat of explosion of warheads in case of defeat at an altitude of 200-300 km in space above our territory. The fight against missiles of the Tomogavk type will be easier due to the creation of a network between air defense systems and radars, but difficulties remain. For example, in the United States, after the appearance of large numbers of CDs with nuclear warheads, we are creating complexes with radars on balloons. But it’s easier for them, because their border is the ocean, and in our case, the entire southern border is continuous mountains. Therefore, you need to master balloons and place them along the border and include in the network of a single air defense.
    1. Leto
      Leto 5 May 2016 12: 14
      +1
      Quote: Zaurbek
      The main difference between the S-500 and Aegis is that the S-500 is designed to defeat BR in the final section of the trajectory, and Aegis in the initial

      Where did you get such heresy?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 5 May 2016 12: 29
        0
        I could confuse Aegis with a ground-based missile defense system in Europe. And so from the subject literature.
    2. CAMS
      CAMS 5 May 2016 12: 43
      0
      question for those who know. how about plasma. have I heard something about plasma weapons that destroy rockets in the air?
  • kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 5 May 2016 11: 28
    +12
    No need to throw hats, firstly there is a serious reservation for airplanes, secondly, according to available data, we have about 1500-2000 pieces of interceptor missiles of all types, if the mattress doesn’t have a breach now it has about 7000 pieces of axes, there are not enough carriers for their calculations, they need 5000 pieces in a single salvo in order to disarm us now as they write THEM they have 2500 pieces of media with vassals of the order of 3000-3500 pieces, but as we see they work in this regard (this is by the way a question for our liberals that I’m not even going to we solve the problems in a military way), and most importantly, the quantitative indicators of the S-500 are not AK. One more thing after the well-known transformations that made us all happy at the end of the 80-90s with air defense in the northern latitudes is still far from ice, so the guys will not throw their hats, but will work and restore the FATHERLAND and would like to have a fast pace.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 5 May 2016 13: 23
      +1
      according to available data, we have about 1500-2000 pieces of interceptor missiles of all types


      Sorry, but where did you read about 2000 SP? We have some PUs, probably a little less. And on each launcher on 2-4 missiles. Not counting those on the PZM. And why else do KAMAZs go with them, if not rockets?
    2. 1536
      1536 5 May 2016 15: 34
      0
      Totally agree with you! It is necessary that for every NATO aircraft there is our missile or interceptor aircraft. For every nuclear warhead. In the meantime, they will continue to become impudent.
    3. Muvka
      Muvka 5 May 2016 17: 04
      +1
      Quote: kapitan281271
      No need to throw hats, firstly there is a serious reservation for airplanes, secondly, according to available data, we have about 1500-2000 pieces of interceptor missiles of all types, if the mattress doesn’t have a breach now it has about 7000 pieces of axes, there are not enough carriers for their calculations, they need 5000 pieces in a single salvo in order to disarm us now as they write THEM they have 2500 pieces of media with vassals of the order of 3000-3500 pieces, but as we see they work in this regard (this is by the way a question for our liberals that I’m not even going to we solve the problems in a military way), and most importantly, the quantitative indicators of the S-500 are not AK. One more thing after the well-known transformations that made us all happy at the end of the 80-90s with air defense in the northern latitudes is still far from ice, so the guys will not throw their hats, but will work and restore the FATHERLAND and would like to have a fast pace.

      Firstly, we have only S-300 = 1900 launchers. This is without taking into account other complexes of medium and small radius with which they are included, this time. And where did you get that 7000 tomahawks? There are so many of them produced. Do you think they do not deteriorate over time and are not written off? And yet, have they never been used in wars? Or are they reusable?
  • Wolka
    Wolka 5 May 2016 11: 30
    -1
    wonderful, now the yankees don't have enough money to create something like that, let them die of envy
    1. cergey51046
      cergey51046 5 May 2016 11: 49
      0
      They cannot create or steal for decades a torpedo-rocket flying under water.
  • godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 5 May 2016 11: 35
    -7
    [quote = Dym71] [quote = godofwar6699]
    There is still a heated discussion of US taxpayers laughing[/ Quote]
    fairy tales.

    nationalinterest is dr for people who don't know a damn thing hi
  • cergey51046
    cergey51046 5 May 2016 11: 47
    0
    Everything will be, let it be.
  • godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 5 May 2016 11: 50
    -6
    Quote: Volka
    Aegis

    Quote: Volka
    wonderful, now the yankees don't have enough money to create something like that, let them die of envy

    bully
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 5 May 2016 17: 06
      +1
      Quote: godofwar6699
      Quote: Volka
      Aegis

      Quote: Volka
      wonderful, now the yankees don't have enough money to create something like that, let them die of envy

      bully

      Range of 300 km and a maximum speed of 3500 km \ h? Do not tell, even the S-400 is not suitable for soles.
  • bad
    bad 5 May 2016 11: 56
    -1
    NI: with the adoption of the C-500, the sky over Russia will become almost invulnerable
    .. huh ... the mattresses probably thought that our air defense was built purely for fun .. laughing surprised? .. so so .. laughing
  • The comment was deleted.
  • raliv
    raliv 5 May 2016 12: 10
    -1
    Something in my soul is so good, joyful! What is it for? fellow
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 5 May 2016 20: 48
      +1
      Quote: raliv
      Something in my soul is so good, joyful! What is it for?

      wink
  • Mister22408
    Mister22408 5 May 2016 12: 14
    0
    Partners have a growing role for SP and CR
  • godofwar6699
    godofwar6699 5 May 2016 12: 18
    -7
    [quote = raliv] Something in my soul is so good, joyful! What is it for?

    Blessed are the idiots because they are the happiest people on earth laughing
    1. Real stalinist
      Real stalinist 5 May 2016 18: 21
      +2
      Envy is the worst of mortal sins!
  • Volksib
    Volksib 5 May 2016 12: 35
    +4
    I am glad that air defense and missile defense systems are being improved, this is unambiguous. It is unambiguous that the measures are being taken asymmetric, the arms race is useless. Resources are always limited, or oil or cannons. So balance is very important. An excellent trump card in the development of domestic strategic nuclear forces is our vast territory. .Military railway complexes will run throughout the country. The PERIMETER system is actively developing. Mine installations are located in Siberia and the Far East. Strategic aviation is on alert. Strategic missile carriers are taking an increasing role in our nuclear triad. Considering the territory, population density in Russia and The United States, it will be clear that no disarming first strike to completely destroy the potential of the Russian armed forces will not work. And the General Staff Academy does not need to be graduated for this in order to understand the consequences of the adventure. Politics they are in Africa, politics, we ... do not turn sacks. ..))). Unlike the American slurred outer floor ithics, Russia is demonstrating a balanced strategy and more and more people understand this. The demonstration of our developments and weapons in Syria is a clear signal about the potential of the Russian Armed Forces. There was no water area of ​​the Caspian Sea. There was no special need to use strategic and Long-Range Aviation to destroy the militants. This also included launching from a submarine, from a submerged position in the Mediterranean Sea. I will emphasize from the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. And where is this sea located and which countries it washes over the writing unnecessarily. But for the demonstration of the projection of force and for the inclusion in the brain of pictures on the topic "but if" and "what will be" gives a good answer.
  • Zomanus
    Zomanus 5 May 2016 12: 48
    0
    It's nice to hear from opponents.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 5 May 2016 12: 52
    +4
    S-500 is the equivalent of the Aegis system.
    The adoption of the S-500 will be very
    an important step for Russia.
    Because BRDS will soon be riveted to all who are not lazy.
    And get a sudden plunge on a strategic object
    or the city doesn’t know from whom - it’s not at all pleasant.
    1. uskrabut
      uskrabut 5 May 2016 13: 10
      +1
      I agree, it can fly from anyone. therefore, it would not hurt to update the warning system systematically.
    2. Winnie76
      Winnie76 5 May 2016 15: 54
      +1
      Aegis has a kinetic warhead. And how she will behave in a real interception - only one Professor knows. To get a bullet into a bullet in the presence of electronic warfare, maneuvering a missile, the presence of false targets, weather factors ... all this causes great doubts
  • Aristide
    Aristide 5 May 2016 13: 15
    0
    Here you are, grandmothers, and St. George's Day! It is pleasant, of course, that Russia possesses such perfect defensive weapons. Why in vain to crush water in a mortar, the thing to do. That’s what Russian gunsmiths do. Well done! Honor and praise! Well, and on the occasion, with Victory Day of the Russian military and all citizens of Russia!
  • Riv
    Riv 5 May 2016 13: 16
    +1
    Good news. But comrades! Please note: an optimist is not the one who first says, "Great!" - and the one who is the last to say: "That's it, Arctic fox!" When we see that the warheads are actually intercepted, then we will boast.
  • givigor71
    givigor71 5 May 2016 13: 18
    -3
    And the enemies of Russia on the VO website are not asleep, minus everything related to the defense capabilities of our country ...
  • DMM2006
    DMM2006 5 May 2016 13: 24
    +1
    Quote: kuz363
    Well, I set a minus, because it looks like hatred. First, the US Standard-3 missiles have almost the same characteristics. Secondly, any defense breaks through a simple increase in missiles by the attacking side or a change in the flight algorithm. If, for example, the number of US cruise missiles reaches 5-6 thousand, then who is stopping them, for example, to double their number? With their defense spending 10 times that of Russia, this is not a problem. When attacking, you can calculate the number of attacked missiles or warheads so that the S-500 does not have time to reload new missiles. So, you have to increase the number of launchers. But you can certainly say that it will be much more expensive than the cost of cruise missiles.

    Forgive my colleague, how do you get such information regarding Standard-3, as far as I remember the published part of their performance characteristics, they, unlike the S-500, do not have the ability to intercept hypersonic targets. In this, we were ahead of everyone already with the S-400, and the S-500 was an unattainable altitude. Only the data on the maximum target interception height and nothing more are similar in the S-500 and Standard-3 characteristics. In addition, for our Topol and Yars, the capabilities of their interceptor missiles will not matter, since, unlike amers, we do not use missiles with a monoblock warhead.
    Well, as for the "cheap" cruise missiles (by the way, costing the amers' budget at least 20 million dollars each), it should be noted that, firstly, they have a relatively short range of use up to 2000 km (declared !!!), which imposes serious restrictions on their use and makes their effectiveness highly dependent on the degree of secrecy in the placement of their carriers. And secondly, the S-500 is not intended to fight them, this task should be dealt with by the old S-300 and the S-400, which scared the amers to hiccups. And why exactly they look at their performance characteristics and performance characteristics of the S-500, as well as the methods used in these missiles to destroy targets. I think everything will be immediately clear.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 5 May 2016 13: 58
      +2
      "In this we have already outstripped everyone with the S-400, and the S-500 is generally an unattainable height" ///

      You got a little excited ... wink The S-400 has better performance than the Patriot,
      but inferior to Aegis. For a long time, the S-400 generally had rockets from the old S-300,
      and only the radar and comp are new.
      The S-500 will be roughly equivalent to Aegis: high-flying ballistic missile defense, satellites ...
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 5 May 2016 14: 19
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        The S-400 has better performance than the Patriot, but inferior to Aegis

        Uh?
        "Aegis" shipborne BIUS, S-400 ground air defense system. How can one be better than the other, a calculator better than a radio?
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 5 May 2016 15: 41
          0
          "Aegis" shipborne BIUS, S-400 ground air defense system "////

          Aegis, out in Romania is being mounted. Built a tower similar
          on a superstructure of Arly Burke, they stuck in the AFAR - and the thing is in the hat.

          Who cares where?
          1. Muvka
            Muvka 5 May 2016 17: 10
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            "In this we have already outstripped everyone with the S-400, and the S-500 is generally an unattainable height" ///

            You got a little excited ... wink The S-400 has better performance than the Patriot,
            but inferior to Aegis. For a long time, the S-400 generally had rockets from the old S-300,
            and only the radar and comp are new.
            The S-500 will be roughly equivalent to Aegis: high-flying ballistic missile defense, satellites ...

            Tell me, how long has Aegis shot down rockets at very low altitudes? And in your opinion, the maximum speed of the target hit 3500km \ h is cool? No offense, far to the S-400. The only thing better than Aegis is the S-400 - the height of the targets hit. All.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 5 May 2016 16: 43
        +1
        Height is height, but to hit cruise missiles with an envelope of terrain at low altitudes for these complexes will be quite a challenge - in the Far East, the Urals and Siberia.
        1. Manitoo
          Manitoo 5 May 2016 17: 19
          +2
          Quote: Vadim237
          Height is height, but to hit cruise missiles with an envelope of terrain at low altitudes for these complexes will be quite a challenge - in the Far East, the Urals and Siberia.

          Everything has been invented for a long time - for the S-300 it was also an integral part: "Universal mobile tower 40V6M (D)" - designed to expand the capabilities of complexes for the detection and tracking of low-altitude targets when deploying anti-aircraft battalions and radio technical troops (RTV) units in a wooded or highly rugged terrain. Height - 39 m - approximately 15th floor.
      3. cap
        cap 5 May 2016 18: 08
        0
        [quote = voyaka uh] S-500 will be roughly equivalent to Aegis: high-flying MRBMs, satellites ...

        Your awareness is astounding.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 5 May 2016 22: 51
          +2
          I have listed what Aegis was practically tested on.
  • ver_
    ver_ 5 May 2016 13: 27
    +1
    Quote: andre
    And what kind of liberals are minus such important news? belay

    Quote: andre
    And what kind of liberals are minus such important news? belay

    .. minus not tok-mo liberals, but also national men with delusions of grandeur and belief in their exclusivity and antiquity of the clan, and simply "sewers", and vultures ..
  • Watchdog
    Watchdog 5 May 2016 13: 39
    +2
    The difference in military thinking of the USA and the Russian Federation. Different mentality, you see. Defense cannot be passive. Defense wars are not won. Effective defense is the enemy’s inability to operate freely on the theater of war, ideally the destruction of all of his threatening potentials, and not just available forces.
    For the United States, in the event of war, priorities are always
    1. Ensuring your maximum safety.
    2. Destruction of the enemy.
    For the Russian Federation priorities:
    1. Destruction of the enemy (threat).
    2. Providing maximum security.
    So Russia won the war. So they won the Second World War.
    So, our western partners should think about whether they are ready for war on the principle of victory or death? In this context, the task of C-500 is to achieve the goals set for strategic nuclear forces at hour X. So this is a signal. I’m only afraid that on the other side, a drunken monkey with a grenade is driving and cannot accept it ...
  • mark_rod
    mark_rod 5 May 2016 13: 56
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    Et yes. Wunderwaffe does not exist. Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

    So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.

    Moscow is always covered, but the state will get "Zamkadye" ....
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 5 May 2016 17: 11
      0
      Quote: mark_rod
      Quote: Spade
      Et yes. Wunderwaffe does not exist. Only a powerful complex can cover the Russian airspace. For which we have no money.

      So far, only focal air defense. And there are big problems with her.

      Moscow is always covered, but the state will get "Zamkadye" ....

      Actually, where there is strategic production, the sky is closed there. And in my Vichuga shoot nuclear missiles ... well, of course there is a lot of sense ....
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 5 May 2016 14: 47
    0
    From such news, American generals will jump out of their own underpants, like this, we are fooling such babosy at the defense, but we don’t have this close. Here's an ambush, so an ambush.
  • kill the fascist
    kill the fascist 5 May 2016 15: 02
    +1
    The adoption of 500 on alert is very good news. I think you should not take seriously the whining of the Americans at the expense of 500 complexes - the military budget should be increased, so they are crying.
  • t118an
    t118an 5 May 2016 16: 22
    -1
    When the Americans have a headache from the capabilities of Russian weapons, you can relax a bit. Unfortunately not now. But their tower is boliit !!!
  • sounddoc
    sounddoc 5 May 2016 17: 43
    +2
    Off topic, of course, though .... What is the power, brother? ... In Tomahawks, Aegis, invisible planes? At Coca-Cola, Superman, gay parades? In tolerance and, like, democracy? What is the strength in, brother????
    A letter from Alexander Zatsepa found by the Americans in the pocket of the coat of a dead soldier ...
    "Listen to God ... Never in my life
    I didn’t speak with you, but today
    I want to welcome you!
    You know ... from childhood, they always told me
    That you are not, and I,, believed.
    I have never contemplated your creations.

    And tonight I watched
    From the crater that knocked out a grenade
    To the starry sky: what was above me.
    I suddenly realized, admiring the flicker,
    How cruel a deception can be.
    I don’t know, God, will you give me a hand?
    But I will tell you, and you will understand me!
    Isn’t it strange that in the midst of terrible hell,
    Suddenly a light opened for me and I saw you!
    And besides this, I have nothing to say
    It's just that I'm glad that I recognized you.
    At midnight we are assigned to attack.

    But I’m not afraid, you are looking at us.
    The signal ... Well then, I have to go ...
    I felt good with you ...
    I also want to say
    That, as you know, the battle will be evil
    And maybe at night I will knock on you.
    And even though so far I have not been Your friend,
    Will you let me in when I come ?!
    But it seems I'm crying, my goodness, you see
    What happened to me is that now I have seen.
    Goodbye, my God ... I'm coming ... And I’m unlikely to be back.

    How strange - but now I'm not afraid of death "....
    ..not about rockets ... about fortitude and Faith ...
  • alex-defensor
    alex-defensor 5 May 2016 18: 07
    +4
    Artem Zhitenev, minus your article for low-quality (in my opinion) work !!!

    Why should we give stripped down article citing the same stripped down article only at the end of which we can find a link to full Russian translation with reference to the original ?!

    Here is a link to the full Russian text: http://inosmi.ru/military/20160504/236391545.html
    And here's the source: http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog/russias-deadly-s-500-air-defense-system-rea
    dy-war-660000-16028
  • v.yegorov
    v.yegorov 5 May 2016 18: 35
    +1
    On a cunning ass there is a horseradish screw, etc. etc .. There will never be protection
    full of attack and vice versa. Custom-made article, designed to lobby
    MIC of the States.
  • NordUral
    NordUral 5 May 2016 19: 32
    +1
    That will be in service in sufficient quantities and in combination with other elements of missile defense and air defense, then it will be possible to say so. And the praises of a potential enemy must be treated with reasonable distrust.
  • Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 5 May 2016 20: 05
    0
    Quote: Ros 56
    From such news, American generals will jump out of their own underpants, like this, we are fooling such babosy at the defense, but we don’t have this close. Here's an ambush, so an ambush.

    For them, the generals, this is good news, because by frightening the population of their countries, you can calmly rattle the budget for military rattles to the grave. But in their money-grubbing they don't take into account only one thing - "if a gun hangs on the wall, then it must necessarily shoot" and then the end of all their savings and sweet life. You cannot endlessly tighten the "spring", you can also get the return from the "spring"! hi
  • Cossack 471
    Cossack 471 5 May 2016 20: 30
    -3
    I served in air defense for 20 years. My first division commander with 200 Vega spoke about air defense troops like this; it's like hair in an interesting place for women. interfere but cannot protect
  • The comment was deleted.