Military Review

Deadly S-500: ready for war at an altitude of 200 kilometers (The National Interest, USA)

151
Deadly S-500: ready for war at an altitude of 200 kilometers (The National Interest, USA)



In the near future, the first samples of a new anti-aircraft missile system S-500 concern "Almaz-Antey" may enter the Russian Army. At the same time continue to test modern complex C-350 «Hero», which over time will replace the air defense systems S-300PS.

“We expect that the first samples of the C-500 anti-aircraft missile system will be delivered to the troops soon,” Lieutenant-General Viktor Gumenny, commander of the air defense forces of the aerospace forces of Russia, told the Russia 24 television channel, TASS news agency reported.

The new facility, which will occupy the top tier of layered single Russian air defense system will be able to fight with the targets at altitudes of about 200 km. This means that the C-500 be able to hit the approaching enemy ballistic missiles at a range of 640 kilometers. The first regiment of new anti-aircraft missile systems to defend Moscow and central Russia.

It is expected that C-500 be able to detect and also to strike 10-minute ballistic missile warheads flying at a speed of seven kilometers per second. In addition, the system is equipped with interceptor missiles with active radar homing head, what is its similarity to the THAAD system (missile range of the mobile ground-based for high-altitude extra-atmospheric intercept medium-range missiles) company Lockheed Martin.

Like all modern Russian air defense system, C-500 should be highly mobile and have a whole network of radar, interception and providing guidance to the target at long distances. It will be used by combat control radar 91N6A (M), a modified radar detection and capture 96L6-CPU purposes, as well as new multi-mode missile radary76T6 and 77T6, as reported edition of Missile Threat institutions of George Marshall and Claremont.

Meanwhile, tests of the mobile air defense and missile defense system C-350 Vityaz are already being conducted in the Russian armed forces. This new system will replace the older C-300PS and will complement the Buk-M3, C-300BM4, C-400 and C-500 complexes.

“The tests of the Vityaz C-350 anti-aircraft missile system are continuing,” said Gumenny. “The first launches were successful, the system confirmed its characteristics and will be widely used to replace the C-300PS anti-aircraft missile system.”

On-350 equipped with radar electronically scanned phased array and the new command and control machine. Typically, the complex includes the control machine, two radars and eight launchers. The complex C-350 uses the same missiles with active radar homing head, that of the C-400, which can hit targets at a distance of 120 kilometers and at an altitude of about 30-five kilometers. The complex is able to fight with 16 objectives simultaneously, with complete 32 missiles.

The Russians intend to tie together C-500 and other such systems as C-400, C-300BM4, C-350 and others, creating a single integrated air defense network. As one industry expert from the United States noted, although the Russian military-industrial sector was very badly damaged as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Moscow somehow managed to continue the development of modern air defense systems, retaining mostly their combat capabilities. Some samples of these new systems are so perfect that many American commanders fear that even invisible airplanes such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them.
Author:
Originator:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/russias-deadly-s-500-air-defense-system-ready-war-660000-16028
151 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Andrey K
    Andrey K 10 May 2016 15: 42
    +37
    Good performance characteristics, great news for "friends" from an overseas country laughing
    Now their headache will go away, no longer need to worry about the peaceful sky above their head laughing
    S-500 guarantees soldier
    1. just exp
      just exp 10 May 2016 15: 45
      +10
      and for sworn friends, the S-500 has more missile defense than air defense.
      will only fight with the states.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 12 May 2016 18: 28
        +4
        Quote: just explo
        and for sworn friends, the S-500 has more missile defense than air defense.

        The S-500 is created primarily for the control of near space and the interception of hyper-speed ICBMs, that is, the tasks of this complex also include the interception of adversary satellites, which means that not only airspace is blocked within the radius of the system, but also near space, which is not capable of making neither the S-400 nor even the S-300.
    2. Dimontius
      Dimontius 10 May 2016 15: 55
      +2
      I am sure that domestic programmers have already linked together all the air defense systems into a single network. Now the network is only expanding and modernizing.
      1. Michael67
        Michael67 10 May 2016 16: 10
        +7
        I am proud of our science and designers.
        Imperialists! Do not even think to rock the boat on us! It will cost a lot!
        1. Nforce
          Nforce 10 May 2016 17: 41
          .
          What - what science are you proud of? In Russia, science is dying of the word "absolutely". From a group of 28 people, 17 left 4 for Europe, the rest of the USA. The salary of the candidate is 35000 rubles. In the USA, from $ 100000 a year. When the Turks shot down the plane, what was the black box of drying-Chinese microcircuits filled with. What microelectronics, what science, what C-500-forget. Descend from heaven to earth.
          1. Terner38
            Terner38 10 May 2016 17: 58
            +12
            Let them knock at least in the geyropu, at least in ... opu, the remaining 10 are more than 10 times more than the worthless semi-finished products that left .IMHO.
            1. Nforce
              Nforce 10 May 2016 18: 24
              .
              I have nothing more to say in your comment
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 11 May 2016 15: 10
                +1
                Leave the vocational schools alone - they were told - everything is OK with us - they are happy.
                They put pluses for what they want to hear - it calms them.
              2. Alexey-74
                Alexey-74 11 May 2016 15: 35
                +3
                "Dear" tell me, what are you doing on this site? It seems like the patriots of their country have gathered here, and you act as a provocateur ...
            2. Nforce
              Nforce 10 May 2016 18: 25
              .
              All for you, if only you would smile
              1. RUSIVAN
                RUSIVAN 10 May 2016 22: 32
                +5
                Rather, if only you cried ...
                EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING has disappeared from the CHEF, the client is leaving, the plaster is removed (hereinafter the sea of ​​tears) .... you very much less recalled the speech of this hero)
              2. apostoll
                apostoll 12 May 2016 14: 43
                +6
                I can well support your opinion on the development of our radio-technical industry, we are buying everything .... from my only reserves from the USSR remain. And the new equipment, even if it has no analogues in the world, is assembled from components of Western and Chinese production. If anyone is interested, read on this topic .... for a long time already all research institutes and NGOs howl about this.
                But with regard to patriotism and faith in the future, I can answer you: be realistic, in all areas of the RF Armed Forces, everything must be honest, and the reliability of personnel brought up under the USSR ... the new officer corps is stupid for money ... None what kind of patriotism and level of knowledge are out of the question ... units brought up in officer families still have an approximate idea of ​​what the Motherland is ... the rest ((((((((I don’t even want to talk.
                Who doubts, ask the sailors of the Northern Fleet - how their boxes go to the DP, how they literally take them out in their hands ... it is not the ship that carries the sailors, but they do it ....
                And by the way, look back at what's going on in youth? Who brings them up and how? and why are swastikas on walls and fences more and more? THINK !!!
                1. Nforce
                  Nforce 12 May 2016 19: 31
                  0
                  You are absolutely right every university graduate wants to become a State Duma deputy or leaves. Here everyone loves to compare Russia with the USA, when such people as Ilon Mask appear in Russia and Russia like him will not be defeated
          2. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 11 May 2016 18: 44
            +3
            Quote: Nforce
            What - what science are you proud of? In Russia, science is dying of the word "absolutely". From a group of 28 people, 17 left 4 for Europe, the rest of the USA. The salary of the candidate is 35000 rubles. In the USA, from $ 100000 a year. When the Turks shot down the plane, what was the black box of drying-Chinese microcircuits filled with. What microelectronics, what science, what C-500-forget. Descend from heaven to earth.

            I understand that they didn’t want to take you with them laughing
          3. cat hippopotamus
            cat hippopotamus 11 May 2016 22: 19
            +3
            Well, if you have such doubts and you are not satisfied with the conclusion of even foreign specialists, then alas, you are a complete skeptic. When the S-400 was deployed in Syria, why didn’t anyone want to try their luck, even though this tells you something?
            1. Nforce
              Nforce 11 May 2016 22: 36
              +7
              Actually, I talked about the current state of science, and not about the S-400 complexes, which are the property of the USSR in 1988. All our equipment, unfortunately, is a merit of the USSR with a few exceptions.
      2. Armored optimist
        Armored optimist 10 May 2016 16: 16
        +14
        In fact, a single air defense network was already in the 70s. The principles of construction have nothing to do with the Internet. Now we are talking about unified control networks for all types of armed forces.
    3. Armored optimist
      Armored optimist 10 May 2016 16: 18
      +12
      I wonder how much we pay Mr. Majumdar? Intimidates amers cleaner Prokopenko with Ren TV.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 16: 47
        +7
        The complex is able to fight 16 goals at the same time, with 32 missiles

        This is strange if true. Since the S-350 has 12 missiles on one launcher, 96 in the division. Therefore, at the same time, it must fire more targets than the S-400, which can simultaneously fire 36 targets with 72 missiles pointing at them.
        The S-350 should at least have the same performance, or even greater, otherwise why would there be so much firepower if it cannot be used.
        1. Serg 122
          Serg 122 10 May 2016 16: 52
          +12
          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 encounter challenges in overcoming them.

          They wouldn’t be faced with problems, they would just be shot down (or stupidly destroyed in the air) ...
          1. Alexey-74
            Alexey-74 11 May 2016 15: 36
            0
            Guaranteed knocked down.
        2. alstr
          alstr 10 May 2016 17: 20
          +1
          This is disa. Most likely launchers can be connected more. 32 missiles are standard delivery.
          1. Armored optimist
            Armored optimist 10 May 2016 20: 32
            +3
            32 missiles - simultaneous guidance on 16 targets
            1. adept666
              adept666 11 May 2016 12: 48
              +2
              32 missiles - simultaneous guidance on 16 targets
              This most likely means two missiles per target. It is common practice for a confident defeat to shoot a doublet.
    4. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 10 May 2016 16: 53
      +7
      Moscow somehow managed to continue developing modern air defense systems, preserving basically their combat capabilities. 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 encounter problems in overcoming them.

      And what, the overseas "partners" have plans to deliver the "humanitarian aid" to Russia with the above-mentioned aircraft?
    5. GSH-18
      GSH-18 12 May 2016 15: 39
      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 encounter problems in overcoming them.
      Posted by Dave Majumdar - National Interest Editor

      Of course they will! And why do you think the S-400 and S-500 are made?
  2. avvg
    avvg 10 May 2016 15: 45
    +5
    This is our asymmetric answer "p.i.d.s.o.s.a.m".
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 10 May 2016 16: 00
      .
      This is our asymmetric answer "p.i.d.s.o.s.a.m".

      Urrrryayayaya !!! Army! Fleet! Caliber-NK! wassat

      Only now, almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with Standard Missile III anti-aircraft missiles, capable of hitting ballistic targets at a distance of up to 500 km, and at altitudes up to 250 km ( here from memory). Add THAAD Mobile Ground Systems bully...
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 10 May 2016 16: 03
        .
        (what the hell do I have the American flag again?) angry
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 10
          +57
          Quote: Wiruz
          (what the hell do I have the American flag again?) angry

          and comments in their style ...
          1. Terner38
            Terner38 10 May 2016 18: 02
            0
            Rather, in the style of the Professor.
            1. Wiruz
              Wiruz 10 May 2016 21: 48
              0
              Rather, in the style of the Professor.

              So no one has insulted me yet angry
        2. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy 10 May 2016 16: 29
          +20
          Quote: Wiruz
          (what the hell do I have the American flag again?) angry

          So the virus, however.
          Admins are not mistaken!
        3. Skifotavr
          Skifotavr 11 May 2016 18: 57
          +1
          Quote: Wiruz
          (what the hell do I have the American flag again?) angry

          You often have punctures laughing
      2. dvina71
        dvina71 10 May 2016 16: 04
        +30
        Quote: Wiruz
        Only now the "p.i.n.d.so.so.v" almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with anti-aircraft missiles Standard Missile III,

        What ice-carrying capacity do these destroyers and cruisers have? The answer is no. Their price as a missile defense is 0.
        And another question .. How many successful test firing did this system have?
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 12
          +27
          Quote: dvina71
          Quote: Wiruz
          Only now the "p.i.n.d.so.so.v" almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with anti-aircraft missiles Standard Missile III,

          What ice-carrying capacity do these destroyers and cruisers have? The answer is no. Their price as a missile defense is 0.
          And another question .. How many successful test firing did this system have?

          well, ice, not all year round, but ignoring the Aegis system is criminal stupidity ... the satellite was shot down, right? and the system is being finalized. so, "we will throw our hats" - no need. everything is serious. and then, how many ships with "Aegis" they have, and how many S-500s we have at this time ... think for yourself. work, and work again.
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 10 May 2016 16: 30
            +18
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich

            well, ice, not all year round, but ignoring the Aegis system is criminal stupidity ... the satellite was shot down, right?

            Our Arctic ICBMs will fly to the Arctic, namely there, all the year round. The United States does not have a serious icebreaker fleet and is not expected soon.
            2. The satellite flies according to strict physical laws. Knock it down. Knowing these laws is not difficult. But what about the BB ICBMs flying in the LC cloud, and in the new afterlife they also maneuver?
            I answer. It is necessary to be as close as possible to the flight path of the ICBM - Arctic. The price of these destroyers and cruisers as missile defense is 0.
            And Russia has bases in the Arctic. On which runways are equipped for large cargo aircraft, infrastructure is built and shells are already standing.
            Question .. How long does it take for series C complexes to be added to the shells?
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 10 May 2016 16: 54
              +5
              "Ice is still flying to Arktiya, where our ICBMs will fly all year round" ////

              There is nothing to do with ice. Read carefully:
              "THAAD is a mobile anti-missile system for
              high-altitude transatmospheric interception of medium-range missiles ".

              THAAD can't shoot down ICBMs. Like the S-500. They are against BDSD.
              Which Russia is not in service with.
              THAAD is intended mainly against the Chinese,
              which BRDS is the main nuclear weapons.
              1. Lt. Air Force stock
                Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 17: 03
                +4
                Quote: voyaka uh
                "THAAD is a mobile anti-missile system for
                high-altitude transatmospheric interception of medium-range missiles ".

                And in the final section of the flight, on the opposite courses?
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 10 May 2016 17: 28
                  0
                  A colleague, the user opus (he does this) explained to me that theoretically
                  a strictly oncoming interception is possible, but in reality (here he agreed with me), neither the radar will have time to give the computer a command to calculate, nor the GOS missiles will have time to react.
                  1. Lieutenant Izhe
                    Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 18: 59
                    +1
                    A colleague, the user opus (he does this) explained to me that theoretically
                    a strictly oncoming interception is possible, but in reality (here he agreed with me), neither the radar will have time to give the computer a command to calculate, nor the GOS missiles will have time to react.

                    is that sho? belay
                    not all Jews seem to be ... smart like Einstein! wassat
                    According to your missile defense, to work faster when firing "in pursuit" at ballistic hypersonic targets !?
                    And the speed of anti-missiles, while what should be?!?
                    (well, so ... "purely LIT! laughing
                  2. Lieutenant Izhe
                    Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 18: 59
                    0
                    A colleague, the user opus (he does this) explained to me that theoretically
                    a strictly oncoming interception is possible, but in reality (here he agreed with me), neither the radar will have time to give the computer a command to calculate, nor the GOS missiles will have time to react.

                    is that sho? belay
                    not all Jews seem to be ... smart like Einstein!
                    crying
                    According to your missile defense, it is easier to work when firing "in pursuit" at hypersonic ballistic targets !?
                    And the speed of anti-missiles, while what should be?!?
                    (well, so ... "purely LIT! laughing
                    PSTell me, will the Jewish radar station - "zhYlezny kumpol" have time to issue a "signal" to the local computer (of course, exclusively on your element base) so that the GOS of the Jewish anti-missile "has time to react KOSHER"?
                    wink
                  3. Skifotavr
                    Skifotavr 11 May 2016 19: 10
                    0
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    A colleague, the user opus (he does this) explained to me that theoretically
                    a strictly oncoming interception is possible, but in reality (here he agreed with me), neither the radar will have time to give the computer a command to calculate, nor the GOS missiles will have time to react.

                    The Moscow missile defense system A-135 (which continues to be modernized) is somehow doing well.
              2. dvina71
                dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 07
                +3
                Quote: voyaka uh
                THAAD can't shoot down ICBMs. Like the S-500. They are against BDSD.


                No ... well, I understand .. food may be kosher, or it may not be. And for some it may matter .. Really, the Americans now have such missiles that start only if the name of the target suits them?
                Yes .. how we padded jacket are behind .. everything is old-fashioned .. In terms of height and speed there is an opportunity to shoot down - we will shoot down, and then we'll figure it out .. ICBM, RSD or UFO it was ..
              3. Skifotavr
                Skifotavr 11 May 2016 19: 06
                +1
                Quote: voyaka uh
                "Ice is still flying to Arktiya, where our ICBMs will fly all year round" ////

                There is nothing to do with ice. Read carefully:
                "THAAD is a mobile anti-missile system for
                high-altitude transatmospheric interception of medium-range missiles ".

                THAAD can't shoot down ICBMs. Like the S-500. They are against BDSD.
                Which Russia is not in service with.
                THAAD is intended mainly against the Chinese,
                which BRDS is the main nuclear weapons.

                Concerning the S-500, the information is contradictory. About 10 years ago it was indeed reported that the S-500 would be able to shoot down medium-range missiles, and the promising S-1000 would be involved in ICBMs. Now they are reporting that the S-500 will be able to intercept ICBM warheads over strictly limited territory (which is also not bad). In my opinion, the project was simply reworked. In any case, waiting for the truth is not so long.
                1. Res_Ullus
                  Res_Ullus 13 May 2016 15: 51
                  0
                  Unfortunately, the truth we will not find out soon, not all and very dosed. Secretly IMHO. Remember how the caliber range was wink
            2. Andrey Yuryevich
              Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 17: 43
              0
              Quote: dvina71
              Question .. How long does it take for series C complexes to be added to the shells?

              a counter question: what "shells" will shoot down in the Arctic? Well, yes, to cover airfields, on a near drive. and who will fly? what
              Quote: dvina71
              The United States does not have a serious icebreaker fleet and is not expected soon

              they don’t even have any seriousness, here I agree yes
              Quote: dvina71
              2. The satellite flies according to strict physical laws. Knock it down. Knowing these laws is not difficult.

              hello! and all the rest of the aircraft fly, contrary to? You’re not aware that they can maneuver?
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 54
                +3
                Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                a counter question: what "shells" will shoot down in the Arctic? Well, yes, to cover airfields, on a near drive. and who will fly?

                Pantsiri will shoot down what’s in their capabilities .. Well, if you have 10 minutes of free time .. Yandex., for what the shells are used in the videoconferencing system. And everything will fall into place, you won’t ask stupid questions.

                Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                hello! and all the rest of the aircraft fly, contrary to? You’re not aware that they can maneuver?

                And to you. You do not know HOW satellites can maneuver and how does this differ from atmospheric maneuvers?
                Yandex to help you.
              2. ty60
                ty60 10 May 2016 19: 26
                +3
                Calculate at the start, let’s allow the s-500 possible targets in low orbits, send a signal to the maneuver of departure, add time to the maneuver, calculate the flight time. Data is on the site. Only then will the conversation be substantive. The rest on the principle is D ... k. one destruction system is not created without taking into account the maneuvering of the target and the installation of interference. Another point is that Different targets have both Different tasks and Different reaction time for missile defense. Respectively the possibility of maneuvering. It is desirable to argue for ALL of us.
              3. adept666
                adept666 11 May 2016 13: 00
                +1
                a counter question: what "shells" will shoot down in the Arctic? Well, yes, to cover airfields, on a near drive. and who will fly?
                Aircraft-based cruise missiles, for example.
            3. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 11 May 2016 15: 25
              +3
              Literacy.
              And why in the Arctic interceptors of ICBMs? They are not stupid people. On this section of the trajectory, the height is approximately 370-450 km in height (I don’t remember exactly, I thought for a long time).

              It is easier to build up NORAD with additional anti-ballistic missiles and intercept at the final site and directly on the approach to the target.
              Aegis system is good in that it allows you to protect control zones in the right place at the right time
          2. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 16: 56
            +7
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich
            a satellite after all brought down?

            The satellite moved in a predetermined orbit and speed and he was alone. And imagine hundreds of ballistic missiles flying along a flat trajectory and maneuvering while using false targets and electronic warfare. It's not so simple.
        2. Maksus
          Maksus 10 May 2016 19: 12
          -1
          A lot of ice in the Mediterranean?
          1. insular
            insular 11 May 2016 01: 25
            0
            Quote: Maksus
            A lot of ice in the Mediterranean?

            "Will a lot of ICBMs fly across Mediterranean?" - that's a better question to ask ...
            1. Maksus
              Maksus 11 May 2016 09: 22
              0
              We pose the question differently: why would ships cover the states from the north if it is safe to place stationary or ground complexes there?
              But if the missiles fly not from Russia (imagine, not only we have missiles with a vigorous warhead) - here the Aegis will help. What the hell is your head for? What would wear a helmet and Hurray! shout?
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 11 May 2016 14: 26
                0
                Quote: Maksus
                why ships to cover the states from the north, e

                Then, what is the purpose of the missile defense Americans destroy the entire rocket, and not separately bb.
                Nutak, these are the missiles that are in the north of America that they cannot completely launch a missile.
                Given the presence of maneuvering bb .. knocking them down is a non-trivial task. Especially kinetic interception.
                And let’s get interested .. who’s so rich in rockets in the middle of the world drawn? Against whom is such an armada?
      3. Armored optimist
        Armored optimist 10 May 2016 16: 23
        +9
        Let them shove these missiles into themselves. Their effectiveness has been discussed more than once. Beautifully shoot at the camera in greenhouse conditions for single targets without interference and maneuver. Believe the old pvoshnik, this is not at all like a massive raid of maneuvering targets covered by interference.
      4. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 25
        +2
        Quote: Wiruz
        This is our asymmetric answer "p.i.d.s.o.s.a.m".

        Urrrryayayaya !!! Army! Fleet! Caliber-NK! wassat

        Only now, almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with Standard Missile III anti-aircraft missiles, capable of hitting ballistic targets at a distance of up to 500 km, and at altitudes up to 250 km ( here from memory). Add THAAD Mobile Ground Systems bully...

        just do not lie, not all, and not SM-3 (by 2020 it is planned to stock up about 600 pieces at an average price of 20 lyam.), there are still a lot with SM-2.
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 16: 57
          +5
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          SM-2 is a lot.

          SM-2 anti-aircraft missile, not missile defense, the newer SM-6 has a maximum speed of Mach 3,5, which is very small for intercepting ballistic missiles.
      5. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 16: 54
        +4
        Quote: Wiruz
        Urrrryayayaya !!! Army! Fleet! Caliber-NK!

        If a solid fuel accelerator is removed from Kalibka-NK, it can also be launched from an airplane. How many Tu-95, Su-34, Su-35S, Su-30SM do we have? Enough to fire a salvo of 1000+ Caliber missiles.
        Quote: Wiruz
        Only here are almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers armed with Standard Missile III anti-aircraft missiles,

        Yeah. They install the SM-3 to the detriment of air defense, and Russia takes them with warm missile launchers. SM-3 is good against ballistic missiles, not cruise missiles. For cruise missiles need SM-2 or SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles.

        Quote: Wiruz
        Add to this the THAAD mobile ground systems ...

        You forget that the S-500 is a step towards parity. Prior to this, we only modernized our nuclear missiles more actively, built Topol-M, Yars, Bulava. The United States, on the other hand, scored on modernization (maintenance and replacement of solid fuel components is not that) and developed missile defense.
        Russia now, in addition to the developed means of overcoming missile defense, will have its own missile defense systems capable of intercepting Minutmen-3 and Trident-2.
        1. Wiruz
          Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 07
          -3
          If a solid fuel accelerator is removed from Kalibka-NK, it can also be launched from an airplane. How many Tu-95, Su-34, Su-35S, Su-30SM do we have? Enough to fire a salvo of 1000+ Caliber missiles.

          Thank you But I am already aware of this topic. They put me in the Americans here, so we will assume that I am a triple agent of the CIA-Mossad-GRU laughing

          Yeah. They install the SM-3 to the detriment of air defense, and Russia takes them with warm missile launchers. SM-3 is good against ballistic missiles, not cruise missiles. For cruise missiles need SM-2 or SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles.

          Correct if I'm wrong, but Arlie Burke carries about 70 SM-2 missiles in "standard configuration". I do not think that its air defense capabilities will suffer greatly if a dozen of these missiles are replaced by SM-3s. But in the capabilities of missile defense will greatly benefit
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 17: 15
            +4
            Quote: Wiruz
            Correct if I'm wrong, but Arlie Burke carries about 70 SM-2 missiles in "standard configuration". I do not think that its air defense capabilities will suffer greatly if a dozen of these missiles are replaced by SM-3s. But in the capabilities of missile defense will greatly benefit

            Dozens are few, more is needed, since 1 missile is 1 target, for guaranteed destruction of the first ballistic missile, several SM-1 are needed, and to defeat already divided maneuvering warheads over the target + false targets and electronic warfare equipment, you need even more.
            To hit the 1st anti-ship missile you need at least 2 anti-aircraft missiles.
            So count how many anti-aircraft missiles the destroyer needs to repel the attack of a submarine with cruise missiles + surface ships + aircraft.
            And if you consider that they will hang in the Baltic Sea, the Barents Sea or the Black Sea, you can also add a bastion.
            As an option, the bastion can also be established in Syria, so that life in the US does not seem to be honey in the Mediterranean Sea.
            1. ty60
              ty60 10 May 2016 19: 32
              +3
              At the same time, the opponent forgot about the capabilities of electronic warfare. And this is an antivirus.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 10 May 2016 17: 36
          +13
          "own missile defense system capable of intercepting Minutemans-3 and Tridents-2" ////

          These will not work.
          But all the same, the S-500 is a major step forward.
          In 20 years, many of Russia's neighbors, such as Turkey, will have BRDS
          and Ukraine, and others. China has hundreds of them with nuclear weapons (one third of them, at least, are aimed at objects in the eastern part of Russia). BRDS will become one of the main threats.
          And the S-500 is the correct answer.
          1. Parsec
            Parsec 10 May 2016 22: 12
            +4
            Quote: voyaka uh
            In 20 years, many of Russia's neighbors, such as Turkey and Ukraine, and others, will have BRDS.


            Ukraine will not have a clear answer, and Turkey is in doubt. Are the other neighbors Baltic tigers? Azerbaijan, Georgia? How, how so.
            Iran yes, China yes, Japan yes.

            Progress cannot be stopped, but the results of the crisis are difficult to predict.
          2. Ajent cho
            Ajent cho 10 May 2016 22: 56
            +3
            Quote: voyaka uh
            of them a third, at least, is aimed at objects in the eastern part of Russia

            This is just your guess. Though not without logic.
      6. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 11 May 2016 15: 14
        +1
        Quote: Wiruz
        Only now, almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with Standard Missile III anti-aircraft missiles, capable of hitting ballistic targets at a distance of up to 500 km, and at altitudes up to 250 km ( here from memory). Add THAAD mobile ground complexes to this ...


        Do not scare the plebs - they do not like it
        They should think that everything is fine with us already :) - Putin thinks for them.
      7. Rosty
        Rosty 12 May 2016 16: 38
        0
        Quantitatively they surpass us, but these forces are greatly smeared around the ball. The quality is debatable. There is a plus, oddly enough, in that we do not have enough technology - we will build a new and more advanced one, and not modernize the old one. The main thing is that there would be enough time ...
      8. Rosty
        Rosty 12 May 2016 16: 38
        +1
        Quantitatively they surpass us, but these forces are greatly smeared around the ball. The quality is debatable. There is a plus, oddly enough, in that we do not have enough technology - we will build a new and more advanced one, and not modernize the old one. The main thing is that there would be enough time ...
    2. Altona
      Altona 10 May 2016 16: 06
      +2
      Quote: avvg
      This is our asymmetric answer "p.i.d.s.o.s.a.m".

      ---------------------
      And what is "symmetrical"? Not asymmetric, but more or less adequate.
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 17
        -5
        Quote: Altona
        Quote: avvg
        This is our asymmetric answer "p.i.d.s.o.s.a.m".

        ---------------------
        And what is "symmetrical"? Not asymmetric, but more or less adequate.

        symmetric, would be an analogue of SM-3.
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 01
          +4
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          symmetric, would be an analogue of SM-3.

          What for? Why do we need a kinetic intercept rocket?
          Such an interception makes sense only at the booster stage of an ICBM. When the bb separates, these missiles are meaningless.
        2. Altona
          Altona 10 May 2016 20: 11
          +2
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          symmetric, would be an analogue of SM-3.

          --------------------
          Where do we put them? Surround America with our Arleigh Burkes counterparts? Will they let us do it?
  3. LÄRZ
    LÄRZ 10 May 2016 15: 47
    +3
    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 encounter challenges in overcoming them.
    But these are your problems, not ours.
  4. just exp
    just exp 10 May 2016 15: 49
    +3
    write about S-350
    The complex is able to fight 16 goals at the same time, having in the kit 32 rockets.

    in one launcher there are 12 missiles, how can there be 32 missiles in a complex? Is that 2 and a half PUs in the division?
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 18
      +5
      Quote: just explo
      Is that 2 and a half PUs in the division?

      reporters sir ... wink
      1. ssergn
        ssergn 10 May 2016 17: 28
        0
        No, not like that. Dave, sir. He is such a.
  5. Wiruz
    Wiruz 10 May 2016 15: 49
    -4
    But will not be enough? 200 km in height, it’s not so much what
    According to an early statement, the S-500 will not only have to provide missile defense, but also hit targets in near space - destroy spy satellites (at least).
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 10 May 2016 15: 55
      +11
      The range is more than 600. And the height of 200 km is not small, the ISS "hangs" at 350.
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 10 May 2016 16: 02
        -9
        The ISS hangs for 400 km, if my memory serves me right. But spy satellites often fly above 200 km hi
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 10 May 2016 16: 10
          +6
          The Russian goal is not about satellites. They can be destroyed easier and cheaper. Tests have already been conducted, successfully.
          The purpose of ballistic missile defense BB ballistic missiles. In conjunction with the A-135 system will allow 1. to cut off false targets at an altitude of approx. 70km 2. partially destroy and disable part of the bb. 3. BBs will lose speed and change direction, which will make them available for the S-300 even, just 400 and 500 will reach much higher.
          In general, Soviet / Russian missile defense against mass nuclear strike.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 10 May 2016 17: 44
            +1
            "In combination with the A-135 system will allow
            1. cut off false targets at an altitude of approx. 70km
            2. partially destroy and disable part of the bb.
            3. BB will lose speed and change direction,
            making them available to the c-300 even,
            just 400 and 500 will get much higher. "////

            You have a wild fantasy, I must admit. hi
            But none of this is neither Russian nor American missile defense systems
            do not know how.
            1. ty60
              ty60 10 May 2016 19: 44
              +1
              What if BBs accelerate with a decrease? Such an option is also appropriate. The architecture is unknown. What if these are false goals? Fortunetelling on coffee grounds. However, a talker is a godsend for a spy
            2. Altona
              Altona 10 May 2016 20: 16
              +2
              Quote: voyaka uh
              But none of this is neither Russian nor American missile defense systems
              do not know how.

              ----------------------------
              In general, we can return to SDI, the technologies are already ancient and reliable. We throw into space a "pack of tungsten scrap" weighing 3 tons and "lower it" to New York. How can you catch 1000 3 kg crowbars? That will blow the city to dust Rather a strategic object in it.
              1. adept666
                adept666 11 May 2016 13: 06
                +2
                How can you catch 1000 3-kg scraps? Which will smash the city to dust. Rather, a strategic object in it.
                Yes you are my friend monster wassat Give each American pope a refractory crowbar!laughing
          2. DimerVladimer
            DimerVladimer 11 May 2016 15: 44
            +1
            Quote: dvina71
            In general, Soviet / Russian missile defense against mass nuclear strike.

            It is impossible by modern means to intercept a massive strike - even over a local area (such as Moscow / Edwards base).
            The issue of the number of missiles / warheads in the warrant, especially since after the first airborne nuclear explosion, the radars in this area will be blinded (the airborne nuclear explosion area becomes impenetrable for radars) and the rest of the blocks will go through missile defense.
            The missile defense area should be protected from a preemptive strike - to intercept the advanced units and give some chance of a retaliatory strike.
        2. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 46
          +1
          Quote: Wiruz
          The ISS hangs for 400 km, if my memory serves me right. But spy satellites often fly above 200 km hi

          ISS-No more than 400 km. The circulation period is 90 minutes. Yes, see for yourself
          http://re-actor.net/space/992-iss-live-stream.html видеокамеры NASA
        3. fzr1000
          fzr1000 10 May 2016 17: 44
          +5
          In general, to be objective, the ISS "walks" in the altitude range from 300 to 400. I gave the average altitude.
    2. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 20
      +4
      [quote = Wiruz] But will it be enough? 200 km in height, it’s not so much what the exact numbers said so! wassat "calibers" were also considered "close combat".
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 10 May 2016 16: 41
        -9
        "calibers" were also considered "close combat".

        Who counted? Those whom God has deprived of brains? The fact that 3M14 is our ala-Tomahawk - non-nuclear reincarnation of the Pomegranate was clear from the very beginning.
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 48
          +1
          Quote: Wiruz
          "calibers" were also considered "close combat".

          Who counted? Those whom God has deprived of brains? The fact that 3M14 is our ala-Tomahawk - non-nuclear reincarnation of the Pomegranate was clear from the very beginning.

          to whom it is clear? from that and fucked up everything at that?
          1. Wiruz
            Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 01
            0
            to whom it is clear? from that and fucked up everything at that?

            Excuse me ... Have you personally observed their stunned faces? Or just read 100500 articles / videos with the title like "How is our Caliber ... NATO betrayed the rotation of the axis of which was our genital organ"?
            Even with the commissioning of Dagestan (it was like in 2012), which was the first ship of our Navy, armed with Caliber-NK, information began to flow, they say, 3m54 hits at 350-375 km, and 3m14 at 1500-2500 km. Even the first channel showed a video from the Caucasus-2012 exercise, where they say it in plain text.
            hi
            1. fzr1000
              fzr1000 10 May 2016 22: 28
              0
              And what have you been bombarded with? I do not understand. Sane questions, normal answers.
              1. Wiruz
                Wiruz 11 May 2016 10: 49
                0
                And what have you been bombarded with? I do not understand. Sane questions, normal answers.

                Collective unconscious wink
                After all, to shout "Hurray!" easier than thinking "Is it worth shouting here?" hi
  6. realist
    realist 10 May 2016 15: 54
    +4
    Thank God that there is enough money and knowledge to develop and put into service new models. this makes me happy .
  7. Altona
    Altona 10 May 2016 16: 05
    0
    A Pakistani often gives out songs of praise on the mountain. Reading is nice, of course, but there is practically no informational content. He became similar to Dima Gubernieva.
  8. drilled
    drilled 10 May 2016 16: 13
    +1
    Something incomprehensible!
    Although ... Once upon a time, in the early 90s, a designer from Sukhoi came to our school. We then asked, how do we sell the newest cars to Indians and all Malaysians? He then said literally "Give me money - our broom flies!"))))
  9. Donlomakin
    Donlomakin 10 May 2016 16: 17
    0
    The first regiment of new anti-aircraft missile systems will defend Moscow and the central part of Russia.
    The second and third regiments, presumably, will go to the Crimea and Kaliningrad.
  10. Yak-15
    Yak-15 10 May 2016 16: 18
    -7
    Tremble the filthy Yankees and their young European lackeys.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 10 May 2016 16: 53
      +5
      Quote: YAK-15
      Tremble the filthy Yankees and their young European lackeys.

      I would correct the minus for you, but they zadolbali "slogans" ...
      1. Yak-15
        Yak-15 10 May 2016 17: 16
        -4
        Yes, this is not a slogan. Just lackeys, they rush at this, like crazy dogs.
      2. Yak-15
        Yak-15 10 May 2016 17: 16
        -4
        Yes, this is not a slogan. Just lackeys, they rush at this, like crazy dogs.
      3. Maksus
        Maksus 10 May 2016 19: 20
        +3
        But I won’t fix it, they’re already sick of raising their ratings with slogans ...
  11. soroKING
    soroKING 10 May 2016 16: 19
    +1
    Quote: Altona
    A Pakistani often gives out songs of praise on the mountain. Reading is nice, of course, but there is practically no informational content. He became similar to Dima Gubernieva.

    he knows - our vimans are the most vimanists bully
  12. sir_obs
    sir_obs 10 May 2016 16: 28
    0
    many US military leaders fear that even stealth aircraft such as the F-22, F-35, and B-2 will encounter problems in overcoming them.

    They will collide with the ground, it will be necessary to integrate harvesting machines into the air defense system, to collect and remove NATO garbage.
  13. Alexandr2637
    Alexandr2637 10 May 2016 16: 33
    0
    In the near future, the first samples of the new S-500 anti-aircraft missile system of the Almaz-Antey concern can be put into service with the Russian army

    This is all great, of course, but ...
    In the future ... may come (or maybe not, and in what future)
    That's when they do, then we will rejoice!
  14. arjuna307
    arjuna307 10 May 2016 16: 48
    +2
    What I like best is that our manufacturers do not deal specifically with air defense systems, but work comprehensively, in addition to air defense, a whole series of electronic warfare systems are being developed that can, in conjunction with air defense systems, deal with various threats. at different stages, and such a systematic approach increases the effectiveness of defense at times. Do not get knocked far, confuse, do not confuse knocked close.
  15. ilya_oz
    ilya_oz 10 May 2016 16: 56
    +1
    Does anyone know if the troops for the S-400 already have a 400km rocket?
    1. dvina71
      dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 12
      0
      They adopted EMNIP that year .. And for what purpose are you interested in?
      1. ilya_oz
        ilya_oz 10 May 2016 17: 15
        +1
        Just a very long time taken into service and fed promises. And when they seemed to be accepted, neither the rumor nor the spirit of these missiles. It seems that high altitude intercepts were not reported either.
    2. Wiruz
      Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 13
      +1
      They say there is. They call "40n6". Rumor has it that it accelerates to Mach 12 and has a defeat height of up to 185 km. I repeat - these are rumors hi
  16. t118an
    t118an 10 May 2016 16: 59
    +1
    Dave got scared? Do you know what this means for Americans? The fact that they are getting catastrophically few arguments for convincing Russia. Economic ends, and the military will be in this case clearly not enough.
  17. Verdun
    Verdun 10 May 2016 17: 01
    +4
    Quote: Wiruz
    Only now the "p.i.n.d.so.so.v" almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers are armed with anti-aircraft missiles Standard Missile III,

    As you know, the devil is in the details. The damaging part of the rocket is kinetic. And this means that one missile is one target. while the cost of the SM-3 rocket ranges from $ 12-24 million.
    2012 missiles delivered for 129, 104 used ... until 2020, a total of 678 missiles are planned to be delivered
    The destroyers armed with these missiles are not 70 at all, but only 32. As for the THAAD complexes,
    About $ 2,3 billion for 1 complex [23].

    The cost of the AN / TPY-2 radar is $ 574 million. In 2011, 22 missiles were purchased for $ 1 billion, in 2012 - 42 missiles for $ 999 million, in 2013 it is planned to purchase 36 missiles, spending $ 777 million on them (for the United States) [24] [sn.
    At the same time, the S-500 declared interception of targets moving at a speed of 7 km / s, and the Americans tested their missiles at a speed of approach with a target of 4,7 m / s. In order to correctly compare American products with Russian S-500, you need to know at least the approximate cost of these systems.
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 12
      -2
      As you know, the devil is in the details. The damaging part of the rocket is kinetic. And that means one missile is one goal

      It is possible in more detail, but how are you going to shoot down more than one target with one missile (say from the S-500)? In addition, as far as I know from the air defense stories, two missiles are usually aimed at each target, so for sure hi
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 15
        +3
        Quote: Wiruz
        It is possible in more detail, but how are you going to shoot down more than one target with one missile (say from the S-500)?

        No way. But there is one trifle. The American missile defense system must get into the carcass of a rocket. Russian-made missiles destroy the target by the method of undermining. Which significantly increases the chance of defeat.
        1. Wiruz
          Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 21
          +2
          Well, actually, about missiles for the S-500 complex, and they are like 77n6-1 and 77n6-2 called, they also said that they would hit targets by "kinetic interception" yes
          In addition, I am sure that our method, and not ours, has its pros and cons. Or do you think that the Americans didn’t have enough brains to add explosives to the rocket? wassat
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 41
            0
            Quote: Wiruz
            Well, actually, about missiles for the S-500 complex, and they are like 77n6-1 and 77n6-2 called, they also said that they would hit targets by "kinetic interception"

            Well, they are for ballistic purposes. Ie flying along a strict trajectory. A maneuvering BB cannot be shot down with such a missile.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 10 May 2016 20: 19
          -2
          Significantly reduces. Just while Russia has not yet developed its
          "killer". Everything is ahead.
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 17: 20
        +1
        Quote: Wiruz
        But how are you going to shoot down more than one target with one missile (say from the S-500)?

        How about nuclear warhead? In the Moscow missile defense system A-135, anti-missiles with a nuclear charge were used.
        You can also install special ammunition on strategic missile defense.
        1. Wiruz
          Wiruz 10 May 2016 17: 30
          -3
          How about nuclear warhead? In the Moscow missile defense system A-135, anti-missiles with a nuclear charge were used.

          You know, I would choose between the fast death (nuclear explosion near my house) and slow (nuclear explosion several tens of kilometers above my house) would choose the first.
          There has been a debate about the effectiveness and safety of the use of special ammunition in missile defense systems ...
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 10 May 2016 17: 34
            +2
            Quote: Wiruz
            You know, I would choose between the fast death (nuclear explosion near my house) and slow (nuclear explosion several tens of kilometers above my house) would choose the first.

            If the explosion occurred outside the atmosphere, in theory there should be no radiation pollution and the power is usually not large.
          2. dvina71
            dvina71 10 May 2016 17: 48
            +6
            Quote: Wiruz
            You know, I would choose between the fast death (nuclear explosion near my house) and slow (nuclear explosion several tens of kilometers above my house) would choose the first.

            PF .. A nuclear explosion at an altitude of 70 km is practically safe for the surface.
            Such an explosion will easily separate the LC from the BB, some of them will damage, they will change speed and direction.
            Incidentally 70km not just chosen. There is still an atmosphere there, so there is not only temperature, pressure and radiation, but also a blast wave. And on the surface of the earth it will look just like a bright flash. Irradiation from this does not threaten you.
      3. FREGATENKAPITAN
        FREGATENKAPITAN 10 May 2016 17: 21
        0
        It is possible in more detail, but how are you going to shoot down more than one target with one missile (say from the S-500)? In addition, as far as I know from the air defense stories, two missiles are usually aimed at each target, so for sure hi = Here other details are already there .... well, at a vantage point, the price of the S-500 honeycomb rocket is comparable to the opponent?
        1. Verdun
          Verdun 10 May 2016 18: 31
          0
          Here, there are already other details .... well, at a vantage point, the price of the S-500 honeycomb rocket is comparable to the opponent?
          So from that I began the conversation. If the cost of American missiles and systems is known at least approximately, then there is no such information about Russian ones. We still need to look at the effectiveness of American missiles. Interception when approaching a target at a total speed of 4,7 km / s is not enough, given that the speed of the warhead, say SS-20, is 6 km / s. Russian complexes in this regard look preferable. But if attempts to unjustifiably raise prices and cut the dough begin, then, alas, you will have to forget about the effectiveness of the S-500 ...
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 10 May 2016 20: 16
      0
      ". The striking part of the missile is kinetic. This means that one missile is one target." ////

      The Americans thought about it.
      The head part of the rocket with several "killers" has already been made, either 3, or 6 ... there was a photo.
      But she has not been tested yet.
  18. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 10 May 2016 17: 09
    +1
    For Russia there are no posiers; we will get everyone everywhere.
  19. NordUral
    NordUral 10 May 2016 17: 14
    +1
    For air defense and missile defense do not mind the country's money. Our children will sleep more calmly.
  20. bad
    bad 10 May 2016 17: 23
    +1
    Moscow somehow managed to continue developing modern air defense systems, preserving basically their combat capabilities. 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 encounter problems in overcoming them.
    .. smiled very expression- "somehow" laughing ..You will never understand the mattresses of US, and not overcome soldier we do not fit into your selfish shit democracy, and our logic is not for your mind .. bully
  21. VOENOBOZ
    VOENOBOZ 10 May 2016 18: 06
    +3
    Brothers, I won’t understand how the Americans Piss North Korea and we for them dirt from under the nails, or something.
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 10 May 2016 18: 13
      +1
      Brothers, I won’t understand how the Americans Piss North Korea and we for them dirt from under the nails, or something.

      Who would you be more afraid of: an adult, intelligent, thoroughbred German shepherd (like Russia) or a small, lousy, ugly, furious and absolutely unpredictable mongrel mongrel, and even with worms (like North Korea)? winked
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 10 May 2016 19: 26
    +2
    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 encounter challenges in overcoming them.

    That is, the Western press does not deny that many American military leaders are going to do this in the future. Clear. No questions.
  24. Maddog
    Maddog 10 May 2016 21: 44
    0
    let them shoot now
  25. Hypocrite
    Hypocrite 10 May 2016 23: 12
    0
    For every cunning sm-3 there is a "Status" torpedo ...
  26. Zomanus
    Zomanus 10 May 2016 23: 55
    +3
    For those who shout that America has more missiles and more generally it’s super.
    Russia relies on a defensive strategy.
    Like we don’t touch anyone and nobody will touch us.
    And America has an offensive strategy.
    Worldwide, the war unleashes.
    Plus defense of numerous bases around the world.
    The mere fact of an attack on us will lead to
    that the aggressor country will turn into a desert.
    It is important for us to repulse the first strike, because we have early warning systems and protective missile systems.
    1. vikmar64
      vikmar64 11 May 2016 14: 57
      +1
      Quote: Zomanus

      Russia relies on defensive strategy.
      Like we don’t touch anyone and nobody will touch us.
      And America has an offensive a strategy.
      Worldwide, the war unleashes.
      Plus defense of numerous bases around the world.
      The mere fact of an attack on us will lead to
      that the aggressor country will turn into a desert.
      It is important for us to repulse the first strike, because we have early warning systems and protective missile systems.


      I completely agree. How worried they are about the fact that over Russia a "zone of inaccessibility" is being formed for their air force and missiles. For some reason, it upsets them more than the fact that we have strategic missiles that are not caught by their missile defense system. I agree with the previous statement, their goal is the first disarming strike. And they just "bleed at the heart", looking at what our videoconferencing is turning into.
  27. Winnie76
    Winnie76 11 May 2016 00: 04
    +1
    Yes. If Status-6 really exists (which can’t be verified in any way), the missile defense system against Russia’s ICBMs becomes less active
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 11 May 2016 15: 53
      +1
      Like the idea of ​​Sakharov about a giant nuclear torpedo, revived in the status-6 project, capable of causing tsunamis and flushing coastal cities into the ocean, lives and lives? I think this is pure disinformation.
      The point is to put a torpedo in the garden when ICBMs solve the same problems faster, cheaper, more efficiently.
  28. Ros 56
    Ros 56 11 May 2016 05: 20
    +2
    Well, by the year 20 they will close the country with an umbrella, it will already be easier. And for all-party people and all-resident people, you can put it with the device and wish - a tablecloth is expensive.
  29. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 11 May 2016 06: 46
    0
    Probably the only article of Majumar without cons. Some American fears, without comparisons and options ...
  30. Evil 55
    Evil 55 11 May 2016 14: 01
    0
    A wonderful splinter in the head of the next US President ..
  31. volgroo
    volgroo 11 May 2016 18: 45
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    ". The striking part of the missile is kinetic. This means that one missile is one target." ////

    The Americans thought about it.
    The head part of the rocket with several "killers" has already been made, either 3, or 6 ... there was a photo.
    But she has not been tested yet.


    Of course, you can take a picture with 9 missiles, and then test it.
    (I just wanted to make a joke. Nothing personal !!)
  32. Brain Yurich
    Brain Yurich 11 May 2016 20: 57
    0
    Quote: Wiruz
    У

    Only now the "p.i.d.d.so.o." has almost 70 destroyers and 20 cruisers ...


    half of our bastion is enough for each of their destroyers
  33. Torins
    Torins 11 May 2016 21: 04
    0
    Quote: MBDA
    What are you interested in for?

    For general development, I read that in western complexes one machine with a radar.
    I can’t understand if there is a radar for detecting and capturing a target, then why another radar? Is it possible to fit all the radars on one chassis?

    What for? Tracking and destroying one machine is easier than several)
  34. CRASH
    CRASH 11 May 2016 22: 19
    0
    "even stealth aircraft such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will have problems getting past them."

    Lord, tell them already somebody that their invisibility, invisible only from their radar! It is strange that the infamous F117 was not indicated, because they remember that his C125 Dvina was shot down, as old as the world.
  35. Rock616
    Rock616 11 May 2016 23: 43
    0
    The article seems to be laudatory, but knowing the Author Dave Majumdar you come to the conclusion that he is degenerate .........
    P / S Read his past opuses and you will agree with me.
  36. Rock616
    Rock616 11 May 2016 23: 47
    0
    And, here’s the super duper expert Dave Majumdamar himself ....
    I find with the top photo (character) they are very similar! laughing
    1. Gippo
      Gippo 12 May 2016 00: 15
      0
      Well, I took it straight from the tongue.
      Some kind of "eksperd" from the South Asian black-ass said something.
      And away we go ....
      Slavs, come to your senses! stop
      1. HERMES
        HERMES 13 May 2016 11: 43
        0
        Quote: Gippo
        Some kind of "eksperd" from the South Asian black-ass said something.
        And away we go ....
        Slavs, come to your senses!


        ... We will listen to our ... light-assed!

        What kind of nationalistic statements?
        What didn’t you like?
        The Russians intend to tie together C-500 and other such systems as C-400, C-300BM4, C-350 and others, creating a single integrated air defense network. As one industry expert from the United States noted, although the Russian military-industrial sector was very badly damaged as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Moscow somehow managed to continue the development of modern air defense systems, retaining mostly their combat capabilities. Some samples of these new systems are so perfect that many American commanders fear that even invisible airplanes such as the F-22, F-35 and B-2 will face problems in overcoming them.
        Posted by Dave Majumdar - National Interest Editor for Military Affairs

  37. dsm100
    dsm100 12 May 2016 07: 42
    +3
    While the Americans are thinking about what to do with the S-500, we are probably already developing the S-600 and S-700 ...
  38. h_d
    h_d 13 May 2016 08: 26
    0
    scared bastards ...
    it seems to me that their "invisibles" have no chance.
  39. Dubasof
    Dubasof 13 May 2016 15: 00
    0
    Oh, quickly, our friends have taken up missile defense recently ... It will be worthy of them angry y answer
  40. Alex von Dorn
    Alex von Dorn 16 May 2016 06: 29
    0
    Tremble adversaries .... and scratch turnips ...