0 for 2. U.S. long-range missile defense test fails again.

[unicorn]

Saturday, February 13, 2010 8:11:55 PM by ErnstStavroBlofeld
ASPLogin
Russia pulls S-400 air and missile defense system off the market

Russia has decided to withdraw its advanced missile defense system for export. Officials said the Kremlin has ordered the state-owned arms agency Rosoboronexport to end marketing of the S-400 air and missile defense system. They said Rosoboronexport was told that the S-400 would be deployed only in Russia until further notice.

"Russia would consider exports only after meeting the requirements of its own armed forces," Rosoboronexport director Anatoly Isaikin said on Jan. 28. Over the last five years, Rosoboronexport has sought to sell the S-400 to a range of Middle East states, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. So far, no export sales were reported.

"There are a lot of preliminary talks," Isaikin said.

The S-400 Triumph was designed to intercept airborne targets at up to 400 kilometers. Rosoboronexport has asserted that the system could destroy stealth aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles.

In 2009, Rosoboronexport lobbied the Turkish government to purchase the S-400. Ankara, which appears to favor the U.S.-origin PAC-3, has conducted a $1 billion tender for the procurement of missile defense systems.

Officials said the Russian military would require at least two years to exploit the potential of the S-400. The first S-400 battalion entered combat duty in the Moscow region in 2007.

"There have been bugs in the system and this has prevented us from properly demonstrating the S-400 abroad," another official said.

You call this a troublesome matter.This news is 11 months old.Check this out live firing in april.

YouTube - S-400 SA-21 Triumf surface-to-air missile system firing in action Russia Russian army RIA Novosti

 

[Hafizzz]

They probably will test it again and again until its successful just like we are doing.

And other countries will keep developing better and faster missiles.

 

[conworldus]

The S-400 has not been proven to be an effective missile defence platform, yet. China's missile defence test was carried out using KT-2, a DF family missile derivative. I don't remember Russia ever conducting a mid-course interception.

 

[Thomas]

You call this a troublesome matter.This news is 11 months old.Check this out live firing in april.

YouTube - S-400 SA-21 Triumf surface-to-air missile system firing in action Russia Russian army RIA Novosti

troublesome matter?

I was simply infering that systems as high tech as anti missile systems can have problems no matter who makes them. The S400 has had long repeated delays in it's production for a reason. Which is why the Russian military has been slow in getting it. The U.S. has systems as effective as the S400 already in service. And I am not talking about the interceptors in Alaska the article talks about.

The Alaska missiles were rushed into service with everyone knowing ahead of time they were not totally ready yet. This was done becuase of concerns about North Korea. right now it has about a 50/50 hit and miss record. the system uses new technolgy not employed before by the U.S. or Russia. So it may take more failures yet before they get the bugs worked out.

Currently the more effective ballistic missile defense rests with the SM-3 based on ships (a ground version is being worked on) or land based PAC-3.

 

[unicorn]

I was simply infering that systems as high tech as anti missile systems can have problems. The S400 has had long repeated delays in it's production for a reason. Which is why the Russian military has been slow in getting it. The U.S. has systems as effective as the S400 already in service. And I am not talking about the interceptors in Alaska the article talks about.

Delays happen in every sophisticated programs but that does't mean
that you will come up to some conclusions regarding the performance of the hardware.Besides you haven't mentioned what is the problem with S400 other than its late deployment.

The Alaska missiles were rushed into service with everyone knowing ahead of time they were not totally ready yet. This was done becuase of concerns about North Korea. right now it has about a 50/50 hit and miss record. the system uses new technolgy not employed before by the U.S. or Russia. So it may take more failures yet before they get the bugs worked out.

How you come to know that they were rushed into service?If you don't know than your reason is of no value.

Currently the more effective ballistic missile defense rests with the SM-3 based on ships (a ground version is being worked on) or land based PAC-3.

Thanks for that info.

 

[Thomas]

Delays happen in every sophisticated programs but that does't mean
that you will come up to some conclusions regarding the performance of the hardware.Besides you haven't mentioned what is the problem with S400 other than its late deployment.



How you come to know that they were rushed into service?If you don't know than your reason is of no value.



Thanks for that info.

the russians have not said what the techincal problems are. They are much more secretive with their programs. The only missile program that has been more transparent is the sea based Bulova. And that is becuase that test is able to be closely monitored and recorded by the west.

if the Bulova failures were any indication then perhaps the S400 has the same problems.....poor quality control in it's parts manufacturing.

And I know about the system in Alaska being rushed into service becuase of the outcry from it's critics at the time the decision was made to field it. do a google search if you want more proof.

 

[unicorn]

the russians have not said what the techincal problems are. They are much more secretive with their programs. The only missile program that has been more transparent is the sea based Bulova. And that is becuase that test is able to be closely monitored and recorded by the west.

if the Bulova failures were any indication then perhaps the S400 has the same problems.....poor quality control in it's parts manufacturing.

Speculation.

And I know about the system in Alaska being rushed into service becuase of the outcry from it's critics at the time the decision was made to field it. do a google search if you want more proof

.

USA government is not fool enough to rush a sophisticated program
into service just because of some critics.Again you are only speculating.It is OK if you disagree about the maturity of S400.Thanks for sharing your views with me.

 

[Defence Expert]

Russians are far better than USA.

failure is usual in development of any product (even it can be simple fan) and missile is one of the most complicated technology in the world. so not need to make it fun. however some people can't think that how difficult to develop the technology bcoz they only believe in buying the technology. russian and american make product according to there needs.

 

[Thomas]

Speculation.

.

USA government is not fool enough to rush a sophisticated program
into service just because of some critics.Again you are only speculating.It is OK if you disagree about the maturity of S400.Thanks for sharing your views with me.

lol, you forget I live in the united states. Problems with controversial systems such as anti-missile systems are widely publicized. even the military said the technology wasn't ready yet. do a google search and you will find what I say is true. And they didn't rush it into service becuase of critics. but becuase of concerns of rogue countries like North Korea. in fact the whole reason we left the ABM treaty to develop these systems is becuase of the same concerns.

And that is a fact not specualtion!

 

[TankGirl]

The United states is lagging in it's BMD program simply because our standards are much higher than the rest of the world. While most countries would be satisfied with a system that stops as many missiles as it can, America is soldiering on to find a system so capable that our country can never be held hostage by the threat of nuclear weapons again.

And we can afford to take our own sweet time, nobody will even dare to attack the US mainland anytime soon.

 

[spin666]

The United states is lagging in it's BMD program simply because our standards are much higher than the rest of the world. While most countries would be satisfied with a system that stops as many missiles as it can, America is soldiering on to find a system so capable that our country can never be held hostage by the threat of nuclear weapons again.

And we can afford to take our own sweet time, nobody will even dare to attack the US mainland anytime soon.

ROFL! When was there been a country that had HELD USA hostage?!!?! If you are going to said cuban crisis, I'm going laugh my self to death....

 

[anon45]

meh delete this.

 

[mjnaushad]

*facepalm

To trolls just think for 1 min before posting.....For god sake... Specially pointed at you unicorn.

 

[Safriz]

How about a kill cloud instead of a direct contact kill vehicle?
We all know that ICBMs are re entry missiles and upon re entry at roundabout mach 20 the warhead is surrounded by plasma which on its own can kill the warhead,only if it can breach the protective heat shield,be it ceramic or any other type.
Now if there was a way of breaching the heat shield? Something similar happened to a space shuttle(i don't remember the name),the heat shield was breached,Plasma found its way into the vehicle and blasted it into smithereens.

If an ICBM's path can be predicted accurately,we can fill missile defense missiles with some sort of chaff? May be Tungsten carbide or synthetic diamond? which is hard enough to breach any surface on impact? A shrapnel cloud of many hundred meters across can be created in the predicted path of the incoming missile. As the missile passes through the chaff cloud,the heat protection is breached and plasma will do the rest?

Well,just an idea.

 

[mnd]

troublesome matter?

You seem to not have idea of what are you talking about.

I was simply infering that systems as high tech as anti missile systems can have problems no matter who makes them. The S400 has had long repeated delays in it's production for a reason. Which is why the Russian military has been slow in getting it.

You are comparing a software glitch with a full system fail. The issue is not a small software "bug", but innefectiveness of the whole system, from poor rocket performance to radar fail, wich is not found on russian systems like in this case. The S-400 is not exported because Russia has a priority on arming with these systems.

The U.S. has systems as effective as the S400 already in service.

If you have look at American interceptors, they´re all quite crappy. None meets the performance of russian systems. The S-300 is decades ahead of any US SAM, thought this is caused by the rocket tech gap between US and Russia, wich invested massively on these weapons.

Currently the more effective ballistic missile defense rests with the SM-3 based on ships (a ground version is being worked on) or land based PAC-3.

It´s spelled "most effective", not "more effective" LOL, Now I´m questioning your age. In resume, This forum is not a self consolation site, go to post this garbage to another place.