What's new

How Russia’s S-400 makes the F-35 obsolete

Major Shaitan Singh

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
43
Country
India
Location
India
RIAN_02413069.HR.ru_468.jpg


It’s not often that a relatively inexpensive air defence weapon is able to make a trillion dollar fighter programme obsolete. But the $500 million S-400 missile system has done precisely that to America’s brand new F-35 stealth fighter.

In November 2014 Moscow and Beijing inked a $3 billion agreement for the supply of six battalions of S-400 anti-aircraft/anti-missile systems that will significantly boost China’s air defence capability against the US and its allies in the Western Pacific.

With a tracking range of 600 km and the ability to hit targets 400 km away at a blistering speed of 17,000 km an hour – faster than any existing aircraft–the S-400 is a truly scary weapon if you are facing its business end.First deployed by Russia in 2010, each S-400 battalion has eight launchers, a control centre, radar and 16 missiles available as reloads.

Unlike the overhyped US Patriot missile that turned out to be a dud in battle, the S-400 was designed to create the daddy of Iron Domes. “Given its extremely long range and effective electronic warfare capabilities, the S-400 is a game-changing system that challenges current military capabilities at the operational level of war,” Paul Giarra, president, Global Strategies and Transformation, told Defense News. The S-400 will have the “effect of turning a defensive system into an offensive system, and extend China’s A2/AD (anti-access/area-denial) umbrella over the territory of American allies and the high seas.”

But first a bit of background. The S-400 was developed to defend Russian air space and a few hundred kilometers further against missiles and aircraft of all types, including stealth. Because it is a highly potent and accurate weapon that can tip the balance of power in any war theatre, Moscow has long resisted the temptation of exporting even its older iteration, the S-300, to troubled allies Syria and Iran.

An S-300 missile fired from, say, Damascus will blow away an aircraft over central Tel Aviv in about 107 seconds, giving the Israelis just enough time to say their prayers. It is precisely because the S-series missile systems can so dramatically upset the military balance that Israel has pressured Russia against introducing it into the Middle East tinderbox. Israel has also warned it would go after Syrian S-300 batteries with everything it’s got.

However, China’s case is different because the chances of another country daring to take a shot at the Chinese are next to zero. This development is really bad news for the F-35.

Russia and the US have traditionally adopted different military strategies. During the Cold War the US relied upon carrier-based aircraft to project power in the Western Pacific, and the strategy continues today. The Russians on the other hand decided these floating airfields were easy targets for their shore-based long-range aviation and anti-ship cruise missiles.

If it came to war, waves of long-range bombers such as the Tu-95M Backfire would take off from safe bases deep in continental Russia, fire their powerful cruise missiles from safe stand-offdistances and blast the carriers out of the water. The Russian pilots would then head home to watch the damage on CNN!

The Russian logic was elegantly simple. Back then the average nuclear powered aircraft carrier cost$1 billion whereas the average anti-ship cruise missile cost $1 million or less. For the money they’d have spent on a single carrier, the Russians figured they could build a thousand cruise missiles. Even if just a fraction of these missiles got through, all American carriers were dead in the water.

The Russians were so sure about the accuracy of their cruise missiles that the Backfirescarried only one Raduga Kh-22 (NATO name AS-4 Kitchen) missile armed with a nuclear warhead. According to weapons expert Bill Sweetman and Bill Gunston these missiles could be “programmed to enter the correct Pentagon window”.

China too is following the same trajectory. It has adopted the Russian Cold War strategy of attacking aircraft carriers with waves of bombers armed with its cruise missiles(that are knockoffs of Russian missiles). In fact, complete destruction of a carrier isn’t necessary; even slight damage can put such large vessels out of commission for months. And since wars don’t last that long these days, the crippling of its carrier arm will force American capitulation early on in any conventional conflict.

To counter the missile threat to its carriers, the Americans are relying on the F-35 as a cruise missile killer. More than a trillion dollars have already been spent on this troubled project. Even if the F-35 is able to miraculously overcome its shortcomings, the S-400 upends this strategy.

Lockheed-Martin claims the F-35 has such advanced electronics that it can jam anything directed at it.But the S-400 won’t be easy to shake off. “It has many features specifically designed to overcome countermeasures and stealth, such as a larger, more powerful radar that is more resistant to jamming. It also actually has a set of three missiles of varying range that provide overlapping layers of defense,” Ivan Oelrich, an independent defence analyst told The Diplomat.

There’s another way the S-400 degrades the F-35’s availability. Fourth generation aircraft such as the Su-30 and MiG-29 have aluminium bodies but stealth aircraft have composite bodies with special radar absorbing coating that requires several hours to apply. For each hour of flight, the F-35 requires 9-12 man hours of maintenance.

But that’s in normal flight. Wear and tear will be of a higher degree during evasive maneuvers that are inevitable if trying to shake off an S-400 radar lock (that’s if the F-35 has enough time to react to the missile in the first place). Not only does the stealthy skin require new repair techniques, but extensive skin damage will necessitate repairs at Lockheed’s land-based facilities. It is because of this reason that Eglin air force base in Florida has17 mechanics per F-35.

Navy gets jitters

The F-35’s backers say the aircraft can emit frequencies, which can confuse and disable the S-400. But the US Navy’s acquisition of 22 Growler jamming aircraft suggests the F-35’s jamming capability is not really all that it’s cracked up to be. According to Air Force Technology, there aresome figures in the US Navy and industry which say the F-35’s stealth and EW capabilities are simply not enough.

“Pentagon officials are in an awkward position. If the Pentagon was to invest in more electronic warfare aircraft – such as the Growler – it would signal a lack of faith in the F-35’s capability to penetrate enemy airspace. Equally, if it didn’t invest in additional electronic warfare capabilities, the lives of F-35 pilots could be at risk with the proliferation of more advanced A2/AD weapons in countries such as China.”

These weapons the Pentagon is losing sleep over are clearly the S-300 and S-400.

According to Air Power Australia, “The S-300P/S-400 family of surface to air missile systems is without doubt the most capable SAM system in widespread use in the Asia Pacific region.”

“While the S-300P/S-400 series is often labelled ‘Russia’s Patriot’, the system in many key respects is more capable than the US Patriot series, and in later variants offers mobility performance and thus survivability much better than that of the Patriot.”

Growing trust

The missile deal is a pointer to the increasing bonhomie between the political leaderships in Moscow and Beijing. The S-400 deal follows the clearance of the Su-35 fighter-bomber sale to China last year. Negotiations that had got bogged down for years because the Russian side wanted to protect their intellectual property were greenlighted after the West imposed sanctions.

The Russian concern was the Chinese would buy a few ‘samples’, take them apart, and then cancel the deal after deciding they could reverse engineer local versions. These knock-offs which would then be peddled cheap as chips overseas. In fact, the Chinese have traditionally reverse-engineered Russian weapons. Their J-15 jet fighter, for instance, is a copy of the Russian Sukhoi-33.

However, the complexity of the S-300 and Russian aircraft engines has proved to be the biggest constraint on Beijing’s copycat industry. This has reassured Moscow about proceeding with the sale of advanced weaponry. Plus, in 2008 and 2012 Russia made China sign stronger intellectual property protection agreements.

As of now Beijing will only receive four of these systems, but even this small number will be enough to create the daddy of Iron Domes over future battlefield theatres.

If you are an F-35 pilot, here’s a piece of advice: stay out of range.
 
The F-35 is far superior and I am sure many countries are up to buying it. I wish the ME countries will look to join Turkish or Korean plane.
 
An S-300 missile fired from, say, Damascus will blow away an aircraft over central Tel Aviv in about 107 seconds, giving the Israelis just enough time to say their prayers. It is precisely because the S-series missile systems can so dramatically upset the military balance that Israel has pressured Russia against introducing it into the Middle East tinderbox. Israel has also warned it would go after Syrian S-300 batteries with everything it’s got.


Who is this stupid writer? A lot of bs, ther is no one sam system that can hit his target at maximum range. Every specification of sam are tested in best condition. The speed of the missile, the range and path. PDF have to stop allowing such bs article. Is the writer a indian?
 
However, the complexity of the S-300 and Russian aircraft engines has proved to be the biggest constraint on Beijing’s copycat industry.
According to AUSAIRPOWER HQ-9 has equal if not better capabilities. And the writers there are professional military analysts with doctorates in their fields.
 
An S-300 missile fired from, say, Damascus will blow away an aircraft over central Tel Aviv in about 107 seconds, giving the Israelis just enough time to say their prayers. It is precisely because the S-series missile systems can so dramatically upset the military balance that Israel has pressured Russia against introducing it into the Middle East tinderbox. Israel has also warned it would go after Syrian S-300 batteries with everything it’s got.


Who is this stupid writer? A lot of bs, ther is no one sam system that can hit his target at maximum range. Every specification of sam are tested in best condition. The speed of the missile, the range and path. PDF have to stop allowing such bs article. Is the writer a indian?

Are you aware of S400 capabilities if not go to below link, written by independent source.
Almaz-Antey 40R6 / S-400 Triumf / SA-21 SAM System /Самоходный Зенитный Ракетный Комплекс 40Р6 / С-400 'Триумф'

Why was turkey so interested in S300 system.
Why did US & Israel stop Russia from delivering S300 to Iran.

Grow up Kid!
 
Are you aware of S400 capabilities if not go to below link, written by independent source.
Almaz-Antey 40R6 / S-400 Triumf / SA-21 SAM System /Самоходный Зенитный Ракетный Комплекс 40Р6 / С-400 'Триумф'

Why was turkey so interested in S300 system.
Why did US & Israel stop Russia from delivering S300 to Iran.

Grow up Kid!


Turkey is never interested in s300, s400 and with Tot. They stop the delivering because if the west gonna interfer iran in the future that may be a problem. Only that is the reason, they can destoy it. A sam is important but not like that. They can destroy it with HARM, go fly with a squedron and shoot the damn sam:-). Saddam had too a lot of s300 and in the end it was destroyed:-).

A childish article about a sam.
 
Turkey is never interested in s300, s400 and with Tot. They stop the delivering because if the west gonna interfer iran in the future that may be a problem. Only that is the reason, they can destoy it. A sam is important but not like that. They can destroy it with HARM, go fly with a squedron and shoot the damn sam:-). Saddam had too a lot of s300 and in the end it was destroyed:-).

A childish article about a sam.
Sadam had S-200, not S-300.
 
According to AUSAIRPOWER HQ-9 has equal if not better capabilities. And the writers there are professional military analysts with doctorates in their fields.
True. Nonetheless, the Chinese I know on CDF aren't impressed by Carlo Kopp. He is an engineer and his field is computer science.

Syria-missile-range-WEB.png


missilerange.jpg


Sadam had S-200, not S-300.
S-200_03.JPG


Why was turkey so interested in S300 system.
Why did US & Israel stop Russia from delivering S300 to Iran.

Turkey confirmed that it will purchase the FD-2000 (an export version of the HQ9 system) missile system from China.
 
Turkey confirmed that it will purchase the FD-2000 (an export version of the HQ9 system) missile system from China.
No, it eventually gave in.
 
True. Nonetheless, the Chinese I know on CDF aren't impressed by Carlo Kopp. He is an engineer and his field is computer science.

Syria-missile-range-WEB.png


missilerange.jpg



S-200_03.JPG




Turkey confirmed that it will purchase the FD-2000 (an export version of the HQ9 system) missile system from China.
By the way, I read the story of Soviet military instructor, who commanded a battery of S-200 in Iraq in 1991. He argued that if Saddam had S-300 and full maintenance for these systems, he would not lost battle in the sky.
 
According to AUSAIRPOWER HQ-9 has equal if not better capabilities. And the writers there are professional military analysts with doctorates in their fields.

This is why China bought the S-300PMU2 in 2011 to protect key cities like Beijing? When HQ-9 was already in serial production?
Mind you, Almaz-Antey was involved in design and development of HQ-9.
 
This is why China bought the S-300PMU2 in 2011 to protect key cities like Beijing? When HQ-9 was already in serial production?
Mind you, Almaz-Antey was involved in design and development of HQ-9.
It was probably to reverse engineer the S-300 and use its features to further improve HQ-9. Remember there is not just one version of HQ-9. There are huge gaps in capability of the different versions.
 
It was probably to reverse engineer the S-300 and use its features to further improve HQ-9. Remember there is not just one version of HQ-9. There are huge gaps in capability of the different versions.

32 units of S-300PMU, 64 units of S-300PMU1 and 64 units of S-300PMU2 in operational in Chinese Air Defence. How many of HQ-9 in operational today since they are in production since 1980?
You said that HQ-9 has a better characteristics, which version then?
 
No, it eventually gave in.
Correct. Nonetheless, they went with the Chinese rather than the Russian system.

Meanwhile Turkey perceived the proposed deployment of the S-300 missiles in Cyprus as a threat to its national security, and threatened to wage military action.

By the way, I read the story of Soviet military instructor, who commanded a battery of S-200 in Iraq in 1991. He argued that if Saddam had S-300 and full maintenance for these systems, he would not lost battle in the sky.
Two very big IF's. Until that time, S-300 exports were limited to Eastern European states. Only post 2000 are there wider exports.

Croatia no longer maintains an S-300 system it acquired from Ukraine in 1995. After much controversy, as of 2004 the system is no longer in Croatia and was presumably sold. According to some sources, including the court testimony of arms dealer Zvonko Zubak, the system was indeed shipped to the United States in 2004

Go figure.


Suter (computer program) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The US / Israeli response to the S-300 - DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums
Operation Orchard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
This is why China bought the S-300PMU2 in 2011 to protect key cities like Beijing? When HQ-9 was already in serial production?

The purchase of the S-300PMU2 happened long before that, with the deliveries taking place in incremental quantities, and thus it bears no indication that these weapons are in any way meant to supplant or even complement the HQ-9 in the niche that it occupies.

There is no indication that Russian systems were especially meant for high-value cities.

Mind you, Almaz-Antey was involved in design and development of HQ-9.

It would be great if there are authentic sources to go along with that.

It was probably to reverse engineer the S-300 and use its features to further improve HQ-9. Remember there is not just one version of HQ-9. There are huge gaps in capability of the different versions.

Beijing does reverse-engineer the S-300 and they are not the HQ-9s but rather the HQ-10, HQ-15, and HQ-18 missiles.
 
Back
Top Bottom