PeeD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,510
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Let me give some credits to Russians here: I said that AHR seeker equipped SAMs are the easy path for nations unable to develop a SAGG based system. The same is true for using a AESA radar as illumination radar; its a more expansive path to achieve something a PESA like the Russian Tombstone is able to do at much lower cost.
If you try to achieve something and need a technology that's twice as expensive but you competitor manages to do the same with technology half that price then his skills are higher.
The Russian design for the S-300P engagement radar was incredibly elegant and of high power. Iran may have been unable to copy it in a good way or somehow lacked access. So it may decided/been forced to go for the AESA path in order to achieve similar results.
This is one scenario. The other is that there is a technological reason to switch to AESA technology and that's the reason why Iran did it and Russia is said to have done it for it's S-500.
The most convincing reason to me would be that the AESA design can establish a good track on very high speed, hypersonic targets while the Gravestone has problems to do so. Jamming issues could be another reason, waveform agility and higher bandwidth for hopping.
The S-300P technology has been 50 years in work now and deserves credit, they perfected it with the limited means of that time.
If you try to achieve something and need a technology that's twice as expensive but you competitor manages to do the same with technology half that price then his skills are higher.
The Russian design for the S-300P engagement radar was incredibly elegant and of high power. Iran may have been unable to copy it in a good way or somehow lacked access. So it may decided/been forced to go for the AESA path in order to achieve similar results.
This is one scenario. The other is that there is a technological reason to switch to AESA technology and that's the reason why Iran did it and Russia is said to have done it for it's S-500.
The most convincing reason to me would be that the AESA design can establish a good track on very high speed, hypersonic targets while the Gravestone has problems to do so. Jamming issues could be another reason, waveform agility and higher bandwidth for hopping.
The S-300P technology has been 50 years in work now and deserves credit, they perfected it with the limited means of that time.
u r missed there
