New Russian S-500 Prometheus air defence missile system will soon enter service

[jessysingh]

If its in any way based on the S-400 then its useless, they couldn't even detect those Tomahawk cruise/target missiles, let alone shoot them down.

LOL first I know u never understand s 400 is not for cruise missiles its for TBM, IRBM, ETC..

Sure, just like the S-400 intercepted the Tomahawks launched on Shayrat Airbase.

abbe yar tomahawk is a CM not a BM and s 400 is only for BM type missels ab itna bavkuf kyu a yar plz just search about the different between in CM or BM

 

[Stuttgart001]

LOL first I know u never understand s 400 is not for cruise missiles its for TBM, IRBM, ETC..

Dude, CM is on the list of S-400’s recipe.
CM is just like a tiny jet flying at a low height at a subsonic speed.
It is not very hard to intercept if SAM has enough reaction time.
In the situation of Syrian airbase attack, S-400 apparently had not enough to handle so many CM.
But if there were a AWAC which could detect Tomahawks in a long distance more S-400s deployed in Syria, I am afraid the result would be totally different.

Just a minor correction: SM-6 is an all-aspect missile. Anti-shipping, air-defence, missile-defence, it can do either role. Against ballistic missiles both SM-2 and SM-6 are credible defences against tactical and short range varieties, but have a more limited capability against longer ranged missiles.

We can see SM-6 and SM-2 take turns swatting ballistic and cruise missiles in this video.

SM-3 is for intercepting medium and intermediate ballistic missiles only (with an inherent ASAT capability as a result).

Because it uses a hit to kill warhead it's of very limited use against cruise missiles or aircraft.

I know it. There are overlaps of different SAM's functions. I just decribe their main targets briefly.

 

[Beny Karachun]

LOL first I know u never understand s 400 is not for cruise missiles its for TBM, IRBM, ETC..


abbe yar tomahawk is a CM not a BM and s 400 is only for BM type missels ab itna bavkuf kyu a yar plz just search about the different between in CM or BM

In 2016, Russian anti-aircraft missile troops received new guided missiles for S-300 and S-400 defense systems. Anti-aircraft missile system, designed to destroy aircraft, cruise and ballistic missiles, it can also be used against ground objectives. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_missile_system )
I heard the Russians saying it can intercept a football sized object flying in supersonic speed.

Dude, CM is on the list of S-400’s recipe.
CM is just like a tiny jet flying at a low height at a subsonic speed.
It is not very hard to intercept if SAM has enough reaction time.
In the situation of Syrian airbase attack, S-400 apparently had not enough to handle so many CM.
But if there were a AWAC which could detect Tomahawks in a long distance more S-400s deployed in Syria, I am afraid the result would be totally different.

The attack literally took 30 minutes, its not like they launched all of the missiles at once, they launched it one by one:

And wait, so you are telling me its radar cannot even detect cruise missiles?

LOL first I know u never understand s 400 is not for cruise missiles its for TBM, IRBM, ETC..

And by the way we already used small precision guided 'ballistic missiles' against a Syrian airport to test the Predator Hawk missiles, the results-

Where was the S-400 and S-300?

Dude, let's be honest.
59 cruise missiles have been launched. It is a saturation attack which is too hard to defence for any single system even Patriot III.
The fight height of cruise missile is very low and it couldn't be detected in a long distance by ground radar no matter how sophisticated it is because of earth curvature, which give air defense system a very short time to react.
Only the AWACs could detect the vehicles flying at a low height in a long distance. It seems Russia did not deploy any AWAC in Syria.
So it is unfair to question S-400’s capability just based on this attack, given to the numbers of Tomahawk and S-400 system.


S-500 is not a replacement of S-400.
They are applied against different types of targets.

That's why we have on-shore radars, the Russians don't?
Well if the attack was against a Russian airport, and at that time the US wont warn them, what will Russia do?

No, its not unfair, the point that Russia couldn't detect those cruise missiles makes them look very weak- just read again what I said above.
And if you want more attacks on Syria by Israel without low-flying cruise missiles-
Happened just now-
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3321817/israel-attack-syrian-army-positions/

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/17/middleeast/israel-jets-syria-strikes/

And I can give you at least a dozen more

 

[Stuttgart001]

The attack literally took 30 minutes, its not like they launched all of the missiles at once, they launched it one by one:

Of course, the missiles should be launched one by one.
A saturation attack does not mean launching all your missiles at once,which no one can do it. It means a wave of attack in a short time.

And wait, so you are telling me its radar cannot even detect cruise missiles?

I didn't say its radar cannot detect ,what i say any ground radar cannot detect low-flying cruise missiles in a long distance because the surface of earth is curved and the electromagnetic wave travels straight.
And the AWAC flies in the air which mean its signal of radar will not be blocked by the surface of earch until it travel long way.
If you still do not understand , you can draw a point ,the abraction of radar, and a circle, the abraction of earth on a paper.
Draw a tangent of the circle through the point and you will know what i mean.

That's why we have on-shore radars, the Russians don't?
Well if the attack was against a Russian airport, and at that time the US wont warn them, what will Russia do?

Dude, you have little knowledge of modern air defence combat.
Today, there is no weapon vs weapon but system vs system.
There are different types of air defense system with different kinds of missile.
Any air defence system has its blind zone, so it need others to complement.
For a critical area like air port , simplily, a long-range SAM should be deployed at the critical area, other mid-range SAM will be deployed forward in the direction of possible attack to compensate the blind-zone of long-range SAM,while lots of short-range SAM should be deployed to compensate the blind-zone of long-rang and mid-range SAM.
At last, the multi-layer air defence architecture could handle threates from any direction and any height with a considerable reaction time.
Besides SAM, there are AWACs and fighers in Russian inventory.
The AWAC could guild the fighers to intercept the missiles beyond the cover of SAM.
The means of interception of fighters and SAMs are hard kill ，meanwhile there is a soft kill weapon,the EW armament, could make missile miss their target by jamming the GPS signals which guild the missiles.

It is a rough modern air-defence combat architecture for critical area.

Apparently, Russia could not deploy the whole architecture in Syria cause it's too expensive.
So I have said , a single SAM not matter how sophisicated is hard to counter such a saturation attack.

No, its not unfair, the point that Russia couldn't detect those cruise missiles makes them look very weak- just read again what I said above.

I do not assert that S-400 is definitely advanced and powerful.

What I mean is the performance of S-400 in the Tomahark attack could not be a convincing evidence used to question its capability.

My personal oppinion.

 

[Beny Karachun]

I didn't say its radar cannot detect ,what i say any ground radar cannot detect low-flying cruise missiles in a long distance because the surface of earth is curved and the electromagnetic wave travels straight.
And the AWAC flies in the air which mean its signal of radar will not be blocked by the surface of earch until it travel long way.
If you still do not understand , you can draw a point ,the abraction of radar, and a circle, the abraction of earth on a paper.
Draw a tangent of the circle through the point and you will know what i mean.

Yeah I understood that but forgot to delete this section, I started to talk about on shore radars in the next sentence.

Dude, you have little knowledge of modern air defence combat.
Today, there is no weapon vs weapon but system vs system.
There are different types of air defense system with different kinds of missile.
Any air defence system has its blind zone, so it need others to complement.
For a critical area like air port , simplily, a long-range SAM should be deployed at the critical area, other mid-range SAM will be deployed forward in the direction of possible attack to compesate the blind-zone of long-range SAM,while lots of short-range SAM should be deployed to compesate the blind-zone of long-rang and mid-range SAM.
At last, the multi-layer air defence architecture could handle threates from any direction and any height with a considerable reaction time.
Besides SAM, there are AWACs and fighers in Russian inventory.
The AWAC could guild the fighers to intercept the missiles beyond the cover of SAM.
The means of interception of fighters and SAMs are hard kill ，meanwhile there is a soft kill weapon,the EW armament, could make missile miss their target by jamming the GPS signals which guild the missiles.

It is a rough modern air-defence combat architecture for critical area.

Apparently, Russia could not deploy the whole architecture in Syria cause it's too expensive.
So I have said , a single SAM not matter how sophisicated is hard to counter such a saturation attack.

I know the most about my country's army, so I will tell you how it happens here-
Every radar is integrated into a system-
In the sea we have this:

On land we have those:

And an American X-Band AN/TPY-2 radar that I couldn't find pictures of

On the shore we have those:

In the air we have this:

So there are barely any blind spots left, if any.
That leaves a lot of time for these:

And these:

And these:

 

[Stuttgart001]

Yeah I understood that but forgot to delete this section, I started to talk about on shore radars in the next sentence.


I know the most about my country's army, so I will tell you how it happens here-
Every radar is integrated into a system-

Since you know exactily these weapons in Isreali inventory and how they work on air defence combat, why you find fault with S-400 for the task supposed to be taken be a whole architecture not a single SAM ?

 

[ptldM3]

If its in any way based on the S-400 then its useless, they couldn't even detect those Tomahawk cruise/target missiles, let alone shoot them down.

As predicted you are banned again. Once again Russia never even bother activating the radars on their air defended--something the US even admitted.

 

[patman]

I wonder when they will sell this

 

[Yaseen1]

S-500 is designed for intercept ballistic missile just as Standard 6,whilst S-400 is used to shoot planes and cruise missile and short range missile. They are different systems which work together.
There is a similar combination in China inventory, which is HQ-9 and HQ-19.The former is used against the vehicle inner atmosphere, and the later aims at ballistic missile and satellite which is out of atmosphere.

russia possess best weapons but they have no courage to use them in battle.u.s always use weapons but russia never respond they should have destroyed u.s ships in response of syrian attack if they had any courage

 

[Stuttgart001]

russia possess best weapons but they have no courage to use them in battle.u.s always use weapons but russia never respond they should have destroyed u.s ships in response of syrian attack if they had any courage

Courage is a quality of human not a state.
Action of state is based on the reality including the strengths of yourself, your friends and your foes.
It is a reality that US is stronger than Russia.

 

[Michael Corleone]

In 2016, Russian anti-aircraft missile troops received new guided missiles for S-300 and S-400 defense systems. Anti-aircraft missile system, designed to destroy aircraft, cruise and ballistic missiles, it can also be used against ground objectives. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_missile_system )
I heard the Russians saying it can intercept a football sized object flying in supersonic speed.


The attack literally took 30 minutes, its not like they launched all of the missiles at once, they launched it one by one:

And wait, so you are telling me its radar cannot even detect cruise missiles?


And by the way we already used small precision guided 'ballistic missiles' against a Syrian airport to test the Predator Hawk missiles, the results-

Where was the S-400 and S-300?


That's why we have on-shore radars, the Russians don't?
Well if the attack was against a Russian airport, and at that time the US wont warn them, what will Russia do?

No, its not unfair, the point that Russia couldn't detect those cruise missiles makes them look very weak- just read again what I said above.
And if you want more attacks on Syria by Israel without low-flying cruise missiles-
Happened just now-
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3321817/israel-attack-syrian-army-positions/

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/17/middleeast/israel-jets-syria-strikes/

And I can give you at least a dozen more

One battery consist of what? 8 missiles?
Let's assume Russia deployed 2-4 batteries... along with radar and other equipments that come along.... 32 missiles enough against 59? By some source even 80?
@Stuttgart001 is talking logic here ....

 

[Zarvan]

S-500 surface to air missile system

Russian next-generation S-500 surface-to-air missile system would be able to engage targets above the earth’s surface.

The new S-500 missile system would be able to engage targets in the upper layer of the atmosphere, 100 kilometers [62 miles] above the Earth’s surface, Pavel Sozinov, chief engineer of the Russian defense corporation Almaz-Antey, was quoted as saying by Sputnik Tuesday.



S-500 is said to have a range of 600 kilometers (more than 370 miles) and can simultaneously intercept up to ten ballistic and hypersonic missiles coming at speeds upto 7 km per second.

"The S-500 will be capable of hitting targets at an altitude of up to 100 kilometers above the ground, which is actually the height of near space. The system's final tests will take place at one of the largest firing ranges in Kazakhstan, given that the S-500's effective damage range stands at 600 kilometers. There is no other such surface-to-air missile system in the world that has the same damage radius," Russian military expert Viktor Baranets was quoted as saying by Sputnik.

According to him, among other things the S-500 system is also designed to destroy combat blocks of hypersonic missiles.

He noted that in terms of its characteristics, the S-500 will significantly exceed Russia's S-400 missile system and its American competitor, the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missile system.

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/19...tem_To_Engage_Targets_Near_Space#.WP80Ajt95PY