Sayyad-2 vs PAC-1/2

[PeeD]

List of Iranian AESA radars:

So called "Najm-802", the basis for all the rest. (100% certain)
Hafez (90% certain)
Navid (90% certain)
Bavar-373 battery accusation radar (90% certain)
Bavar-373 Meraj-4 line-element AESA (100% certain)
Talash-3 radar (100% certain)

Plus some other unclear ones that could be PESA as well.
Neither PESA nor mechanical steered radars are obsolete.
I even hope the Bavar-373 engagement radar to be PESA instead of AESA because for that task a AESA would be very cost-ineffective for minimal better performance.
I love the Tabas's mechanical radar, an incredible cost effective solution for its mission.
Many others are PESAs others mechanically steered arrays, all with their own special field.

In the past I did some miss-identifications:
I called the 3rd Khordad a potential AESA while it is a PESA, which is also a much better solution, cost wise.
I called the Matla ol Fajr-3 a PESA, while it does not need electronic steering for its claimed 2D-only mission task and is likely simply a mechanical steered array.
I speculated that the Bavar-373 engagement radar could be a AESA but meanwhile see above.

 

[VEVAK]

So it is PESA radar?

If they didn't use a single transmitter it would be more like a hybrid between a AESA and a PESA that's why I called it ESA

If they used multiple solid state transmitters it's effects would be more superior than a single transmitter PESA but it's detection time would be less than a standard AESA radar it's size but faster than a PESA with a single transmitter but without knowing how many transmitters they used and what kind I wouldn't know exactly but it doesn't look like a standard AESA radar that has towers of solid state transmitters with a larger number of faster and smaller beams being sent out which extremely reduces radar emissions and makes them much faster and less detectable

So from the pic's I've seen I would say PESA or at best a hybrid between a AESA and PESA but without solid state transmitters it would be more like a PESA

If you go 1min into the video you'll see a flight test of the F-35's AESA radar from the moment the pilot goes "Radar On" in 1 Second he is tracking 10 targets (out of 24) in 3 seconds he has 19 out of 24 and 9 seconds to track all 24 targets within 100 miles.
Now imagine a squad of 4 F-35's networked via high speed datalink and additional data linked in with their IRST's and that means these they would be able to go radar on and in under 2 seconds have more targets than they have weapons for and since their networked with advanced computers and likely had data fed to them by AWACS they can go radar on and in under 10 seconds the pilot could fire all their weapons and get out or have the computer fire all the appropriate weapons for them in probably half that time.

And that means any Air Force that doesn't have fighter with AESA radars really doesn't have a chance against an Air Force that has them and you'll need a large number of SAM's active at all times with radars on which makes them easy to detect and target

 

[VEVAK]

List of Iranian AESA radars:

So called "Najm-802", the basis for all the rest. (100% certain)
Hafez (90% certain)
Navid (90% certain)
Bavar-373 battery accusation radar (90% certain)
Bavar-373 Meraj-4 line-element AESA (100% certain)
Talash-3 radar (100% certain)

Plus some other unclear ones that could be PESA as well.
Neither PESA nor mechanical steered radars are obsolete.
I even hope the Bavar-373 engagement radar to be PESA instead of AESA because for that task a AESA would be very cost-ineffective for minimal better performance.
I love the Tabas's mechanical radar, an incredible cost effective solution for its mission.
Many others are PESAs others mechanically steered arrays, all with their own special field.

In the past I did some miss-identifications:
I called the 3rd Khordad a potential AESA while it is a PESA, which is also a much better solution, cost wise.
I called the Matla ol Fajr-3 a PESA, while it does not need electronic steering for its claimed 2D-only mission task and is likely simply a mechanical steered array.
I speculated that the Bavar-373 engagement radar could be a AESA but meanwhile see above.

Don't think so!

They say Phase Array and doubtful they would say Phased Array and not AESA if it was a AESA so it's a PESA or at best a hybrid and if Iran is not claiming they are AESA why would you?

Navid I wouldn't know without better Pics

Meraj-4 is an Air Surveillance AESA which means it just sends multi directed beams towards one direction to get a 3D image of an areal target

AND WHY ON EARTH would you want a PESA over a Multipurpose AESA for target acquisition
We need a system that can get data from Air Surveillance or at worst a 2D Early Warning system that can remain off and point towards the correct heading (And altitude if possible and our air surveillance hasn't been taken out)until the target gets within weapons range then turned active and have beam's focused on a single heading (and altitude if possible) and track, target and fire it's 1st SAM missile within 3 seconds or less

And we'll need multiple solid state transmitters capable of sending large number of smaller, faster and more focused beams to do that!

Being able to conduct Quantum Networking without even the ability to mass produce more modern Solid State Memory devices, Solid state drives, solid state transmitters, highly advanced processors or even quantum computing..... Is like having an HD TV but only being able to watch VCR or TV with analog signals

Clearly Iran has the workforce to do it there is NO Question about that so it's just a matter of proper funding which sadly Rohani is NOT providing!

Megan Rejeh asli emsol am to Bandar Abbas bargozar mesheh! Halla agheh mebordan Esfehan boz behtar bood because that's where most of our weapons are anyways! I really really really wanna smack Rohani!

 

[PeeD]

Don't think so!
View attachment 499819

They say Phase Array and doubtful they would say Phased Array and not AESA if it was a AESA so it's a PESA or at best a hybrid and if Iran is not claiming they are AESA why would you?

Navid I wouldn't know without better Pics

Meraj-4 is an Air Surveillance AESA which means it just sends multi directed beams towards one direction to get a 3D image of an areal target

AND WHY ON EARTH would you want a PESA over a Multipurpose AESA for target acquisition

AND WHY ON EARTH would you want a PESA over a Multipurpose AESA for target acquisition

We need a system that can get data from Air Surveillance or at worst a 2D Early Warning system that can remain off and point towards the correct heading (And altitude if possible and our air surveillance hasn't been taken out)until the target gets within weapons range then turned active and have beam's focused on a single heading (and altitude if possible) and track, target and fire it's 1st SAM missile within 3 seconds or less

And we'll need multiple solid state transmitters capable of sending large number of smaller, faster and more focused beams to do that!

Being able to conduct Quantum Networking without even the ability to mass produce more modern Solid State Memory devices, Solid state drives, solid state transmitters, highly advanced processors or even quantum computing..... Is like having an HD TV but only being able to watch VCR or TV with analog signals

Clearly Iran has the workforce to do it there is NO Question about that so it's just a matter of proper funding which sadly Rohani is NOT providing!

Megan Rejeh asli emsol am to Bandar Abbas bargozar mesheh! Halla agheh mebordan Esfehan boz behtar bood because that's where most of our weapons are anyways! I really really really wanna smack Rohani!

They call it phased array which mean ESA they don't go into detail whether it is a P-ESA or a A-ESA.

AND WHY ON EARTH would you want a PESA over a Multipurpose AESA for target acquisition

Because engagement radars normally work in X-band and X-band T/R modules are expensive.
If the Bavar-373 engagment radar would be an AESA you would have to pay for more than 5000 X-band TRMs.
I can only hope that the designers chose a PESA design, because for a engagement radar at the end only EM energy on target counts. Gain, also important, stays about the same.
An AESA design would cost probably twice as much as a PESA and only offer things like: better emergency search function or more advanced waveforms, longer MTBF. Those potential benefits are not worth twice the system price.

For the S-band accusation radar on the other hand AESA offers benefits such as LPI search modes and longer MTBF. More importantly, S-band TRMs are way more cost effective.

Air defense is now Irans top priority after the BM arsenal size and system capability have reached an asymptotic region. That's why Rohani can't interfere much, even if he wanted.
Iran is #1 in the world in terms of air defense technology growth.

 

[VEVAK]

They call it phased array which mean ESA they don't go into detail whether it is a P-ESA or a A-ESA.



Because engagement radars normally work in X-band and X-band T/R modules are expensive.
If the Bavar-373 engagment radar would be an AESA you would have to pay for more than 5000 X-band TRMs.
I can only hope that the designers chose a PESA design, because for a engagement radar at the end only EM energy on target counts. Gain, also important, stays about the same.
An AESA design would cost probably twice as much as a PESA and only offer things like: better emergency search function or more advanced waveforms, longer MTBF. Those potential benefits are not worth twice the system price.

For the S-band accusation radar on the other hand AESA offers benefits such as LPI search modes and longer MTBF. More importantly, S-band TRMs are way more cost effective.

Air defense is now Irans top priority after the BM arsenal size and system capability have reached an asymptotic region. That's why Rohani can't interfere much, even if he wanted.
Iran is #1 in the world in terms of air defense technology growth.

All modern fighters from upgraded F-16's to F-22 all use either X-Band or a multi band and if Iran can't or won't produce or buy 100-120 Advanced Air Superiority fighters equipped with AESA radars, BVR missile,..... capable of going up F-35's Then at the VERY LEAST we can't be cheap when it comes to producing a wide range of SAM's and UCAV's equipped with doppler radars & upgraded R-27's or AiM-7


And the difference between a 2GHz S-Band vs +10GHz for targets beyond visible range will be very noticeable and yes we'll need a lot more transistor for higher frequencies but so what

And Iran's main focus should be on electronics and software rather than Air Defense because if they are focused on a limited number of radars then they'll just buy the components and yes that may be cheaper if you limit your self just to a few radars a year but if you truly want them to be cost effective in the long run that will also allow you to use them in a wider range of equipment then you have to mass produce every little component from a simple transistor to processors, Memory Devices, solid state transmitters,..... all at home in automated factories and MOST of the components will NOT be limited to military use so you'll be able to sell them to companies that will be able to produce better computers, TV, Aircrafts, cars,....

And if we produce our own components ourselves we don't become restricted to various frequencies that are based off of the components sold to us and our guys become more innovative and they may be able to produce solid state transistor that can operate at wider range of frequencies

And that way our guys wouldn't be restricted to any frequency

 

[PeeD]

All modern fighters from upgraded F-16's to F-22 all use either X-Band or a multi band and if Iran can't or won't produce or buy 100-120 Advanced Air Superiority fighters equipped with AESA radars, BVR missile,..... capable of going up F-35's Then at the VERY LEAST we can't be cheap when it comes to producing a wide range of SAM's and UCAV's equipped with doppler radars & upgraded R-27's or AiM-7


And the difference between a 2GHz S-Band vs +10GHz for targets beyond visible range will be very noticeable and yes we'll need a lot more transistor for higher frequencies but so what

And Iran's main focus should be on electronics and software rather than Air Defense because if they are focused on a limited number of radars then they'll just buy the components and yes that may be cheaper if you limit your self just to a few radars a year but if you truly want them to be cost effective in the long run that will also allow you to use them in a wider range of equipment then you have to mass produce every little component from a simple transistor to processors, Memory Devices, solid state transmitters,..... all at home in automated factories and MOST of the components will NOT be limited to military use so you'll be able to sell them to companies that will be able to produce better computers, TV, Aircrafts, cars,....

And if we produce our own components ourselves we don't become restricted to various frequencies that are based off of the components sold to us and our guys become more innovative and they may be able to produce solid state transistor that can operate at wider range of frequencies

And that way our guys wouldn't be restricted to any frequency

Iran is not restricted, the world is restricted because a X-band TRM with overall same performance as a S-band TRM will always be way more expensive.
So Iran just did what everyone has done.

It' only the Americans who can afford things like the THAAD ABM radar. Others like Israelis go for L- and later S-band with their Green pine series. And for ABM X-band brings real benefits.

Iran better avoids X-band TRMs where it can. In fighter radars e.g it can't if it wants the benefits of a AESA.

The mobile Matla ol Fajr 3 is such a good design because it has 120m² (!) aperture size for the price of just 40 elements (albeit PESA for all we know). This is the reason for its massive 500km range and appearance all over Iran.

Today Chinese, Indians and Israelis concentrate their ground based AESA efforts on the S-band. Only Russians go for lower bands too and only Americans can afford higher bands.
Iran is on the right track.

 

[VEVAK]

Iran is not restricted, the world is restricted because a X-band TRM with overall same performance as a S-band TRM will always be way more expensive.
So Iran just did what everyone has done.

It' only the Americans who can afford things like the THAAD ABM radar. Others like Israelis go for L- and later S-band with their Green pine series. And for ABM X-band brings real benefits.

Iran better avoids X-band TRMs where it can. In fighter radars e.g it can't if it wants the benefits of a AESA.

The mobile Matla ol Fajr 3 is such a good design because it has 120m² (!) aperture size for the price of just 40 elements (albeit PESA for all we know). This is the reason for its massive 500km range and appearance all over Iran.

Today Chinese, Indians and Israelis concentrate their ground based AESA efforts on the S-band. Only Russians go for lower bands too and only Americans can afford higher bands.
Iran is on the right track.

Any country that mass produces the solid state TRM's and can produce every little components required to build them will be able to afford it!
It's not like building each Solid State TRM is going to require a 1kg of iridium for it to cost too much! As for the software engineers that should be the easy part for Iran compared to other major weapons producers like U.S. and Russia

And Israel is a relative small country and handful of S-Band deployed will more than cover the entire country with little effect in speed and producing their own S-Band would make sense and they'll get faster detection for
SHORAD operations simply because X-Band beam coming out are relatively small at shorter ranges and it takes longer to scan by comparison and you'll need a very expensive system to match the detection speed of an S-Band and it will become a problem when you have a multitude of small RCS projectile being fired within 50km of your boarder but still I would say it's quite doubtful that they don't have American X-Band systems backing them allowing them to track target large number of projectiles. So even if Iran was mass producing SS TRM at such greater numbers where each one cost no more than a router we would still need S-Band
As for India with all the software engineers they have with no restriction or sanctions to speak of it would be shocking if they weren't producing their own or at least working toward producing their own and both Israel and India have a modern Air Force backing them but we DO NOT!

And especially to combat the U.S. Iran needs to be able to use it's supercomputers to monitor every frequency and be able to transmit large amount of junk data when needed in every frequency from HF to K and we will need higher at and above microwave level frequencies that will be needed to burn out enemy radars when needed. And we need R&D and in the future the production of directed energy weapons. And in the future we'll need higher more capable frequencies for wireless communications and for more accurate measuring devices for future sats,.... So developing our own advanced transmitters capable of sending higher frequencies at a greater distance is a necessity

And you say there is no difference but there is! S Band can travel greater distances and is usually used for surveillance while higher frequencies travel at a reduced range but at much greater speeds and the reason they use X-Band on fighters (Most modern AESA aren't restricted to that) is because a fighter radar needs to be multi purpose all compacted into one system and requires more accurate light weight BVR missiles equipped with their own advanced radars for terminal guidance that have the accuracy to take down an aircraft using kinetic energy and no more than a few grams of explosives

And the costs are well worth it especially when it comes to targeting and tracking but that doesn't preclude the need for S-Band requirement inside the system for various reasons

But most of all for our guys to build more capable systems they need to be able to build and upgrade and improve on every little component required to build the TRM's

 

[PeeD]

@VEVAK

Iran is going the right direction. It has developed 50 radar systems in the last 20 years.

You are right, that X-band TRM are need too, specially for airborne radars.

I can tell you that the Tabas SAM system with its mechanically steered radar is probably one of the most cost effective killers.
It is like a super slow, small Mig-29 with 3 BVR missiles. Tabas systems would drive to any area where the enemy would try to push through the IADS barrier. Contested, near hostile ground where the enemy is trying to gain air superiority.

It just needs IADS information that something is coming, drive out of the warehouse or out from below the bridge, turn on its old school mechanically scanned radar, find the target, paint it with EM energy and it's SAM will go for the kill. It shoots and scoots in the matter of few minutes. A true BVR fighter on the ground probably for 2-3 million $ a TELAR with 3 SAMs.

So the art is to know what provides the best for your spent money.

 

[VEVAK]

@VEVAK

Iran is going the right direction. It has developed 50 radar systems in the last 20 years.

You are right, that X-band TRM are need too, specially for airborne radars.

I can tell you that the Tabas SAM system with its mechanically steered radar is probably one of the most cost effective killers.
It is like a super slow, small Mig-29 with 3 BVR missiles. Tabas systems would drive to any area where the enemy would try to push through the IADS barrier. Contested, near hostile ground where the enemy is trying to gain air superiority.

It just needs IADS information that something is coming, drive out of the warehouse or out from below the bridge, turn on its old school mechanically scanned radar, find the target, paint it with EM energy and it's SAM will go for the kill. It shoots and scoots in the matter of few minutes. A true BVR fighter on the ground probably for 2-3 million $ a TELAR with 3 SAMs.

So the art is to know what provides the best for your spent money.

3rd of Khordad

vs the outdated tabas




And it won't matter how many we build because detecting them will be simpler, jamming them will be far simpler, their speed of operation and accuracy will be reduced, your ability to better detect what it is your firing at will clearly be reduce, your ability to be able to better operate independently will be reduced,....

Best option to cut cost is to have a unit of 5 or more vehicles networked capable of both high speed, high bandwidth, secure wireless communication with each other within line of sight or up to 500 meters if not & the ability to connect to each other via armored fiber optics from at least 100 meters out (Maybe a 100meter roll coming out of the left and or right side of each vehicle with all vehicles capable of sharing data or taking lead to track, target & firing with at least 1 vehicle with an X-band AESA per unit and 1 vehicle for SHORAD for better within visible range fighter & projectiles equipped with larger number of smaller SAM's

And we also need to build far more capable Missiles because if that's the accuracy then we are in trouble because the only fighter one of these missiles would be able to take down is at best an F-16's and we'll have to get lucky and damage a vital system to be able to take down heavier fighters

And that's the blast radius at altitude and in a thinner atmosphere you get a much wider blast radius!

 

[PeeD]

@VEVAK

Thats the thing I wanted to show.

The PESA, multi-target 3rd Khordad costs probably twice as much as the single target Tabas.

What do you choose when I offer you a Tabas for 2,5 million $ and a 3rd Khordad for 6 million $? Or why not a 12 million $ AESA 3rd Khordad?

This is the message: Cost dictates!

The Tabas has its fixed role in the IADS mix.
-It will operate at the closest frontline where IFF is no issue
-Its search capability is secondary as it will rely on IADS early warning data of identified targets that are worth to be attacked.
-As single TELAR with just one communication car assigned to it, it will have smallest possible footprint
-Once the IADS assigned target is locked, the mechanical Mig-29 style radar will put a high energy amount on the target for the SAM seeker. Job done, pulling the jacks up and back into hiding position.
The attack cycle is too short, too simple to expect a HARM counter attack.

As said a Mig-29 on the ground, just 10 times cheaper. Imagine how many system and what coverage such a low price and high systems numbers allow.

You are right that the Tabas is less useful than the 3rd Khordad without IADS support. The 3rd Khordad has a typical battery structure and will work behind the Tabas which can be deployed at most forward position.

An example what the Tabas means for the IADS. Imagine you are protecting a city under siege with your SOF squad (3rd Khordad). You know that down the street you have a tank in defensive position with some infantry and mortars (Bavar-373). Suddenly your squad comes under attack by small arms from a certain direction, a unfavorably one. You take your radio and ask whether someone can take out the attacker. The rear tank and mortar unit says yes, I can turn that spot into rubble. But then a hiding Basiji sniper also answers and says that he is closest to that position, sees the attacker and can take them out by his bolt action 7.62mm sniper rifle (Tabas).
Basijis bring numbers into the battle, same as the Tabas. You can't replace Basijis with SOF units or heavy armored/artillery units, not if you are fighting an much stronger enemy.

Missile accuracy is sufficient: The directional frag warheads work best at some distance to the target such a 10m, having a 30-60m kill radius.

 

[TheImmortal]

And we also need to build far more capable Missiles because if that's the accuracy then we are in trouble because the only fighter one of these missiles would be able to take down is at best an F-16's and we'll have to get lucky and damage a vital system to be able to take down heavier fighters
View attachment 500390
And that's the blast radius at altitude and in a thinner atmosphere you get a much wider blast radius!

Warhead fragments exploding at high speed towards another high speed target.

That plane would get shredded.

Even a old S-200 (highly immobile missile) was able to explode close enough to critically damage a F-16, a target it wasn’t even designed to intercept!

Even if it doesn’t critically damage a F-22 or F-35, the damage from that distance from a BUK would make the radar cross section of the aircraft to start lighting up radars as there radar absorbing coating panels/skin would be severely damaged among other things

This allows a more capable system (Bavar-373 or S-300 to go for the kill)

 

[VEVAK]

@VEVAK

Thats the thing I wanted to show.

The PESA, multi-target 3rd Khordad costs probably twice as much as the single target Tabas.

What do you choose when I offer you a Tabas for 2,5 million $ and a 3rd Khordad for 6 million $? Or why not a 12 million $ AESA 3rd Khordad?

This is the message: Cost dictates!

The Tabas has its fixed role in the IADS mix.
-It will operate at the closest frontline where IFF is no issue
-Its search capability is secondary as it will rely on IADS early warning data of identified targets that are worth to be attacked.
-As single TELAR with just one communication car assigned to it, it will have smallest possible footprint
-Once the IADS assigned target is locked, the mechanical Mig-29 style radar will put a high energy amount on the target for the SAM seeker. Job done, pulling the jacks up and back into hiding position.
The attack cycle is too short, too simple to expect a HARM counter attack.

As said a Mig-29 on the ground, just 10 times cheaper. Imagine how many system and what coverage such a low price and high systems numbers allow.

You are right that the Tabas is less useful than the 3rd Khordad without IADS support. The 3rd Khordad has a typical battery structure and will work behind the Tabas which can be deployed at most forward position.

An example what the Tabas means for the IADS. Imagine you are protecting a city under siege with your SOF squad (3rd Khordad). You know that down the street you have a tank in defensive position with some infantry and mortars (Bavar-373). Suddenly your squad comes under attack by small arms from a certain direction, a unfavorably one. You take your radio and ask whether someone can take out the attacker. The rear tank and mortar unit says yes, I can turn that spot into rubble. But then a hiding Basiji sniper also answers and says that he is closest to that position, sees the attacker and can take them out by his bolt action 7.62mm sniper rifle (Tabas).
Basijis bring numbers into the battle, same as the Tabas. You can't replace Basijis with SOF units or heavy armored/artillery units, not if you are fighting an much stronger enemy.

Missile accuracy is sufficient: The directional frag warheads work best at some distance to the target such a 10m, having a 30-60m kill radius.

Best option would be a multi car units with 1 AESA X-band leading them even if the cost is $12 Million instead of 3 and that way you can track a large number of targets and you can send that data to a unit of 3-4 Tabas vehicles that would have their own radars off and only used as backup to the AESA + 1-2 vehicles for SHORAD operation capable of intercepting projectiles Also other mobile support, command, coms, surveillance,... will be based on operational requirements)

With the proper tactics, software, navigation and datalink between each vehicle having just 1 AESA X-Band vehicle in each unit would be like all of them are equipped with X-Band AESA radars (So basically for a $3M investment per vehicle your upgrading your very slow MiG-29's to very slow MiG-35's)

And if Iran focuses on mass producing every little components needed to build X-Band AESA radars with Iranian built compact long ranged solid state transmitters we will also be able to build more capable missiles and the price difference between that and the 3rd of Khordad will only be a little more at best not double the price

even as a backup to other fixed or less mobile AIDS system I would still be preferable to at least have one 3rd of Khordar or AESA in each unit for better autonomy if those sites are taken out

And you produce the $12Million USD AESA at a rate of 1 per month (12 per year) for $144Million + the $3 Million USD Tabas at a rate of 1 Per Week (52 per year) for $156M for a total of $300M And in terms of price that's equivalent to buying 2 Su-30's with ammo a year which should be minimum requirement on such a system in a country who hasn't paid to acquire more advanced modern fighters for the past 40 years! Our F-4's are now 50 years old and a country our size should have at least purchased 12 new modern fighters a year every year not including CAS fighter or trainers!

 

[VEVAK]

Warhead fragments exploding at high speed towards another high speed target.

That plane would get shredded.

Even a old S-200 (highly immobile missile) was able to explode close enough to critically damage a F-16, a target it wasn’t even designed to intercept!

Even if it doesn’t critically damage a F-22 or F-35, the damage from that distance from a BUK would make the radar cross section of the aircraft to start lighting up radars as there radar absorbing coating panels/skin would be severely damaged among other things

This allows a more capable system (Bavar-373 or S-300 to go for the kill)

I specifically said it can shoot down an F-16 which is a light multi role fighter with a relatively weak frame! And S-200's have a 500lb warhead and a very large dimension vs 150lb on bulk missiles with much smaller dimensions

Here are titanium requirement for fighters jets

And FYI by the % of overall structure the F-35's and F-22 use more Ti than any of these fighter + composite reinforced skin over vital areas & ordinance are protected inside weapons bay

So being able to shoot down F-16's means NOTHING, for they have relatively weak frames!

AND the main thing that effects the size of your blast is altitude and thinness of the Air FYI the speed of your missile has little effect on fragments coming out the side of the missile! Unless you have bullets flying at the nose of the missiles it really has nothing to do with anything!

Also the target drone didn't conduct any kind of countermeasure and unless we have missiles that can move their way towards a moving fighter the capability of a single shot single kill is NOT there!

 

[TheImmortal]

I specifically said it can shoot down an F-16 which is a light multi role fighter with a relatively weak frame! And S-200's have a 500lb warhead and a very large dimension vs 150lb on bulk missiles with much smaller dimensions

Here are titanium requirement for fighters jets
View attachment 500487
And FYI by the % of overall structure the F-35's and F-22 use more Ti than any of these fighter + composite reinforced skin over vital areas & ordinance are protected inside weapons bay

So being able to shoot down F-16's means NOTHING, for they have relatively weak frames!

AND the main thing that effects the size of your blast is altitude and thinness of the Air FYI the speed of your missile has little effect on fragments coming out the side of the missile! Unless you have bullets flying at the nose of the missiles it really has nothing to do with anything!

Also the target drone didn't conduct any kind of countermeasure and unless we have missiles that can move their way towards a moving fighter the capability of a single shot single kill is NOT there!

Yeah so what and a bird severely damaged an F-35. What’s your point?

You fail to understand a fighter jet traveling at Mach 1 is suspecitible to severe damage from something as simple as a soft tissue bird let alone warhead fragments.

An S-200 is a highly immobile missile designed to attack bombers and AWACs not RCS reduced mobile fighter jets like F-16. The fact an old S-200 was able to get close enough to a FLEEING F-16 and despite its countermeasures still do critical damage should tell you all you need to know.

So yes a BUK can take down a 5th gen fighter though there are more capable missiles that can pull higher G’s.

Your titanium stats are worthless. This isn’t an A-10, an F-35 or F-22 is not designed to take high speed fragments and easily survive. They are made to use their EW package, stealth, and mobility to survive.

So again unless you have actual physics data that show an AD missile warhead exploding with a directional spray would not significantly damage F-35 or F-22 THEN YOUR SPREADING PROPAGANDA.

Furthermore, drones are hard targets to hit due to size and slow speed. Even A2A missiles struggle against drones. Thus the missile was likely set to a proximity explosion rather than Kinetic.

BTW Mr. Titanium during 1991 Gulf War a 1960’s SA-2 missile brought down a Titanium heavy F-14.

 

[VEVAK]

Yeah so what and a bird severely damaged an F-35. What’s your point?

You fail to understand a fighter jet traveling at Mach 1 is suspecitible to severe damage from something as simple as a soft tissue bird let alone warhead fragments.

An S-200 is a highly immobile missile designed to attack bombers and AWACs not RCS reduced mobile fighter jets like F-16. The fact an old S-200 was able to get close enough to a FLEEING F-16 and despite its countermeasures still do critical damage should tell you all you need to know.

So yes a BUK can take down a 5th gen fighter though there are more capable missiles that can pull higher G’s.

Your titanium stats are worthless. This isn’t an A-10, an F-35 or F-22 is not designed to take high speed fragments and easily survive. They are made to use their EW package, stealth, and mobility to survive.

So again unless you have actual physics data that show an AD missile warhead exploding with a directional spray would not significantly damage F-35 or F-22 THEN YOUR SPREADING PROPAGANDA.

Furthermore, drones are hard targets to hit due to size and slow speed. Even A2A missiles struggle against drones. Thus the missile was likely set to a proximity explosion rather than Kinetic.

You don't know much about anything!!!

So a few fragments is NOT going to take down an F-15 let alone an F-22 and the titanium structure is VITAL you just don't know enough on the subject to understand how much

And you keep going on about the speed of the missile as if your getting the Kinetic power of a direct hit!

And how many times do I have to say this the SPEED OF YOUR MISSILE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FRAGMENTS BLOWN OVER 10 METERS OUT OF THE SIDE OF THE MISSILE!

And it's a ridicules assumption that enemy fighters aren't going to turn when fired upon! Especially from over 40km out! So the speed of the fighter will only mean something if the fighter was flying in a head on collision towards your fragments so if anything the fighter will turn and the speed of the fighter will work counter to your absurd argument!

And any bird can take down any aircraft it just depend on where you get hit!