U.S. Receives 3D radar S-300 system's Ukraine - F-35, Patriot are not good

[scionofPakwattan]

Not joking.

PAC-2 variants < S-400 variants < PAC-3 MSE < S-500 variants < THAAD


Somebody gets it now.


See the pecking order above.

US is ahead in all areas at present; Russia doesn't have the budget to keep up with American technological prowess. This isn't to say that Russian designs do not have merits of their own; taking a look at them is absolutely worth it.


They spoofed Pakistani radar systems on the night of May 2 when they raided a compound system in Abbottabad in 2011. This is why PAF was unable to respond in time.

I doubt we had these sams back then. Secondly ive also heard a different version of the story where we had turned those radars off as is/was the 'practice' on the western front

 

[LeGenD]

Where is all the evidence ? You just say and do not have any reliable sources

If the PAC-3 was good, the United States did not have to buy the old S-300 radar (Soviet tech)

The S-300 from the Soviet era is similar to the S-400 at now and the Americans simply bought the old S-300 from Ukraine, which would defeat Russia, It's a joke for the knowledge of American patriots

Can any US Patriots give me any information on the similarity of the S-300 and S-400 or S-400 still using the 36D6M1-1 radar? anyone ? 36D6M1-1 is an outdated radar system, only used by Vietnam and Ukraine

I have evidence but presenting it to you, is of no use. Not going to waste my time.

@pakistanipower

Bro, THAAD is above S-500.

S-400 doesn't have credible intercept capability against an MRBM class target due to its poor BMDS altitude ceiling (27 KM), let alone an IRBM class target.

THAAD destroyed a 4-stage IRBM class target in a test in 2017; this target covered 4200 KM distance in total when it was intercepted.

 

[Oldman1]

The S-300 is an old system and it's in Ukraine, very old fashioned, you can not learn anything from it. Because the SU-27 is a hard-to-copy aerodynamic, the US is based on invisibility, the Su-27 is not invisible, look at the F-15, it is a reference from the MiG-25. Asked for it through the MiG-25 in Japan in 1976)

It may be old, but its constantly upgraded, and like I've said, many countries have that system. The S-400 is just barely coming online to other countries, just only a handful. And the U.S. didn't make their own version of the SU 27 just because its hard to copy aerodynamic. The F-15 is not based on the MiG-25. You should look at the A-5 Vigilante.

The North American A-5 Vigilante is an American carrier-based supersonic bomber designed and built by North American Aviation for the United States Navy. Wikipedia

Top speed: 1,319 mph
Weight: 32,780 lbs
Range: 1,808 mi
Engine type: General Electric J79
Manufacturer: North American Aviation
Number built: 156
First flight: August 31, 1958

 

[blackuday]

It may be old, but its constantly upgraded, and like I've said, many countries have that system. The S-400 is just barely coming online to other countries, just only a handful. And the U.S. didn't make their own version of the SU 27 just because its hard to copy aerodynamic. The F-15 is not based on the MiG-25. You should look at the A-5 Vigilante.

The North American A-5 Vigilante is an American carrier-based supersonic bomber designed and built by North American Aviation for the United States Navy. Wikipedia

Top speed: 1,319 mph
Weight: 32,780 lbs
Range: 1,808 mi
Engine type: General Electric J79
Manufacturer: North American Aviation
Number built: 156
First flight: August 31, 1958

It has only one vertical wing at the back, MiG-25 & F-15 are double vertical wing
There were no similar American aircraft before
MiG-25 has been stolen by the United States through intelligence (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/adolf-tolkachev-cia-kgb/400769/), the MiG-25 in Japan gives the United States a close look. Viktor Belenko helped the F-15 go into mass production (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defection_of_Viktor_Belenko)

and you're paranoid with false assumptions/theories, APG-68 in the block-52 has a range of more than 300 km, and post the links that saying F-16 detection range with only 120 km with AESA don't fool yourself @blackuday give me reference from respected sites like Jane's. aviation weekly , flight global etc etc, don't post the links that suits your narratives @blackuday

wikipedia is unreliable source in other article in Wikipedia said that MIG-25 was the copy of A-5 Vigilante
View attachment 497288


here is the trange of Block 52 @blackuday
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APG-68

The wiki is unreliable, in wiki: The AN/APG-68 radar is a long range (up to 296 km), where the max range 300km ?

The latest APG-83 radar only has 120km max range, you can not say the older APG-68 has max range far more than the latest radar!

Read again youngboy

The new version radar of F-16

Not many may be aware that F-16v Block 70/72 Super Viper has been fitted with a state of the art AESA fire control radar APG-83. It has a detection range of 120 km and engagement range of 84 km
https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/0...edge-over-other-4th-generation-fighters-jets/

The old radar of Su-30

The aircraft is equipped with an upgraded N001VEP Pulse-Doppler fire-control radar developed by Tikhomirov Scientific Research Institute of Instrument Design (NIIP). With a new processor, the radar is able to track 10 targets and engage 4 of them (or 2 for ground targets) simultaneously. The radar has a detecting range of 150 km against fighters-sized targets or 400 km against bomber-sized target. It has also been optimised in order to fire the Vympel R-77 (AA-12 ‘Adder’) active radar-homing medium-range air-to-air missile.
http://sinodefence.com/sukhoi-su-30mkk/

The smaller size of the F-16, the radar is smaller than the Su-30 radar, you can not have a 400km range with small radar, it does not have enough electronic circuits to increase the power.

I have evidence but presenting it to you, is of no use. Not going to waste my time.

@pakistanipower

Bro, THAAD is above S-500.

S-400 doesn't have credible intercept capability against an MRBM class target due to its poor BMDS altitude ceiling (27 KM), let alone an IRBM class target.

THAAD destroyed a 4-stage IRBM class target in a test in 2017; this target covered 4200 KM distance in total when it was intercepted.

ok trolling i knew
Aegis, Patriot, THAAD was helpless before the North Korean missile. All is just paper advertising

I doubt we had these sams back then. Secondly ive also heard a different version of the story where we had turned those radars off as is/was the 'practice' on the western front

In the West and those who hate Russia, Russian weapons are rubbish
NATO members still use the old Soviet technology

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Buying copy to evaluate and break the system or find weaknesses

 

[Ultima Thule]

It has only one vertical wing at the back, MiG-25 & F-15 are double vertical wing
There were no similar American aircraft before
MiG-25 has been stolen by the United States through intelligence (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/adolf-tolkachev-cia-kgb/400769/), the MiG-25 in Japan gives the United States a close look. Viktor Belenko helped the F-15 go into mass production (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defection_of_Viktor_Belenko)

YOU KNOW WHAT IS YOU TALKING ABOUT WIKI SAY THAT NOT US. AND MIG-25 EVALUATED BY WEST/USA BUT NEVER COPY AS A F-15, LOOK AT THE WINGS AND HORIZONTAL TAIL SURFACES IS THE WHOLE DIFFERENT FROM MIG-25, AND MISSION ARE ALSO DIFFERENT FOR BOTH JETS, MIG-25 WAS BASICALLY A INTERCEPTOR WITH MINIMAL AGILITY/ MANEUVERABILITY TO EMERGING THREATS LIKE MACH-3 XB-70,SR-71 ETC ETC, WHEREAS F-15 TO COUNTER MANEUVERABLE/AGILE/FAST JETS LIKE MIG-21,MIG-23 AS WELL AS A THREAT POSED BY MIG-25, TO COUNTER THE F-15 SOVIETS/RUSSIAN DEVELOPED SU-27 SERIES OF JETS READ THE HISTORY AND GET OUT OF YOUR FAIRY TALES/WET DREAM/FANTASY WORLD @blackuday
F-15 IS NOT A COPY OF MIG-25 THAT'S THE TRUTH @blackuday

The wiki is unreliable, in wiki: The AN/APG-68 radar is a long range (up to 296 km), where the max range 300km ?

The latest APG-83 radar only has 120km max range, you can not say the older APG-68 has max range far more than the latest radar!

Read again youngboy

HERE IS ANOTHER LINKS

1. Greater range – The AN/APG-68 engages targets at greater ranges, up to 184 miles, and with more accuracy than legacy radars.

https://duotechservices.com/7-improvements-the-apg-68-offered-the-f-16-fighting-falcon

wANT MORE @blackuday

AND USE THE COMMONSENSE LOGIC, LATE 80'S/90'S MECHANICAL SCANNED RADAR (APG-68) HAS A BETTER RANGE THAN LATEST AESA RADAR (APG-83) @blackuday

AND I DIDN'T FIND A SINGLE WORD ON ABOUT THE RANGE APG-83 AESA ON NET @blackuday


AND YOUR LINK JUST SPREADING A FALSE ASSUMPTIONS/RUMORS, SHOW ME THE MANUFACTURER (NORTHROP GRUMMAN) OR OTHER RESPECTED WEBSITES LIKE JANE'S, FLIGHT GLOBAL, AVIATION WEEKLY ETC ETC STATED THAT APG-83 HAS A MAX RANGE OF JUST 120 KM YOU RETARD HEAD @blackuday

ok trolling i knew
Aegis, Patriot, THAAD was helpless before the North Korean missile. All is just paper advertising

THAAD,PAC-3 AND AGIS ARE FOR WAR, THERE ARE NO WAR GOING IN EAST ASIA BETWEEN NORTH KOREA AND ALLIES, RUSSIA AND CHINA TESTED THEIR ICBM/SLBM IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN

THEN WHY NOT US AND ITS ALLIES INTERCEPTED THOSE ICBM/SLBM TEST LAUNCHES @blackuday

NORTH KOREAN JUST TESTED ITS BM @blackuday

NATO members still use the old Soviet technology

PLEASE SPECIFY WHICH OLD SOVIET TECH IS USED BY NATO MEMBERS, YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR MIND @blackuday , I MEAN MAIN NATO MEMBERS LIKE UK/FRANCE/GERMANY/ITALY SPAIN @blackuday

 

[gambit]

It has only one vertical wing at the back, MiG-25 & F-15 are double vertical wing

Vertical wing? The correct words are: stabilizer, stabilator, or rudder.

You did not do basic research on correct basic terminologies and expect to be taken seriously?

The A-5's original design had twin vertical stabs...

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3Wkn...Wo6uco/wiki/North_American_A-5_Vigilante.html

Preliminary design studies had employed twin vertical fin/rudders.

http://vietnam.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/a5vigilante-operation.html

Although the Vigilante served in the attack and reconnaissance roles, its design and configuration was believed to be a major influence on one of the world's most famous postwar interceptors: the Soviet MiG-25 "Foxbat" was apparently heavily influenced by the A-5's design.. (The MiG-25 would look even more familiar if the Vigilante had retained the twin vertical fins of the prototype; although North American originally specified two fins [like the later Foxbat], that part of the design was vetoed by the Navy in favor of one folding tailfin.) Other western aircraft such as the F-15 Eagle would also adopt a high mounted wing and wedge-shaped intake geometry.

In 1956, the US Navy determined that the twin vertical stabs design was 'too radical' and demanded a change.

North American changed the A-5 to a single stab design but in order to have the same axis control effect, the single vertical stab had to be made larger, and in order to make the A-5 suitable for below deck storage, the single vertical stab had to be foldable, as seen below.

The MIG-25's design came from the A-5, which the Soviets pretty much admitted it.

You cannot even use the proper terminologies but blabber on something you know nothing about.

 

[LeGenD]

@blackuday

Trolling is your forte; not mine. You are not very bright either.

I will leave a hint: US study flight characteristics of every ballistic missile type and cruise missile type in existence. They are developing detailed profiles of each, and this treasuretrove of information is fed to relevant defenses.

Should DPRK continue to test different types of ballistic missiles - US will continue to learn more and inform its defenses accordingly. Therefore, no need to interfere in such tests.

Japan have also stated on record that it will only shoot down targets which will be coming for a Japanese asset.

Russia deployed an S-400 battery in Syria which is an actual warzone. So what targets have it shot down since? Nothing per my knowledge.

I clearly pointed out in my previous post that a THAAD battery destroyed the RV of a state-of-the-art 4-stage IRBM class ballistic missile in a complex test in 2017. This target had covered over 4100 KM distance by the time it was shot down, and is more advanced than anything in DPRK arsenal.

A Chinese SIGINT naval vessel monitored the aforementioned test, albeit from considerable distance. I am not kidding when I say that China is spooked. They have pressured South Korea to not host THAAD battery in its territory.

As for my comparison of certain characteristics of PAC-3 MSE and S-400; I can easily pinpoint relevant sources including a Russian OEM and show you pictures. However, I also pointed out that you are not worth these exchanges. Either you change your ways of addressing people or face lack of response.

Don't quote me again with a stupid remark. My time is precious.

 

[blackuday]

YOU KNOW WHAT IS YOU TALKING ABOUT WIKI SAY THAT NOT US. AND MIG-25 EVALUATED BY WEST/USA BUT NEVER COPY AS A F-15, LOOK AT THE WINGS AND HORIZONTAL TAIL SURFACES IS THE WHOLE DIFFERENT FROM MIG-25, AND MISSION ARE ALSO DIFFERENT FOR BOTH JETS, MIG-25 WAS BASICALLY A INTERCEPTOR WITH MINIMAL AGILITY/ MANEUVERABILITY TO EMERGING THREATS LIKE MACH-3 XB-70,SR-71 ETC ETC, WHEREAS F-15 TO COUNTER MANEUVERABLE/AGILE/FAST JETS LIKE MIG-21,MIG-23 AS WELL AS A THREAT POSED BY MIG-25, TO COUNTER THE F-15 SOVIETS/RUSSIAN DEVELOPED SU-27 SERIES OF JETS READ THE HISTORY AND GET OUT OF YOUR FAIRY TALES/WET DREAM/FANTASY WORLD @blackuday
F-15 IS NOT A COPY OF MIG-25 THAT'S THE TRUTH @blackuday

HERE IS ANOTHER LINKS

1. Greater range – The AN/APG-68 engages targets at greater ranges, up to 184 miles, and with more accuracy than legacy radars.

https://duotechservices.com/7-improvements-the-apg-68-offered-the-f-16-fighting-falcon

wANT MORE @blackuday

AND USE THE COMMONSENSE LOGIC, LATE 80'S/90'S MECHANICAL SCANNED RADAR (APG-68) HAS A BETTER RANGE THAN LATEST AESA RADAR (APG-83) @blackuday

AND I DIDN'T FIND A SINGLE WORD ON ABOUT THE RANGE APG-83 AESA ON NET @blackuday


AND YOUR LINK JUST SPREADING A FALSE ASSUMPTIONS/RUMORS, SHOW ME THE MANUFACTURER (NORTHROP GRUMMAN) OR OTHER RESPECTED WEBSITES LIKE JANE'S, FLIGHT GLOBAL, AVIATION WEEKLY ETC ETC STATED THAT APG-83 HAS A MAX RANGE OF JUST 120 KM YOU RETARD HEAD @blackuday

THAAD,PAC-3 AND AGIS ARE FOR WAR, THERE ARE NO WAR GOING IN EAST ASIA BETWEEN NORTH KOREA AND ALLIES, RUSSIA AND CHINA TESTED THEIR ICBM/SLBM IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN

THEN WHY NOT US AND ITS ALLIES INTERCEPTED THOSE ICBM/SLBM TEST LAUNCHES @blackuday

NORTH KOREAN JUST TESTED ITS BM @blackuday


PLEASE SPECIFY WHICH OLD SOVIET TECH IS USED BY NATO MEMBERS, YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR MIND @blackuday , I MEAN MAIN NATO MEMBERS LIKE UK/FRANCE/GERMANY/ITALY SPAIN @blackuday

The First Prototype F-15. Do you see it like the F-15A?

MiG-25 vs F-15A

Read agian US fanboy

The new version radar of F-16

Not many may be aware that F-16v Block 70/72 Super Viper has been fitted with a state of the art AESA fire control radar APG-83. It has a detection range of 120 km and engagement range of 84 km
https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/0...edge-over-other-4th-generation-fighters-jets/

The old radar of Su-30

The aircraft is equipped with an upgraded N001VEP Pulse-Doppler fire-control radar developed by Tikhomirov Scientific Research Institute of Instrument Design (NIIP). With a new processor, the radar is able to track 10 targets and engage 4 of them (or 2 for ground targets) simultaneously. The radar has a detecting range of 150 km against fighters-sized targets or 400 km against bomber-sized target. It has also been optimised in order to fire the Vympel R-77 (AA-12 ‘Adder’) active radar-homing medium-range air-to-air missile.
http://sinodefence.com/sukhoi-su-30mkk/

The smaller size of the F-16, the radar is smaller than the Su-30 radar, you can not have a 400km range with small radar, it does not have enough electronic circuits to increase the power.

The APG-68 has a larger size and it allows for more power, but it is less accurate because low tech, APG-83 is smaller, lighter, it is lighter and no unit shows F-16 radar = Su-30 radar

THAAD was helpless before the North Korean missile, this is the truth, I did not fabricate it

The American warship was blinded by the ship's stabbing. Aegis is legend ?!

Vertical wing? The correct words are: stabilizer, stabilator, or rudder.

You did not do basic research on correct basic terminologies and expect to be taken seriously?

The A-5's original design had twin vertical stabs...

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3Wkn...Wo6uco/wiki/North_American_A-5_Vigilante.html

http://vietnam.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/a5vigilante-operation.html

In 1956, the US Navy determined that the twin vertical stabs design was 'too radical' and demanded a change.

North American changed the A-5 to a single stab design but in order to have the same axis control effect, the single vertical stab had to be made larger, and in order to make the A-5 suitable for below deck storage, the single vertical stab had to be foldable, as seen below.

The MIG-25's design came from the A-5, which the Soviets pretty much admitted it.

You cannot even use the proper terminologies but blabber on something you know nothing about.

ok fanboi. The Soviet Union admitted where ? The MiG-25 has evolved since the 1950s

The A-5 is not a fighter, it was shot down in Vietnam as a scout. Americans want to deny that they copied the MiG-25, they have tried to propagate that the Soviet Union copied A-5 despite no evidence
The A-5 is completely different from the MiG-25 or F-15

Low speed (don't same MiG 25)
The intakes is not the same. The A-5 air intake is rounder than the MiG-25, MiG-25 has trapezoidal intake same as F-15A
Tail not the same
It has a fairly large clearance in the tail compared to the MiG-25
Its size is thinner than the MiG-25/F-15A

Where is A-5 Twin fins? YA3J-1 Vigilante prototype

A5 in Vietnam

@blackuday

Trolling is your forte; not mine. You are not very bright either.

I will leave a hint: US study flight characteristics of every ballistic missile type and cruise missile type in existence. They are developing detailed profiles of each, and this treasuretrove of information is fed to relevant defenses.

Should DPRK continue to test different types of ballistic missiles - US will continue to learn more and inform its defenses accordingly. Therefore, no need to interfere in such tests.

Japan have also stated on record that it will only shoot down targets which will be coming for a Japanese asset.

Russia deployed an S-400 battery in Syria which is an actual warzone. So what targets have it shot down since? Nothing per my knowledge.

I clearly pointed out in my previous post that a THAAD battery destroyed the RV of a state-of-the-art 4-stage IRBM class ballistic missile in a complex test in 2017. This target had covered over 4100 KM distance by the time it was shot down, and is more advanced than anything in DPRK arsenal.

A Chinese SIGINT naval vessel monitored the aforementioned test, albeit from considerable distance. I am not kidding when I say that China is spooked. They have pressured South Korea to not host THAAD battery in its territory.

As for my comparison of certain characteristics of PAC-3 MSE and S-400; I can easily pinpoint relevant sources including a Russian OEM and show you pictures. However, I also pointed out that you are not worth these exchanges. Either you change your ways of addressing people or face lack of response.

Don't quote me again with a stupid remark. My time is precious.

China panic? I see that putting weapons arms around your house is an unacceptable act. Russia deployed Iskander on Russian territory and NATO has also objected, so that weaker Russian technology is enough for NATO to protest? China was also opposed by the United States when deploying missiles in the South China Sea.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-05/china-missile-deployment-will-force-the-us-hand/9729460
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...le-deployment-reported-military-a8336936.html

The S-400 protects the Russian base, no one dares to shoot at it. Small targets were shot down by Pantsir-S1. You should not deny the Russian air defense technology blindly, I am Vietnamese and I understand their capabilities. They helped my country get peace before the US Air Force, helping us expel the United States

North Korean technology is very old technology, it can not threaten the United States on paper (All Chinese, Russian and North Korea technologies are old compared to the United States on the papers). THAAD, Aegis and Patriot did not really do anything, I'm right!?

And finally you can not deny that the US has to buy the old Soviet technology from Ukraine The US has certainly beat the S-300, why do they need to buy its technology? And remember that technology is very very old

2009: F-35 Jet Designed To Take Out The S-300 Battery....today all is just advertising

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/F-35_Jet_Designed_To_Take_Out_The_S-300_Battery_999.html

 

[Hellfire]

The F-35 actually did not pass the S-400 in Syria, it was all false advertising, if it was actually invisible to the S-400 in Syria, the US probably did not need to buy older radars.

Patriot system is not good enough, if it's good enough why the US needs to buy an old radar system to evaluate (or copy)

In my opinion, this kind of radar is used to evaluate and copy, similar to what the US copied radar technology from Germany (after WW2) or the former Soviet Union (find the billion dollar spy Tolkachev you will understand)

A good bravado but the fact remains that even if the Radar is inferior, I would like to know about all the systems out there to evaluate the potency of a threat in a future conflict. It also allows one to formulate own stratagem to deal with an adversary using the said equipment.

A standalone Radar will achieve nothing. Even if the Patriot is not good enough, at the end of the day, the day is carried by one who can integrate the information received from the Radar, sort and use it effectively. I would like someone to claim that the effectiveness of US in this field is mediocre?

 

[gambit]

The A-5 is not a fighter,...

Irrelevant. The A-5's first flight was in 1958. The MIG-25's first flight was in 1964. As I have shown you, the A-5's ORIGINAL design was with twin vertical stabs. When we took apart the MIG-25 in Japan, there was no mistaking the MIG's inspiration. Your argument is shallow because of two things: You have no experience and refuse to acknowledge your ignorance.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Read agian US fanboy

The new version radar of F-16

Not many may be aware that F-16v Block 70/72 Super Viper has been fitted with a state of the art AESA fire control radar APG-83. It has a detection range of 120 km and engagement range of 84 km
https://fighterjetsworld.com/2018/0...edge-over-other-4th-generation-fighters-jets/

Get a life or use your brain APG-68 V9 (80's 90's era) mechanical radar has range of 300 Km and LATEST APG-83 has range of just 120 km keep blabbering without a base or give me the manufacture (NORTHROP GRUMMAN) gives a range specification about APG-83, and why you think that US are going backward for its AESA development in the term of range,, another AESA radar for F-16 is APG-80 for UAE air force has a range of more than 300 km
http://www.radartutorial.eu/19.kartei/08.airborne/karte020.en.html
so why you assume that APG-83 has range of just 120 km, use your brain and logic which you don't have instead of a brain you have dog shit in your brain
@blackuday

And you are not a fanboy of Russian military tech for your ridiculous/baseless theories @blackuday and as for PESA in Su-27/Mig-29 are less accurate than AESA @blackuday

The First Prototype F-15. Do you see it like the F-15A?

MiG-25 vs F-15A

what are you trying to prove @blackuday , Infact F-15 is not copy of MIG-25 but whole different jet from MIG-25 you paranoid @blackuday

 

[Oldman1]

It has only one vertical wing at the back, MiG-25 & F-15 are double vertical wing
There were no similar American aircraft before
MiG-25 has been stolen by the United States through intelligence (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/adolf-tolkachev-cia-kgb/400769/), the MiG-25 in Japan gives the United States a close look. Viktor Belenko helped the F-15 go into mass production (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defection_of_Viktor_Belenko)

The F-15 was unveiled and flown in 1972 which is 4 years before the defection of the pilot. They don't need to copy it. And there was one other U.S. jet aircraft that has twin rudders long before the F-15.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_F7U_Cutlass

Role Naval multirole fighter
National origin United States
Manufacturer Chance Vought
First flight 29 September 1948
Introduction July 1951
Retired 2 March 1959
Primary user United States Navy
Produced 1948–1955
Number built 320

 

[blackuday]

S-300PS in Nevada (USA)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonopah_Test_Range
Russian S-300PS SAM Testing[edit]
The TTR has also been the site of US testing of foreign-made surface-to-air missile systems. Satellite imagery confirms the US secretly acquiring the Russian made S-300PS surface-to-air missile system from an unknown supplier in order to test UAVs as well as other advanced aircraft based at nearby airbases. According to OSGEOINT, these bases include Creech Air Force Base, the Yucca Lake UAV testing facility, and Nellis Air Force Base, operating the MQ-1-9, MQ-170, and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in addition to other aircraft . The testing of aircraft is executed under the direction of the 53rd Wing Test and Evaluation Group based at Nellis.[11]

 

[Sineva]

State-owned enterprise Research and Production Complex Iskra is Ukraine's leading developer and manufacturer of ground radar equipment.

Defence Blog / Archive Photo According to ImportGenius, a website tracking import/export operations at shipping docks, the U.S. Army Contracting Command received the 3D mobile air-defense radar system from Ukraine. The notice by the ImportGenius said that the U.S. Army Contracting Command center in Orlando has received 3D mobile air-defense radar system, called the 36D6M1-1, from Ukraine through SFTC “Progress,” according to Defence Blog. The 36D6M1-1is a mobile 3D airspace surveillance radar system that was developed by the SE “Scientific and Production Complex “Iskra” and is designed to be used as a part of modern automated Air Defense systems, Anti-Aircraft Missile Complexes and to detect low flying air targets under active and passive jamming as well as to provide Air Traffic Control both for military and civil purpose. However, it is expected that the Ukrainian-made 3D mobile air-defense radar system could be used for technologies analysis and operational OPFOR training. Read also Ukraine's air shield: Taking off to 21st century It is worth noting that previously business structures associated with Russia tried to disrupt the contract for supply Ukrainian 3D radar system to the United States. According to the notice by the Ukrainian industrial group UkrOboronProm, LLC KIT tried to cripple the production process at SE Iskra through fake accusations in 2017 of non-payment of patent royalties.

The Ukrainian defense group added that LLC KIT was in fact a fictitious firm, with which the former management of the company entered into an agreement, for the sake of money siphoning. The court declared this contract invalid as LLC KIT failed to meet UkrOboronProm's requirements, received no UOP accreditation, and had nothing to do with the defense complex of Ukraine as such. State-owned enterprise Research and Production Complex Iskra is Ukraine's leading developer and manufacturer of ground radar equipment. The company is part of UkrOboronProm Concern.

Read more on UNIAN: https://economics.unian.info/102462...le-air-defense-radar-system-from-ukraine.html

It looks to be based on the old Tin Shield family of late cold war radars,probably modernised with cots I would imagine,tho knowing the Ukrainians it might just be a couple of old unmodified tin shields,who knows?.It used to be the long range search radar for the late cold war s300s like the pm1.The dprk even got a couple back in the late 80s,these could be the as yet unseen long range search radar,or the basis for a modernised version,for the s300 derived/related[?] kn06 sam system.
I imagine the radars the us would really like to get its hands on would be the later versions of the Big Bird or the Nebo Svu,or better yet the s400s Nebo M radars.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Acquisition-GCI.html#mozTocId55304