Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sean Mirrsen]

100% reliably? Likely not. "Reliably enough" is a different matter though. And SAMs are just one part of it - Tunguskas are combined anti-air autocannon and missile systems, so they can engage both aircraft and cruise missiles equally well.

[gogis]

100% reliably? Likely not. "Reliably enough" is a different matter though. And SAMs are just one part of it - Tunguskas are combined anti-air autocannon and missile systems, so they can engage both aircraft and cruise missiles equally well.

Lets not forget Iskander's as well. It's contracted all the way up to 2020+

[10ebbor10]

Besides, Russia has the equipment to jam drone systems, if they're willing to close much of the spectrum to themselves as well.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

IIRC, UR's plan is to be swiftly defeated, then guerilla the Russians untill they get bored or the West actually does something.

Yeah, something like that

Can SAMs reliably shoot down Tomahawks and Predator drones?

Shhh, Russian  wundewaffe S-300 can shoot down anything. Including a deathstar if it comes to close.

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

[gogis]

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

I like that this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile) have something to actually read. What is this tells to you?

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

You really need to look up definition on word "refit". Also look up s-400 and s-500.

[gogis]

They apparently going to make Crimea a russian Las-Vegas 
http://lenta.ru/articles/2014/04/01/casino/

This actually makes sense, cuz all casinos was closed. I don't see it's a bad choice. Guaranteed investments

[Sean Mirrsen]

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

Well, the Type 3 page lacks numbers, but... Barak 8, seriously? Developed in 2009, range 70km, altitude 16km, speed Mach 2... Whereas the S-300PT, developed in 1981, has speed of over mach 4, altitude of over 20km, and juust falls short with 70km operational range that was the limitation of the detection array, rather than the missile.

Sorry, but no. There are likely better SAMs than ours somewhere, but these are not it. And as far as actual combat, we are using our old SAMs as target practice for our new ones so far. I'm pretty sure our engineers would love to get them some fresh testing data.

[gogis]

http://lenta.ru/articles/2014/04/01/s400forchina/

Putin is going to sell s-400 to China. So China ties is going strong liek right now.
(guys, I deliberately put pro-Kremlin links just to show you, how I feel when you post huge(most) amount of links to clearly anti-russian propaganda materials)

[gogis]

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

Well, the Type 3 page lacks numbers, but... Barak 8, seriously? Developed in 2009, range 70km, altitude 16km, speed Mach 2... Whereas the S-300PT, developed in 1981, has speed of over mach 4, altitude of over 20km, and juust falls short with 70km operational range that was the limitation of the detection array, rather than the missile.

Sorry, but no. There are likely better SAMs than ours somewhere, but these are not it.

I was ironic about his posts. He attacked me with links to systems which is HUGELY inferior to ours in any charesteristic, and he attacked it's age. Which is silly. That why I said s-300 wikipage have more writing. And I really want to read about better SAM's which is better, but I didn't find any in open internetz. "Likely" - please, provide links.

[gogis]

Well, the Type 3 page lacks numbers, but... Barak 8, seriously? Developed in 2009, range 70km, altitude 16km, speed Mach 2... Whereas the S-300PT, developed in 1981, has speed of over mach 4, altitude of over 20km, and juust falls short with 70km operational range that was the limitation of the detection array, rather than the missile.
[/quote]

Btw, dont emphaize age of something, as I said I was born in Votkinsk and I worked in it's prominent plant, and my father still works there. Just read a short summary of this town in wikipedia and you will understand what I mean. Granted, I have no full information, it's unavailable without security clearance, but when I say that something is real and something not, I have a slight clue.

[Darvi]

The modify button. Learn it. Use it. Maybe don't love it.

[Sean Mirrsen]

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

Well, the Type 3 page lacks numbers, but... Barak 8, seriously? Developed in 2009, range 70km, altitude 16km, speed Mach 2... Whereas the S-300PT, developed in 1981, has speed of over mach 4, altitude of over 20km, and juust falls short with 70km operational range that was the limitation of the detection array, rather than the missile.

Sorry, but no. There are likely better SAMs than ours somewhere, but these are not it.

I was ironic about his posts. He attacked me with links to systems which is HUGELY inferior to ours in any charesteristic, and he attacked it's age. Which is silly. That why I said s-300 wikipage have more writing. And I really want to read about better SAM's which is better, but I didn't find any in open internetz. "Likely" - please, provide links.

Most of it's on Wikipedia. The US Navy's RIM series "Standards" are pretty neat, however they are ship-mounted, not what you'd use to defend a piece of land. Lately, it seems most of the world is focusing on "anti-ballistic" defenses, not anti-air. Lots of huge missiles designed to stop an ICBM from ruining your day, but everybody sticks to the same old guns when it comes to preventing a flock of errant fighter-bombers from doing the same. Everybody, that, is, except Russia. As usual. Maybe because the "old guns" everybody sticks to are either Patriots or russian-made.

[gogis]

The modify button. Learn it. Use it. Maybe don't love it.

I use modify button extensively because my messages is ridden with syntax errors (another language spell checker). But I can't fix all. Sorry to bother you.

[mainiac]

Why you asking me like I have no idea what we talking about? I provided you with a link to incredibly long and thorough documentary of Napoleon life with hundreds of numbers and details provided about everything and you keep arguing. Spanish campaign started before Russian, was not supervised directly by Napoleon most of the time and economic woes doesnt affected ability of Napoleon to field enormously huge grand army to march towards their demise in Russian wastelands. And if you don't know simple facts that there was plenty of guerilla warfare in Russian campaign including scorched earth tactics, setting Moscow ablaze, cossacs raids etc then I have no intention to discuss this topic with you. You are way ignorant to simple historical facts, it's like arguing with idiot, which never works. You was caught so many times on posting bullshits it's beyond my patience.

Deny reality all you want buddy.  Simple fact is more French soldiers served in Spain then in Russia.  It's not complicated, the Grande Armee was big but was only around for six months.  The Iberian occupation was less big but still very large and lasted for six years.

But thank you for that documentary, I'd never had the amazing opportunity to see a documentary about Napoleon before.

[gogis]

There is no better SAM's though, currently.

Said who? It was never tested in actual combat and there are plenty more modern developments. Like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chū-SAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_8_(missile)

[sarcasm] How can Japan and Israel design something better than 1980s weapon systems? That countries have shitty defense industries comparing to what USSR had[/sarcasm]

Well, the Type 3 page lacks numbers, but... Barak 8, seriously? Developed in 2009, range 70km, altitude 16km, speed Mach 2... Whereas the S-300PT, developed in 1981, has speed of over mach 4, altitude of over 20km, and juust falls short with 70km operational range that was the limitation of the detection array, rather than the missile.

Sorry, but no. There are likely better SAMs than ours somewhere, but these are not it.

I was ironic about his posts. He attacked me with links to systems which is HUGELY inferior to ours in any charesteristic, and he attacked it's age. Which is silly. That why I said s-300 wikipage have more writing. And I really want to read about better SAM's which is better, but I didn't find any in open internetz. "Likely" - please, provide links.

Most of it's on Wikipedia. The US Navy's RIM series "Standards" are pretty neat, however they are ship-mounted, not what you'd use to defend a piece of land. Lately, it seems most of the world is focusing on "anti-ballistic" defenses, not anti-air. Lots of huge missiles designed to stop an ICBM from ruining your day, but everybody sticks to the same old guns when it comes to preventing a flock of errant fighter-bombers from doing the same. Everybody, that, is, except Russia. As usual. Maybe because the "old guns" everybody sticks to are either Patriots or russian-made.

As a mostly wary-to-defend-land  nation I dont see how that's a problem for us. Anything ship mounted is offensive, how it's contradict to my viewpoint that one side is full offensive and other is full defensive? I am absolutely pro-peace generally. But when one's start to speak about NATO superiority I can't help but laugh. There is no such thing, except in minds of brainwashed individuals. There are no winners.