Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Air Defense Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Is the russian S-400 the best air defense system in the world??
Military Strength    4/15/2004 3:57:30 PM
S-400 or the American PAC 3?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
Professor Fickle    RE:Is the russian S-400 the best air defense in the world??   12/1/2004 3:55:03 PM
First of all S-400 can be compared to PAC-2 and THAAD {Theater High-Altitude Area Defense} PAC-3 is a much shorter range surface to air missile, 15 Km max. http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/patriot-specs.htm http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/patriot.htm On the other hand PAC-3 is a very accurate, hit to kill missile!!! PAC-3 is smaller than PAC-2, eight PAC-3 can fit in a truck instead of four PAC-2. However PAC-2 has a range of over 160Km, 100 miles. Unfortunately the S-400 the range of the big missile is 400Km and can hit ballistic missiles just like THAAD. http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/thaad.htm
 
Quote    Reply

Covaysh    RE:Is the russian S-400 the best air defense in the world??   12/1/2004 7:19:51 PM
What about the Israeli Hetz (arrow) Missile system? How does that compare to the S-400 and Pac 3? I've heard good reviews on it so far. It's supposed to be the latest anti-missile generation. Advanced Electronics. Althugh from what i can tell it only has a range of 70 km... and it's half the size of the S-400...i think. Anyways while i'm here. Can someone tell me the difference between the F15/F16 and the F-15I/F16I
 
Quote    Reply

GBU28    RE:Is the russian S-400 the best air defense in the world??   12/24/2004 10:56:22 AM
Israelis defend missile failure Israeli military officials have defended a new anti-missile system they are developing jointly with the US, despite its failure in tests. The Arrow-2 anti-ballistic missile failed to intercept a target missile designed to simulate attack by weapons of the type held by Iran and Syria. The tests took place off the coast of Californian on Thursday. The missile successfully identified its target, but the interception failed because of an unidentified fault. Aryeh Herzog, the Israeli Defence Ministry official leading the Arrow project, said the testing could be seen as a success and only minor technical glitches needed to be corrected. "The element of distinguishing was successful, and the element of final interception had a local malfunction in the Arrow missile," he said. Thirteenth test The Associated Press reports that this was the 13th interception test for the Arrow-2 and the eighth test of the complete weapons system. Officials have not said how many of the tests have been successful. Last month, an Arrow successfully hit a missile launched from a platform on a military ocean range north-west of Los Angeles. The Arrow system was developed in 1991, after Israel came under attack from Iraqi scud missiles during the Gulf war. In Thursday's test, the Arrow was trying to hit a short-range, air-launched target. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/3605214.stm Published: 2004/08/27 13:20:14 GMT © BBC MMIV Israel plays down missile test failure http://www.dawn.com/2004/08/28/top12.htm AL QUDS, Aug 27: Israeli officials on Friday tried to downplay the failure of a joint test with the United States of a new missile system designed to intercept incoming missiles. The Arrow-2 missile system failed to destroy the detachable warhead of an incoming missile fired by a US airforce aircraft in a test off the coast of California on Thursday. While the Arrow did identify the warhead, the interception failed because of an unidentified malfunction, defence ministry officials confirmed. The Arrow system was originally designed to meet the threat of Iraqi Scud missiles during the rule of Saddam Hussein but is now being adapted to head off potential threats which intelligence sources say are being developed by Syria and Iran. Aryeh Herzog, the defence ministry official in charge of the Arrow project, said on Friday that the testing could be seen as a success and that only minor technical glitches needed to be ironed out. "The element of distinguishing was successful and the element of final interception had a local malfunction in the Arrow missile," he said. "We are now trying to identify the source of the malfunction." A further test is expected in the next few months. -AFP http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2004_09/Arrow.asp?print Israel, Iran Flex Missiles Wade Boese Israel and Iran spent the last weeks of the summer conducting missile tests and exchanging verbal volleys about their determination to match each other’s weapons capabilities. On July 29, Israel, for the first time, successfully tested its Arrow-2 missile defense system against what was widely reported as a Scud ballistic missile. U.S. and Israeli officials would not officially confirm that the target was a Scud—a mainstay of the Soviet missile arsenal that has spread around the globe, including to Iran—but a Missile Defense Agency spokesperson implied as much, commenting Aug. 13 that the target was a “liquid-fueled short- to medium-range ballistic missile.” The joint U.S.-Israeli test took place off California’s coast to provide a more realistic test scenario. Israel’s territory is too small and densely populated to fire the Arrow-2 against targets at ranges that would replicate a real attack. The Arrow-2 system failed Aug. 26 to replicate its earlier success, missing an air-launched target off the coast of California. Although U.S. and Israeli officials said they did not know the cause of the failure, they reaffirmed their confidence in the system, which has been tested a total of 13 times but never used in combat. Israel has deployed two Arrow batteries and is seeking to deploy more of the interceptors. Unlike U.S. missile interceptors that are designed to destroy enemy targets through collisions, the Arrow-2 carries a conventional explosive warhead. Israel Aircraft Industries, which works with U.S.-owned Boeing Corp. to build the Arrow-2 system, said the July 29 test marked “an important step in proving the system’s operational ability and its response to the existing and growing threat of ballistic missiles in our region.” With Iraq and Libya currently out of the ballistic missile business, Syria and Iran were clearly the intended audiences. Iran was paying attention. Tehran announced Aug. 11 a successful test of its Shahab-3 ballistic missile, which is estimated to be capable of reaching Israel. Speaki
 
Quote    Reply

rikopotomous    its russian   12/24/2004 8:06:27 PM
BOOOOOOOOHHHHH
 
Quote    Reply

jarkeld    RE:Is the russian S-400 the best air defense system in the world??   12/30/2004 2:56:20 PM
I think its fairly clear that a US navy Carrier group is the best air defense system in the world at this time.
 
Quote    Reply

Adamantine    reply to felixA9   1/13/2005 11:33:49 PM
Hi Felix, You said "What kind of crack are you on? Oh, and thanks for making me spray Pepsi all over my keyboard. I did enjoy the laugh though. YOu assumption is so flawed that I hardly know where to begin. L/D ratio has an effect on drag and the diameter has an effect on how much propellant you can carry but that's as far as it goes. To say that they'd have the same range because the motor length is similar is ludicrous." Maybe you misunderstood my meaning. Of course if you have two different missile using different airframe material, propellant, motor etc, you cannot compare range with L/D ratio alone. But the propellant that is used to power PAC-2 and PAC-3 is either having similar energy density or differ by small margin. The DRAg to WEIGHT ratio of PAC-3 is slightly bigger than PAC-2. But the propellant fuel fraction of PAC2 and PAC3 is broadly similar. Now if you have two missile of same length, the fatter PAC2 has a frontal drag that is approximately 2.7 times more than PAC-3 BUT PAC2 has rough 2.88 times more propellant than PAC3, you WILL end up with a missile that is roughly of similar range. PAC2 is quoted to have max range of 160km while PAC3 is quoted by Russian to have range of 150km against slow moving aircraft. That is about right. In contrast US sources only admit that PAC 3 range against aircraft is ONLY 25km or so. Thats severe understatement. PAC2 and PAC3 has almost the same dragxweight to total impulse ratio, their range should be broadly similar. PAC2 is 2.88 times heavier than PAC3, it has 2.7 times more drag and a weight of 2.88 times more than PAC3 in most part of its flight regime, the extra fuel of PAC2 is used to carry almost proportionally extra weight and extra drag compare to PAC3, hence the range of both missile must be broadly similar. The only way for this pAC3 to have much SMALLERE range is if PAC3 uses vastly inferior propellant or if PAC3 propellant weight fraction is vastly smaller. neither is the case.
 
Quote    Reply

andyf    RE:patriot   1/14/2005 8:55:30 AM
during gulf war 1 the patriot was announced to be capable of shooting down scuds and the like, they deployed em in israel. they fired rockets off... they all missed. not one scud was ever shot down by a patriot. we were fed propaganda the US has a history of this: recently the anti missile system tests were cancelled until the missile was deployed. it failed most of its tests, it doesnt work. yet we are told that it is just fine. mind you, the UK government is just as bad, during the falklands war we were told that rapier was a wonderful bit of kit that nailed 9 or so argentinians- in fact it missed. seawolf on the other hand works. the greeks were looking for a defence agaist scuds and the like after GW1 so they shopped around, the yanks offered patriot, the russkies S-300 the greeks were quite savvy, and asked for proof that it was capable. the americans pointed to the propaganda from GW1 and the russkies took a greek delegation out to the range, fired a scud in and shot it down the system was delivered at around the same time as the kosovo war, admiral kusnetsov battlegroup i belive did the delivery. dont know where its installed. so , if its predecessor did shoot down scuds and the like, it certaily can
 
Quote    Reply

andyf    RE:reply to felixA9   1/14/2005 9:03:48 AM
surely ,due to drag after motor burnout ,the larger heavier missile will travel further.These things after all , do not boost all the way to the target?
 
Quote    Reply

bazos    RE:Is the russian S-400 the best air defense system in the world??   1/14/2005 11:21:20 AM
the history of the S400 is the same with sam5 sam 6 sam2 .hawk was largely superior to that serie.As PaC 3 is largely superior to hawk missile ,you can conclude that PAC3 is largely superoir to S400. Can you tell me the battle where S400 was used? you said that PAC was not ffective ok but many despite many countries continue to buy the system and not anycountry
 
Quote    Reply

Adamantine    PAC3 better in ATBM, S-400 better in anti aircraft   1/14/2005 1:53:02 PM
PAC 3 has range of 150km. A new upgraded PAC3 with larget motor has double its range against Aircraft target. This brings its range to 300km at most. S-400 is at least 3300kg and possibly as huge as 4500kg and contain a huge directional warhead, even if it miss, it still could blow a aircraft there is within 50 meter radius away from its original aiming point. PAC 3 is very lethal if it score a direct hit. But a near miss would mean that the aircraft would survive. The lethality device in PAC3 is nothing more than a extended metal umbrella that enhance the surface area of PAC3 that can hit a target. If PAC3 miss its target by more than 1 meter, it will definitely fail to destroy the target. PAC3 advantage lies in better ECCM and guidance due to superior US electronic Kinematic wise, the two stage S-400 triumf is better. No question abaout it. But for ATBM purpose PAC3 is better than S-400 because only a DIRECT hit to kill impact can ensure complete destruction of dangerous warhead containing biological and chemical agent or nuclear warhead.. S-400 is nota direct kill device, its inferior in ATBM mode. Moreover there is a smaller hit to kill missile use for S-400 when the larger missile is not use. The smaller missile is HIT TO KILL but less accurate and reliable and shorter range that the IMPROVED PAC-3
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics