Forest Green
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 11 June 2019
- Messages
- 7,967
- Reaction score
- 13,467
I vaguely remember domestically the whole battery cost around 100-200 millions USD, no?I heard something like 900 million dollars for foreign buyers.
What an S-400 kill and a spec ops raid reveal about Ukraine's ability to hit Russia - Breaking Defense
According to Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov, the Neptune preformed “flawlessly” during the Aug. 23 attack on a Russian Almaz-Antei S-400 “Triumf” air and missile defense complex.breakingdefense.com
The Neptune was first designed as an anti-ship missile, but Luch added in a GPS guidance capacity to supplement its seeker, which was designed by Radionix in Kyiv, one of the most capable defense electronics firms in Ukrainian industry. This gave the missile the flexibility to be re-purposed as a land-attack weapon.
A senior Ukrainian designer, briefed on the Aug. 23 attack, told Breaking Defense that “the seeker was switched into the passive mode for this strike. There were also modifications made to incorporate digital scene matching into the guidance system.”
All air defense systems are vulnerable especially if you have excellent intelligence and attack during times of optimal weakness.
That said I have serious doubts.
This suggests that the SA-21 battery's crew weren't doing their job perhaps slacking off due to low morale and this is assuming they were properly trained (The same goes for the SA-22 battery's crew) and then there's the possibility they've may've been load on vodka (Drinking on the job).
SA-22 Greyhound linked to the SA-21's surveillance radar yet it didn't do it's job.
I'm highly inclined to believe reports, given that the SA-21 battery was supposed to be defended by an SA-22 Greyhound linked to the SA-21's surveillance radar yet it didn't do it's job.
This is some serious speculation on your side.
Mind you they didn't pick up and engage the UAV that was filming the engagement...
Yes it is but based on what I've read from various sources over the past year suggest that this is very likely.
If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
It almost certainly is meant to threaten the F-16s, but I don't believe that it will be effective. The F-16s all have much newer defenses than the MiG29s UkAF has been flying.Russian mod has said over a dozen fighters have been shot down with what sounds like 40N6 missiles linked with the A-50U awacs. If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
The F-16s all have much newer defenses than the MiG29s UkAF has been flying.
Nothing on liveuamap or twitter feed about it. Oil refinery in Krasnodor Krai and drone base in Fedosia got hit within the last 24 though and some S-400 destroyed by ATACMS in Luhansk prior to that.Russian mod has said over a dozen fighters have been shot down with what sounds like 40N6 missiles linked with the A-50U awacs. If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
I would like to add that the ЗУР 48Н6 S-400 is hypersonic. So it is difficult to knock it down even after detecting it.Can it spot a 48N6 series missile at 400 kilometers? Because if not, given that the missile is not using radar guidance when fired, how will the E-2 know that its day just got far more interesting?
I think it is a decoy site.So an SA-21 Growler battery was spotted by a Ukrainian drone and destroyed shortly afterwards?
The solution is often decoy like ALE-50 or MALDI would like to add that the ЗУР 48Н6 S-400 is hypersonic. So it is difficult to knock it down even after detecting it.
S-400 have much longer engagement range than AGM-88, especially with AEW&C support that there no longer radar horizon limitIt also depends on how well the SA-21's crew has been trained, how much experience they have and how well the battery has been integrated into the local defence network.
Not only much newer and hence better ECM but those F-16s will be able to take full advantage of the AGM-88s already supplied to the UkAF even if they're older models.
S-400 have much longer engagement range than AGM-88, especially with AEW&C support that there no longer radar horizon limit
How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.F-16s are not going to be a significantly greater threat to either the S400 batteries or opponent aircraft. They would however solve a lot of issues with parts and weapons streams, as well as making more weapons available (and some existing weapons donated incrementally more effective).
For example: with AGM-88, because Mig-29 and Su-27 can’t directly talk to the missile, and they also lack dedicated emitter locating system like ASQ-213 (which can not only find the direction but also the distance to target), so they lack ability to use some mode of AGM-88How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.
The HARM has four basic operating modes. The Pre-Brief, Pre-Emptive or Position-Known (PB/PE/POS) mode is a Lock On After Launch (LOAL) mode, and is used for standoff maximum range attacks on emitters of a known type and location, within several degrees of the missile boresight. This is the basic mode used by dedicated defence suppression (SEAD) aircraft such as the F-4G and Tornado ECR, or F-16CJ/HTS. In PB/PE/POS mode, as used by the Tornado ECR or F-4G, the aircraft's Emitter Locating System (ELS) determines the identity and position of the target, which are downloaded to the missile. The launch aircraft will then toss the missile to impart the best possible range. The missile flies on inertial guidance until it acquires the target, and then homes to impact. The PB/PE/POS mode is essentially offensive and most commonly used when taking down an IADS.
A sub-mode of the PB/PE/POS mode is Equations-Of-Motion (EOM) mode which allows more precise selection of emitters at maximum range, in a high density environment. The EOM mode is more specific than PB mode in terms of target selection, and can engage off axis if required, but requires more precise target position information than the baseline PB mode. The target position data can be provided by an onboard receiver or datalinked from an external source (eg Rivet Joint to F-16CJ).
The Target Of Opportunity (TOO) mode, also termed the HARM as Sensor (HAS) or Direct Attack (DA) mode is a lock-on-before-launch (LOBL) mode in which the missile receiver is used before launch to acquire the target. This mode allows off axis attacks on emitters within the field of view of the seeker. It is typically used as an offensive mode by non-dedicated strike aircraft to suppress emitters.
The Self Protect or Launch Off RWR (SP/LOR) mode is a short to medium range mode used defensively to engage targets within 360 degrees of the launch aircraft. In SP mode the HARM is slaved to the aircraft's RWR and given a prioritised list of threats. The highest priority threat will be engaged after launch. The SP/LOR mode is similar to the TOO/HAS/DA mode, but provides a larger search footprint.
No, it's a fake and not a very good one if you click on the picture.So an SA-21 Growler battery was spotted by a Ukrainian drone and destroyed shortly afterwards?
How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.
The МИГ-29 and СУ-27 available in the ВСУ were put into service in 1982-85. F-16 in 1978. That is, the ВСУ planes will even be newer. Or are we talking about some new modification of the F-16? The whole question is the integration of the system. In fact, integrating the HARM system in the same МИГ-29 is not difficult at all (but of course I will not advise it). We have already shot down many dozens of HARM missiles. Many of them came to us in almost complete condition. We take it apart, let's see what's inside, of course. But that's not the point. As the respected Grandfather Biden said quite correctly: "The conflicts around Ukraine and Israel will bring progress to the world." It is already obvious that according to the results of it, many weapons systems and even individual types of troops can be safely thrown into the trash of history. We didn't understand a lot earlier. And you didn't understand a lot either. Including those lessons that you should have learned already after the Vietnam War.The old F-16 has been fully integrated with things like JDAM and HARM and can target them dynamically in the air, vice those weapons being pre set for targets on the ground and fired by even older Soviet vintage aircraft in an improvised fashion.
As of today, this document is still not online, are there any other way of getting it?"REMOVED PENDING PDF CONVERSION"
Did you ever generate the PDF? Didn't see it anywhere. Also wondering if you have any details (that you can share) of any 40N6 tests. I get the impression it's an SM-6 analog.
The Dutch F-16s destined for Ukraine have been upgraded throughout their service lives with the Dutch air force. Added since their introduction: adapted for and using Litening-, LANTIRN-, FLIR- and ECM-pods, night vision goggles, terrain following system, AN/APG-66v2 radar, integration of AIM-9X - IRIS-T - AMRAAM - GBU-47.Or are we talking about some new modification of the F-16?