Or just being a right evil cheeky bastard and putting half an MLRS load spamming the battery and then sending the second half of that load a couple minutes later to get the battery.Spamming the SA-21 battery would ensure it wastes a lot of expensive interceptor missiles making it easier to destroy if there's a follow up HIMARS barrage.
We do not know the conditions of the engagement. It is possible other rockets and decoys were used. Ukraine is known to mix HIMARS and ADM-160s into their ATACM strikes.
We don’t know the exact conditions but the Russian milblogger who published photos is claiming five ATACAMS. It’s also clear it wasn’t a saturation attack as the TEL’s still had ammo left. MALD’s should not serve as effective decoys for ballistic missiles vs a modern AESA, though vs Russia, who knows.
No doubt Turkey will be looking to very quietly sell its SA-21 batteries to Ukraine.
So probably two seperate S400 batteries destroyed via ATACAMs over the last couple of days.
It looks intimidating but it doesn't really do much, it's sort of like a scarecrow for planes.
Looks like jamming has not rendered GPS 'completely ineffective' after all.
Appears so:So another horribly expensive and difficult to replace SA-21 battery has been destroyed?
With modern data links, it's almost more important to get the TELs than the radars...The 92N6 Grave Stone radar, generator unit, and one 51P6 TEL were destroyed by the ATACAMs strike.
Debatable, not everyone has IBCS-equivalent and a radar is usually way more expensive and difficult to replace, and also serves many TELs.With modern data links, it's almost more important to get the TELs than the radars...
The S400s do have a comparable networking system where a radar not in the same grid square as the TELs can tell those TELs when to fire.Debatable, not everyone has IBCS-equivalent and a radar is usually way more expensive and difficult to replace, and also serves many TELs.
The radar is still the harder to replace item. Control center perhaps more so. Destroying any part of an opponent SAM system is desirable to prevent reconstituting batteries.With modern data links, it's almost more important to get the TELs than the radars...
There's way more TELs than there are radars and the TELs are relatively very cheap and easy to replace. The easiest way to disable SAMs is the killing the radars and ground stations. Keep the radars out permanently and you have permanence. Killing TELs as well uses more munitions and is therefore not as efficient. Of course, if your cluster warhead takes out a TEL or two as well as the radar and ground station, then that's not something to complain about... not for you anyway.The S400s do have a comparable networking system where a radar not in the same grid square as the TELs can tell those TELs when to fire.
So while blinding the TELs is good for short term suppression, you need to get the TELs as well as the radars for permanence.
And the modern data links make it so that pretty much any radar and control center can give launch orders to any TEL.The radar is still the harder to replace item. Control center perhaps more so. Destroying any part of an opponent SAM system is desirable to prevent reconstituting batteries.
That's what the russians claim anyway, but they're still removing most of their AD umbrella from Crimea after losing so many systems.And the modern data links make it so that pretty much any radar and control center can give launch orders to any TEL.
Gotta kill them all these days, not just take out radars and/or control centers at each battery.
And the modern data links make it so that pretty much any radar and control center can give launch orders to any TE
I'd still just as soon treat the claims as true for planning on how much destruction it's going to take to degrade the AA performance.I think that just like with many russian pieces of gear, the claims are bigger than the performance.
This video will explain why attacks on S-400 became more numerous. Why the focus on Crimea? What might be the ultimate goal? And why have Russian S-400 SAMs often showed to be inadequate to protect themselves?