Russia’s advanced S-500 SAM ‘ready for series production’

https://www.rt.com/russia/462640-s-500- ... roduction/

That's a Gazelle ABM, not an "S-500".

Christ I cant imagine the amount of almost ready, ready for production, by 2020, etc reports about the system already. Only think new claimed was hitting a target from 480kms away but they don't say what kind of target.

http://www.deagel.com/Sensor-Systems/77 ... 33001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 10001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 09001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 11001.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 54002.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 56002.aspx
http://www.deagel.com/Tactical-Vehicles ... 60001.aspx

This looks like its going to be a boring army forum if they cant go into any good detail about the specs of different radars or its missile among other military systems in production.

Take Russian claims about the S-500 with a hefty dose of skepticism; remember the S-400 'entered service' in 2007, but only received it's 380 km range 40N6 missile in late 2018.

Take Russian claims about the S-500 with a hefty dose of skepticism; remember the S-400 'entered service' in 2007, but only received it's 380 km range 40N6 missile in late 2018.

We can easily estimate S-500 missile dimesions based on mock up.

Mock up:
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/s500.jpg

That is based on BAZ 10wheeler:
http://www.baz32.ru/upload/iblock/b0a/sxema_4.jpg

S-500 missile is at least 10meters length and 1.2meters diameter. That is quite similar S-300 Giant, which had 5800kg mass. Of course S-500 is lot newer so we can expect similar tech as S-400 (I am talking just about rockets, we already know S-500 will have more advanced radars).

40N6 missile:
https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/38 ... iginal.jpg

40N6 is 1900kg mass, that is toy compared to S-500 missile, S-500 is three times heavier missile with similar tech (fuel electronics).

So it is good question what was target it hit 480km away? Something acting as aircraft? I really doubt. Probable reentry target, which I think was mentioned in some reports.

Probable reentry target

Not too impressive though, for such a role, if the aim was just to produce a 500 km radius kill interceptor.

Original SM3 BK1A has an operational range of 900 km since 2004, @ 3,000 lb (1,350 kg), with a length of 6.55 m and diameter of 34.3 cm.

Chalk and cheese.

Suggests to me the aim is other than that, possibly to deliver heavy warheads rapidly to air and especially ground targets at greatly extended ranges, rather than as a dedicated satellite or RV killer. Though a baseline heavy missile to match with multiple warheads and sensor options is still a possibility.

I suspect the real answer to why the difference in scale with Western SAM systems is more obvious.

What we're looking at with S300, S400 and S500 is the product of a country that's never had sufficient or consistent enough budget generosity to build anything but oversize SAMs. So they've not developed the affordable technologies needed to miniaturize them while retaining the performance levels they need from them. So they're forced to build outlandishly large and very heavy SAM interceptors and mobile launchers, even in 2019.

Thus everyone, especially the public, becomes over-awed by the enormous scale and evident power of these heavy SAM complexes, but fail to realize that they're so large simply because the core technology is so obsolete. Russia has typically built heavy SAMs for the army, then retro-fitted them to a heavy naval fleet.

US and NATO countries instead went for developing dedicated very compact naval SAMs which lost little if anything in performance to the heavier SAMs still on land, which Western army SAM missiles also then shrank in size while increasing their performances to current PAC and especially mobile THAAD level.

The fact that 40N6 'S400' missiles were a decade late, and that the Russians struggled for so long to develop and produce such a heavy missile with that range is evidence enough that a lack of funds and resulting difficulties developing, optimizing and testing the affordable older technology needed to get them to perform to the maximum is what made the S400 complex what it is (and why for the Russians 'Aegis Ashore' is such a challenge, as they can't match it).

I think the realistic way to view the newer versions of S300, S400 and S500 is as competent old-school heavy SAMs which are appallingly hard to hide, easy to detect, easy to track, and relatively easy to kill, using western targeting, VLO weapons and tactics. There's just not much there to actually be over-awed by.

A navy needs a ~500 km range SAM to kill stand-off maritime patrol and bomber aircraft plus SATs if they don't have an all-aspect naval VLO 5th-gen with a >150 km range AAM. Such SAM range is nice to have, but is clearly not necessary if you have such a jet. But if you don't have the competitive all-aspect VLO 5th-gen supersonic naval fighter at least an S300, S400 or S500 complex looks sufficiently grandiose and fierce, even if they are largely impotent, vulnerable and temporary.

Comparing vegetables with fruits. God I always forget how fun this board is

I am impressed and all about the SM-3 missiles ranges no matter what block it is. But it seems its entire purpose was just built to intercept ballistic missiles the s-400 missiles not only are said to engage ballistic missiles but cruise missiles and aircraft targets. SM-6 Ohhhh there we go lets see if it has the same ranges as the SM-3. 13] Estimates of the SM-6's range vary; its official published range is 130 nmi (150 mi; 240 km),[14] but it could be anywhere from 200 nmi (230 mi; 370 km)[15] to as much as 250 nmi (290 mi; 460 km)……Damn..... What happened to that long range? Wait a sec. The missile is said to engage cruise missiles and aircrafts as well besides just only ballistic missiles(sm-3) like the s-400 and s-500

Also bigger launchers don't mean bigger missiles there are big launchers on the s-400 that comes with small, medium and long range missiles. until I see the size of 40n6m or 77n6-n1 missiles. Although what bothers me about interception tests from both countries is one country is able to say what range they intercepted a target while the other does not list what range they intercepted their target. while the other one lists the ballistic missile class target they intercepted while the other does not.

Please everyone at least read the details of what each missile is able to do from a given air defense. You will be shocked by the differences in their purpose and realize they are not comparable.

One big difference between US and Russian SAM systems is that in US systems strategic air (and sea) mobility is pretty important thing. This is one major reason for the much smaller size of Patriot missiles and launchers. For Russia such mobility is far less important. Of course they also had technological limitations which meant that their missiles had to be larger for equal performance. Since they wanted better performance (range, altitude and speed), the missiles were necessarily a lot bigger.

Please everyone at least read the details of what each missile is able to do from a given air defense. You will be shocked by the differences in their purpose and realize they are not comparable.

Agree, not to mention that some countries have 3D ROFAR radars under development which will be able to recognize people's faces from hundreds of miles away. So yeah, completely pointless discussion.

Comparing vegetables with fruits. ... SM-6 Ohhhh there we go lets see if it has the same ranges as the SM-3. ... Please everyone at least read the details of what each missile is able to do from a given air defense. You will be shocked by the differences in their purpose and realize they are not comparable.

Rather than be a smart-ass maybe you should have noted this bit first:

Probable reentry target

Not too impressive though, for such a role, if the aim was just to produce a 500 km radius kill interceptor.

That's stated clearly enough for most.

Since they wanted better performance (range, altitude and speed), the missiles were necessarily a lot bigger.

Better than what though? Better than anyone else?

Please everyone at least read the details of what each missile is able to do from a given air defense. You will be shocked by the differences in their purpose and realize they are not comparable.

Agree, not to mention that some countries have 3D ROFAR radars under development which will be able to recognize people's faces from hundreds of miles away. So yeah, completely pointless discussion.

I do agree that both of your contributions were completely pointless.

Since they wanted better performance (range, altitude and speed), the missiles were necessarily a lot bigger.

Better than what though? Better than anyone else?

I'd say that better than previous Soviet/Russian systems and US HARMs mostly. Both Patriot and S-300 missile sizes were determined in the 1960s and 1970s when the first versions were designed. USA had more advanced technology and could have about equal performance from a much smaller missile (PAC-1 vs. 5V55 missiles). Of course it's only the latest 48N6E2 and 48N6E3 missiles that outrange Patriot PAC-2 missiles. Of course 40N6E also does that, but it's still unclear what role and capabilities it really has.

Of course 40N6E also does that, but it's still unclear what role and capabilities it really has.

Yes, good reply, the Russians are certainly taking full advantage of the resulting ambiguity.