It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia lifts ban on delivering missile-defence system to Iran

page: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

greed. arrogance. intolerance.
whatever.

violence is the last resort of the incompetent.

so it's really just that the west lacks competence.




posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: mSparks43




violence is the last resort of the incompetent.

so it's really just that the west lacks competence.


those who resort to violence mostly understand the language of violence. till they are not dealt with, they will keep on unleashing violence on others. history is full of such examples.

on the otherhand, west and especially america, are very competent in pursuing the goals that they plan upon. to call them incompetent would denying the truth and underestimating the reality.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: mSparks43

www.youtube.com...

another DARPA strategy to defeat the S-300s.

is the missions truck also stealth? if not very stealthy then using passive systems go after the truck first using Mig-31s long range missiles.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: victor7

yes.
they are developing systems that are nearly as good as the Russians had in the 60s and 70s.

probably based on stuff they declassified under the 50 year rule.

a lot has changed in 50 years.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had tech capable of taking over control of the us autonomous systems. for example.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

much more efficient to just detonate enemy ordinance before its launched.
edit on 19-4-2015 by mSparks43 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 03:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: mSparks43

www.youtube.com...

another DARPA strategy to defeat the S-300s.

is the missions truck also stealth? if not very stealthy then using passive systems go after the truck first using Mig-31s long range missiles.


In other Words the US dont have the capability today to couter the S-300.
The S-300 by Russian standard is already a old system. Russia now have a generation S-400 and are testing the S-500.

Fom just looking at your YouTube video it is odd that you dont take into account that small cruise missiles probably have short range....Shorter range than the S-300 system. That means the Delivery system is going to be targeted by the S-300 before it can deliver the cruise missiles. A S-300 is also going to be protected by other S-300,400 or even 500 systems, and by TOR and Pantsir S1 and even lang range radars. The cruise missile delivery Craft is not stealthy by a long shot. Its a slow moving cow to.

And for this to work With such a deliviery system you would need to have air supremacy. That means there can not be a Russian jet flying any more.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

What if the mission cow truck is B-2, then finding it and killing would be difficult.

I think lots of CIWS type point defenses protecting against the sub-sonic saturation attacks would help in saving the S-300 missiles to be used against the F22s and other bigger cruise missiles.

Also, attack and cancellation of the data links between various parties in the offense team would help by alot. Once say the first S-300 battery is attacked, then whole monster of war will be unleased and in 24 hours how many Sats will still be functioning on either side would be a question.

Presence of well hidden passive sensors and that too way upfront and outside of the S-300 envelope would also help. The best would be successfully go after the "missions cow" and remove it early on.

However, this also leads to conclusion that S-300s can be vulnerable when defensive party is non-Russian like Iran or Syria. These countries would not have enough and multiple layered assets to negate various attacks. They might also not want to spend up their air force planes against the F22s. Makes no sense sending a 4th generation legacy plane against the Raptor anyways.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

I have to wonder hos many Space planes does the airforce have? They could be used in place of Stellites and stay out of range of Anti sat weapons. Its one reason why they deved it prolly.

As for those cruise missiles. tomohawks can hit over 1000 miles. There is a way to make a CIWS or similiar defense system dangerous to the defenders. Putting Chemical weapons on it that if destroyed will spread on the target area.VX would be easy to use in such a way.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

It seems when running out of options you are ready to take matter to space and indulge in WMDs at the onset.

That's really low!

Tomahawk cruise missile can be launched from 1000 miles but can be handled by a good CIWS like Pantsirs. Although Pantsirs complex is good $15 million a piece, so a highly mobile CIWS needs to be developed which is barely $1 million a unit and employ 15 of them to protect 1 S-300 system. That would be a good option against the saturation strikes. Not only that use of cluster bomblets shot in the direction of the attack will also come real handy. Best of all would jamming the links of the incoming mini-cruise missiles to throw them off the target.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

Do you think the US would use all 8 B2s in a first stike on Russia to take out their air defence?



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7

->It seems when running out of options you are ready to take matter to space and indulge in WMDs at the onset.

And for those not used to the game :p
www.econ.umn.edu...



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: yuppa

It seems when running out of options you are ready to take matter to space and indulge in WMDs at the onset.

That's really low!

Tomahawk cruise missile can be launched from 1000 miles but can be handled by a good CIWS like Pantsirs. Although Pantsirs complex is good $15 million a piece, so a highly mobile CIWS needs to be developed which is barely $1 million a unit and employ 15 of them to protect 1 S-300 system. That would be a good option against the saturation strikes. Not only that use of cluster bomblets shot in the direction of the attack will also come real handy. Best of all would jamming the links of the incoming mini-cruise missiles to throw them off the target.


Its not low to use all options to win. All fair in love and war. DRopping conventional weapons from space isnt really against any treaties though IF the weapon isnt based in space. I wonder if a Tungten rod impactor could be stopped by a S-300 or would it just keep on trucking?

Also I thought VX was not a WMD if used in small areas and on just a military target. Still it be a way to spoilsport the area for a week or two. Denial of the area is just as effective as destroying them. Shoot Microwave beam weapons on the space plane would fry their electronics if used properly.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

I'd highly recommend you read up on the theory of mutually assured destruction and game theory
there's a better one here
gametheory101.com...

Heaven forbid you might learn something.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: spy66

THAT number is 84 not 8.
9 are reserve.
LOVE that ZiL PUNISHER scout vehicle by that way. It shows a really interesting design sense,you should sell civilian versions overseas when all the CRAP blows over...IF we survive.
IF it only it had a remote turret and was amphibious it would be way better than your BRDM.
edit on 19-4-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Yes it is only kinnetic but it's existance as a ground striking weapon would violate the weapon of space treaties.
NOT that EITHER side GIVES a damn and just goes SECRET with all the BLACK last use stuff.
edit on 19-4-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

sorry pal, wikipedia says number built were 21 and i think 1 crashed so left are 20. still pack an awesome punch given that they are 99.99% stealth in terms of RCS.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: yuppa

Yes it is only kinnetic but it's existance as a ground striking weapon would violate the weapon of space treaties.
NOT that EITHER side GIVES a damn and just goes SECRET with all the BLACK last use stuff.


what is they are not based in space though? dropped by the space plane that treaty was for stationed weapons i thought.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spy66

THAT number is 84 not 8.
9 are reserve.
LOVE that ZiL PUNISHER scout vehicle by that way. It shows a really interesting design sense,you should sell civilian versions overseas when all the CRAP blows over...IF we survive.
IF it only it had a remote turret and was amphibious it would be way better than your BRDM.


84 is not the numbers i could find. They built 21. One crashed so 20 are left. 19 are in service With 509 bomb wing.

Not all of them would be used as a delivery truck to take out Russian air defence.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: victor7

ACTUALLY that pesky NUMBERS things is doing what it does...58 at current count,I trust this rather than wikki
www.af.mil...



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: yuppa

I'd highly recommend you read up on the theory of mutually assured destruction and game theory
there's a better one here
gametheory101.com...

Heaven forbid you might learn something.


IRAN wont cause MAD if we attack them with conventional weapons even if they are chemical weapons such as VX gas booby trapped cruise missiles. Once again your putin russia in the middle east . Sure attacking russia or china would MAD everyone but Iran dont have the ability yet.

@spy 66. yes they do have the ability to strike S-300. test against greeces versions were done and detection radius against f-35/22 was round 25-45 nm depemding on jamming/ecm/microwave interference. well within range of HARM/aarm missiles or JASM-em 250 nm range.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

They would HAVE to be the size of a telephone pole to do effective damage I should think THAT is a small drone.
Again it is ONLY what we KNOW about.
In THAT situation the black triangles would got to war so to spaek and the gloves would come off.
WE haven't done that since WWII poor littlre Russia DOES NOT deserve such a scotched earth fate,but if a NUKE is lofted ..IT'S ON.




top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join