Originally posted by iskander
I see we’re still on and rogue1 is still at it.
rouge1 for one last time, I’m blocking your posts, because you’re hopelessly dense.
, just look at the rest of the BS you just wrote 
I think hopelessly dense is title that you and you alone are
only capable of holding.
Rouge1, you must be a Nazi lover, because the Apollo program was under management of Wernher Von Braun, a Nazi war criminal that used slave labor in his factories. Is this the great American accomplishment you’re so proud of? That’s ok, keep it to your self until you learn how and what to read.
Well somehow I don't think that's going to happen. Originally posted by intelgurl
A few days ago I read an article by the Air Combat Information Group (ACIG) an organization which is generally considered a good source of factual information. While reading the article I happened across the following paragraph:
"...between the late 1970s and 1985 nobody less but the chief of the Phazotron Design Bureau was supplying all possible information about such projects R-23, R-24, R-33, R-27, and R-60, S-300, as well as about fighter-interceptor aircraft like MiG-29, MiG-31, and Su-27 and their radars directly to the CIA."
Gone With the Wind
By Tom Cooper
Nov 20, 2003
The thought of a CIA mole passing secret missile & radar technology to the US intrigued me so I asked an aerospace engineer working in Raytheon's missile division what he thought about it.
My first inclination was to think that the Patriot missile system was perhaps a copy of the S-300, but I was surprised when the engineer I spoke to said that it was common knowledge in the missile industry that the S-300 was actually a copy of the Patriot.
Being somewhat jaded by the patriotic ranting I encounter on ATS on both the US and Russian side concerning who's products are the best and who copied who - I asked if he could prove it.
He immediately referred me to a couple of aerospace engineering white papers - one of which states the following:
"These (Soviet) intelligence victories continued until recent times with the KGB stealing the U.S. Patriot anti-missile technology on which the Soviets based their modern version, the S-300, which it now exports to any buyer for hard currency."
The Attack on America’s Intellectual Property - Espionage after the Cold
by S. Eugene Poteat, Winter 2001
(This is from a Tau Beta Pi publication - Tau Beta Pi is very reputable and is the only engineering honor society representing the entire engineering profession.)
From discussions with this engineer and reading the articles of these organizations one can conclude that the SS-300PMU SA-10B GRUMBLE Mod 1 or one of the other upgraded mid-1980's versions is the result of Soviet espionage in the early to mid-1980's which acquired Patriot air defense technology during the Patriots' development phase.
According to the engineer I spoke with, the Patriot technology was indeed found in the tech information passed on to the CIA by their mole at Phazotron.
Thoughts anyone?
Originally posted by StellarX
So when exactly did the Russians fall so far behind ( when they were so far ahead for so long) that they had to not only steal US rocket tech but actually chose to use enough ot it to become obvious in their own design.... Just wondering since all my knowledge on the rocket race between the two countries indicates the Russians never lost their post war lead......
Anyways
Stellar
These intelligence victories continued
until recent times with the KGB stealing the U.S. Patriot
anti-missile technology on which the Soviets based their
modern version, the S-300,
The loss of our advanced
technology to foreign governments
through this aggressive
economic espionage means not
Modern SARH systems use continuous-wave (CW) radar for guidance. Even though most modern fighter radars are pulse Doppler sets, most have a CW function to guide radar missiles. A few Soviet aircraft, such as some versions of the MiG-23 and MiG-27, used an auxiliary guidance pod or aerial to provide a CW signal. Vympel R-33 AA missile for MiG-31 interceptor uses SARH as the main type of guidance (with supplement of inertial guidance on initial stage).
en.wikipedia.org...
It was originally intended to fit the TVM guidance system onto this model. However, the TVM system had problems tracking targets below 500m. Rather than accept the limitation, the Soviets decided that the tracking of low altitude targets was a must and decided to use a pure command-guidance system until the TVM head was ready
en.wikipedia.org...-dtig10
Originally posted by vK_man
stellar , the source is weak and highly questionable , as it only contains bashing of socialism as a system and has only one statement on s-300(that it was copied) , it does not elaborate whether the concept ot technical solution or details on the aerodynamic or ballistic behaviour of the two missiles neither does it document or prove anything ...
i conclude the assumptions (on anything) of the source are highly questionable ...
using similiar methods assumptions and col. krutov statements on technocracy.ca ,i could implicitly prove that aurora is electrochemical MHD version and ripoff of the nuclear powered MHD of AYAKS aerospace vessel, though i consider his conclusion as false
photo of AYAKS :
firstly patriot was orginally a air defence system and not a ABM defence , while S-300 was primarly a missile defence solution of the USSR as proved by you which was ultimately incorporated as nuclear ABM defences in USSR
(but i wish to ask you how you conclude that the sys can blunt a first strke , while your sources say that it was meant to deal with the second strike after first strike was achieved),
which makes the accusations made highly debatable and questionable...
but also the assumption of many that PAC-3 is a ripoff of s-300v is also false as from what i know only certain few technical solutions of s-300v are used in pac-3 to remove the glitches and targeting problems in the patroit
also stellar reading the source is like reading american cold war era nationalistic nonsense and propaganda
Oh, my, god. Please go into detail as to why you find the massive volumes of information i have posted on ATS on this topic to be 'flawed' and i do mean DETAIL.
Which source as this topic is quite old
If you can defend such ideas in as much detail as i have my ideas on the S-300 you will make a believer of me yet
Back in the early 1980's it would have 'blunted' ( it would have robbed American strategic planners of any chance of knowing for sure if they should assigned one warhead or five and thus massively reduce their target list) a US strike buy with the current number of warheads ( after all the reductions and technological evolutions) the US deploys it could truly make a American strike largely futile.
The Patriot's can still not bring down scuds while the USSR managed HTK technology in 1961. The USSR are still possibly a few decades ahead in this area as at least some Russian specialist claims.
The USSR are still possibly a few decades ahead in this area
Why is it a great thread such as this has to turn into another "biggest dick" contest. It is my understanding that INTELGurl's opinions and knowledge highly reguarded and respected when it comes to aircraft and weapons systems. Thats just my impression.
Originally posted by vK_man
oh my god , stellar , i was not refering to your sources , i was refering to intelgurl's highly questionable source on s-300(which only has one line and does not elaborate) , the first post of this topic
the source of intelgurl(whose claims are contradictory) , but evidence shows that patriot-3 has stolen technology of s-300v , while americans try claim the opposite even while patriot has been a big failure
en.rian.ru...
also intelgurl's assumptions on electronics and computational processes are fundamentally wrong , because russian electronics was 5-7 yrs behind the US electronics(she said that elctronics is same) and soviets relied on superior logic and mathemitcal algorithms will was the hallmark of soviet sciences(she said that computational processes and networking were stolen.....
also s-300v ABM was deployed in 1986(tested in early 80's) and was designed for ABM and intercepting crusie missiles , while patriot was first TESTED in ABM mode in 1988 ... so soviets stealing patriot tech is again wrong as russians had already ABM s-300v for ABM purposes(in 1986) and need not steal , but the performance of Patriot in gulf wars , seems to indicate that it needs improvements and stolen tech
definitely , not in adequate detail as there is limited info on AYAKS and the technical details i already posted in a former discussion with you , unless ,i am alble to locate some more , possibly on xakep where krutov was a former editor and posted quite a bit on hacking computers ,ATM and servers (main specialty)...
seems to be understood better as you are a specialist on ABM, sometimes i think you are joel skousen or jeffrey nyquist ,
for the level of knowledge on DIA.... you should be made ATS subject matter expert , especially where weapons and strateegies are concerned .....
i meant that some have claimed that patroit is a total ripoff of s-300 that is not true , but yes patriot uses some stolen tech and technical solutions from s-300v
a well known and accepted fact
rahter ,one of stupidest threatds , i have ever seen
That was far below my standard and
another good reason why i should not post on days like those.... 
)