posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 05:07 AM
Originally posted by rogue1
Fact is that no one knows how the Russian ABM sustems will perform.
I like it when you don't mix obvious truths with presumed truths.
They have only ever been tested under "test" conditions nit battle conditions and not with dozens of targets.
Like Aegis and the patriot and most of US air defenses? Who do you think could have and would have learned most from the other nations employing their
air defenses in Korea, Vietnam, all the ME conflicts and Yugoslavia? Don't you think the USSR/Russia would have gained far more practical knowldege
than the US? What do you think just the defense of Hanoi meant in terms of learning what can and can't be done?
ow well are they hardened against EMP for example ?
Vacuum technology are about a million times less vulnerable to EMP effects than regular circuitry so depending on how much their systems has been
upgraded and in which ways it may be all but immune to EMP effects. We for instance know that the first US air defense systems were shown to be all
but immune to EMP effects and i have seen little reason to think that the Russians could not or would not have emulated or reached similar
They can't shootdown cruise missiles and the US is developing hyposonic delivery platforms like the HyStrike, Fast Hawk and JSSCM - which
could easily carry a unclear payload.
But as far as the brochure's and western defense and intelligence specialist goes a whole host of Russian air defense systems ( as well as American)
have anti cruise missile capabilities. The Foxhound and Flankers as well as Foxbat's all have anti cruise missile capabilties and as far as i recall
the Foxbat was the first fighter to actually have such a capability anywhere.
If the Americans wanted to hit Moscow, they could simple as that.
Sure they could but how many warheads of the first strike would have to be allocated to ensure the destruction of Moscow and or deeply buried command
bunkers? The sources i have given on many occasions use numbers as high as three to four hundred to "ensure" the penetration of both the Sa-10 and
the 100 other launchers of the Moscow defenses. That was back in the 80's with a far more limited Sa-10 coupled with the even more limited Sa-5 so
it's anyone's guess how much warheads may or may not be required today.