Russia to sell Iran S-300PMU

certainly good news. we always wanted more of S-300's and this can be better research to our missile technology.

Russia, pledging to complete the Bushehr reactor, has offered to sell a range of surface-to-air missile systems to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Middle East Newsline reports.

Russian diplomatic and industry sources said Moscow has been negotiating to sell Iran a range of anti-aircraft systems to protect Bushehr from Israeli or U.S. air strikes. The sources said contracts could be signed when Bushehr was ready to begin operations in a move expected to take place in late 2007.

“Russia has already installed and manned SAM systems around Bushehr,” a diplomatic source said. “The current talks regard an air defense umbrella that would protect all strategic sites in Iran.”

In November 2005, Russia reached agreement for the sale of 29 TOR-M1 short-range anti-aircraft systems to Iran in a deal valued at more than $700 million. The sources said Iran has also sought the strategic S-300PMU SAM system, capable of detecting and intercepting enemy aircraft at a distance of 300 and 150 kilometers, respectively.


mosnews.com...

[edit on 26-9-2006 by Mehran]

mod edit: Added external quote tags

Quote Reference (review link)

[edit on 27-9-2006 by UK Wizard]

I think 2007 delivery will be too late for Iran.

Originally posted by longbow
I think 2007 delivery will be too late for Iran.

I'm sure its too late alright your people been saying that from the same years starting 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006. what makes 2007 so different.

The ``surprise`` of october, will be either an attack against Iran, either a big terrorist attack in the US, either both. And from sure sources in the French army, the confrontation with Iran will be in about a month. So Mehran, buy a shelter.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
The ``surprise`` of october, will be either an attack against Iran, either a big terrorist attack in the US, either both. And from sure sources in the French army, the confrontation with Iran will be in about a month. So Mehran, buy a shelter.

French army getting involved in Iran? Or how does the French Army knows the moves of the US? I don't think the Deuxieme is infiltrated in the US that much...
Anyway, any proof to your statement? For example, this "sure" sources. (I hope not "anonymous").

If the information is true, and Iran does acquire does S-300, and integrate them to their existent radar network correctly, it would be a valuable air defense asset...
Question is how many and how well placed? And last question...how well trained will their personnel be? Good equipment with bad personnel is as good as bad equipment or worse...

Originally posted by Mehran
certainly good news. we always wanted more of S-300's and this can be better research to our missile technology.

Russia, pledging to complete the Bushehr reactor, has offered to sell a range of surface-to-air missile systems to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Middle East Newsline reports.

Russian diplomatic and industry sources said Moscow has been negotiating to sell Iran a range of anti-aircraft systems to protect Bushehr from Israeli or U.S. air strikes. The sources said contracts could be signed when Bushehr was ready to begin operations in a move expected to take place in late 2007.

“Russia has already installed and manned SAM systems around Bushehr,” a diplomatic source said. “The current talks regard an air defense umbrella that would protect all strategic sites in Iran.”

In November 2005, Russia reached agreement for the sale of 29 TOR-M1 short-range anti-aircraft systems to Iran in a deal valued at more than $700 million. The sources said Iran has also sought the strategic S-300PMU SAM system, capable of detecting and intercepting enemy aircraft at a distance of 300 and 150 kilometers, respectively.


mosnews.com...

[edit on 26-9-2006 by Mehran]

Even the article doesn't say that the S-300 is going to be sold - it merely comments that Iran wants it. Iran may want the S-300PMU but Russia has turned down customers for that system in the past, not least Syria.

Originally posted by planeman
Even the article doesn't say that the S-300 is going to be sold - it merely comments that Iran wants it. Iran may want the S-300PMU but Russia has turned down customers for that system in the past, not least Syria.

Thanks planeman, I was waiting for the almost official ats SAM expert to tell me something. Yes I thought that Putin had refused to sell the longer range SAMS to Iran last minute...
I think I read it in one of your posts?

The S-300 eouln't make much difference to a US attack on Irans facilities. Before any manned plans went in you can bet their would be a barrage of precision guided standoff weapons, such as the "brilliant" JASSM 200 mile range cruise missile. More than capable of taking out an S-300 unit.

This is the Globalsecurity.com Article on the specific version of the weapon system being discussed.

As with all things for attacking SAM defenses, the target wouldn't be the SAM itself rather its attached radar, command, and control systems.

This would be a considerable upgrade for Iran, far beyond the Tor-1 missile systems acquired last year. While the Tor-1 is a very accurate weapon system, the version acquired by Iran is really a short range system. The S-300PMU-2 is a long range SAM able to independently track and engage fast moving and high altitude targets, including limited ballistic missile defense capability. The actual western equivalent would be the PAC-2.

On mobile launchers that make constant rotations, this would add a sophisticated A2D2 (anti-access/area-denial) system that would make it tough for all but the most robust dedicated penetration capabilities.

While I am not certain it would change the dynamic between Iran and the US, it would certainly change the dynamic between Iran and Israel.

Originally posted by Ioseb_Jugashvili
Thanks planeman, I was waiting for the almost official ats SAM expert to tell me something. Yes I thought that Putin had refused to sell the longer range SAMS to Iran last minute...
I think I read it in one of your posts?

Well you don't need a SAM expert to figure this one out..
It was the first thing that stood out in the thread once you'd read the pilot post. Infact I was surprised nobody pointed it out until planeman.
Just shows the amount of paranoia around on both sides!
C'mon people Deny Ignorance?
'Iran has also SOUGHT the S-300PMU..'

EDIT:What's this 'brilliant' 200mile JASSM? What stops the S-300 from taking it out as well?
I see no way out other than saturation salvos launches..





[edit on 27-9-2006 by Daedalus3]

Originally posted by Daedalus3

EDIT:What's this 'brilliant' 200mile JASSM? What stops the S-300 from taking it out as well?
I see no way out other than saturation salvos launches..

Hmm you haven't heard of the JASSm, I thought a person such as yourself would have been well aware of this missile for several years now.

The Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) is an autonomous, long-range, conventional, air-to-ground, precision standoff missile for the U.S. Air Force and Navy. JASSM is designed to destroy high-value, well-defended, fixed and relocatable targets. JASSM's significant standoff range keeps Air Force and Navy aircrews well out of danger from hostile air defense systems. The missile's mission effectiveness approaches single-missile target kill capability. With this superior performance and affordable price, JASSM offers the best value of any weapon in its class.

www.missilesandfirecontrol.com...

^^^^ Some good testing videos on this site as well.

The JASSM is a conventionally armed, low observable cruise missile designed to destroy the enemy's high-value targets from aircraft that launch from outside the area defenses. The missile has automatic target recognition, autonomous guidance, precision accuracy, and a J-1000 warhead optimized for penetration and carrying a new high-yield explosive. These characteristics give JASSM capabilities against heavily defended hard targets such as aircraft shelters and underground command posts as well as soft targets such as rail yards.

The extended-range version, called JASSM-ER, would increase its standoff distance to over 500 nautical miles. Lockheed Martin, which builds the missile, believes that a more efficient engine and using internal volume for additional fuel would allow the longer range without changing the weapon's external dimensions, called the "mold line." Keeping the same mold line would dramatically reduce development and test cost and time.

JASSM-Extended Range (ER) is a spiral development program. JASSM-ER started development in late FY03 with congressional plus-up funds. Development will end in FY07 when the program will enter production with the first deliveries in FY08.

www.globalsecurity.org...

I ail to see how you think the S-300 an untested system against US weapons is a magic bullet. What test results lead you to the conclusion that the S-300 is so deadly apart from tsalk and hype. It seems the US weaposn are held to a miuch higher standard of verification than Russian ones.
I believe teh JASSM would be more than a match for any S-300 defended target. NBearing in mind this weapons wouldn't be used in ones or two's, they would be slavoed by the dozens approaching the target from many directions. Their accuracy would ensure that if only one got through the target ould be destroyed.

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmm you haven't heard of the JASSM, I thought a person such as yourself would have been well aware of this missile for several years now.

No such distinction thankfully..
Anyways I read up on it a bit.
Seems to still not be fully operational; a test on the F/A-18 hornet was just concluded a month or so back?

Anyways I wasn't aware of its capabilities or whether it was LO/terrain hugging etc etc..
Thus the question on the S-300 as a counter.
I do not think of the S-300 as a magic bullet and nor do I think of it as a white elephant.
The dimensions of the JASSM are similar to that of the Tomahawk and so the obvious question to its susceptibility to SAM batteries arises (read Kosovo).
However it being LO does help of course, though the extent of its LO capability is the real key here.
Anyways since I don't know much on the JASSM, its not worth taking a stand about it here until further reading is done.
What can be said is that this missile doesn't look like it'll be used in a conflict occuring in the next year or so.
2008 and beyond?more probable..

Isn't the S-300 supposed to be protected using Tor-M1.

As in the S-300 hits air targets and the Tor-M1 takes out any incomming missiles such as HARM(anti-radiation missile), ALARAM(anti-radiation missile), Cruise missiles, Laser Guided bombs etc...

Also i think that the Buk-M1 is to be used there as well so what yuo have is a combination of Tor-M1, Buk-M1 and S-300 providing a short, medium and long range coverage.

The Iranians have also been going for this combo. They already have purchased the Tor-M1 and have enquired about the Buk-M1 and S-300.

I suspect that the Russians are going to try and sell these through Belarus

www.missilethreat.com...

but then Russia obviously denied it :
www.isn.ethz.ch...

but they did sell them to Belarus :
en.rian.ru...

So i don't know whats going on there. Alot of reports have been comming out that a countyr like Belarus does not require such a system so they are only getting it to retransfer.

Anyway here is some Info/Video on there 3 Systems :

Buk-M1
www.janes.com...
www.youtube.com...

Tor-M1
www.youtube.com...
www.aviation.ru...
www.warfare.ru...

Interestingly all these systems are enhanced to take out cruise missiles and certain types of PGM.

Personally my own opinion is they will go for only Tor-M1(which they already purchased) and S-300 and use the Improved Hawks they already have as the medium range SAM.

The JASSM is more like the TACTOM, not the Tomahawk Block III. If the S-300PMU-2 can find the missile, it can probably shoot it down.

I first saw this article on Stratfor.

Stratfor Release

With assurances to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor, Russia has offered to sell a range of surface-to-air missile systems to Iran protect the country's nuclear facilities from Israeli or U.S. airstrikes, Middle East Newsline reported Sept. 25. The agreement might be finalized when Bushehr begins operations, which are expected to start in late 2007. In 2005, Iran purchased 29 Tor-M1 short-range anti-aircraft systems for $700 million and the country has reportedly been attempting to buy the strategic S-300PMU SAM system.

Stratfor quotes another Middle Eastern news agency, but the key is Russia is offering Iran SAM systems, and they know which systems Iran has wanted in the past.

Russia's willingness to sell the S-300PMU-2 makes sense for a variety of reasons, not the least of which would be the effect of an attack on an operational nuclear power plant in the Persian Gulf. While radation exposure would be a horrible thing on the ground in Iran, it isn't even close to a worse case scenario, which would be a massive radioactive leak into the Persian Gulf. A radiated Gulf wouldn't hurt only the oil industry, but the fishing industry as well, both of which have major cascading effects.

The lease agreements for the SAM systems to China and India is cutting into Russia's defense industry. Unless they can sell to customers like Iran, it is possible many of those manufacturing jobs will be lost. I would count on Putin doing everything in his power to keep the industry busy, even if it means selling to Iran against political opposition from other nations.

Russia's track record regarding selling high tech weapons to Middle Eastern countries has been well documented but largely ignored.

Originally posted by darksided
The JASSM is more like the TACTOM, not the Tomahawk Block III. If the S-300PMU-2 can find the missile, it can probably shoot it down.

LOL and what test results can you site to prove this ? It seems american weapons have to have the test results to back up their claims, however Russian weapons need no such burden of proof. Also who said anything about individual missiles, the JASSM is chep enough that it can be deployed en masse.

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL and what test results can you site to prove this ? It seems american weapons have to have the test results to back up their claims, however Russian weapons need no such burden of proof. Also who said anything about individual missiles, the JASSM is chep enough that it can be deployed en masse.

You are acting like high speed missile intercept technology is difficult for the Russians, it isn't, in fact it is and always has been their speciality, considering they are just about the only country in the world to consistantly build modern SAMs capable of taking down modern USAF aircraft of the same era. See history for proof.

The question isn't their interceptors, Russian intercepters have always been top quality, it is the modern Russian radar, tracking systems, command and control systems, and capability of the system to overcome electronic assault. No one really knows how effective these Russian systems would be against the full spectrum of US air forces, particularly in modern air combat. Against a dedicated assault that includes advanced ew, and ecm among other tools of the trade, can the Russians track a TACTOM missile? We know they can track a Tomahawk III, because Iraq could with their 90s era radar, but the Iraqi's didn't have any missiles that could do anything about the Tomahawk IIIs. In a major assault with plenty of jammers, can modern Russian radars burn through US jammers?

I think it is an important question. In 2003, the Navy Prowlers were so effective that an entire wing of F-18s was over Baghdad before the Iraqi's knew about it. F-18s aren't stealth, and Iraq had early 90s era Russian radar.

If the modern Russian tech can track a target, they can shoot it down, history tells us they have always been advanced in the intercept aspect of anti-air missiles.

BTW, Americans do have test results to back up their claims, they have no choice, because other western nations won't buy their stuff if they don't back those claims up.

The S-300PMU is already a defeated system.
The F/A-22 can approach to within killing distance before being detected by this system.

We know they can track a Tomahawk III, because Iraq could with their 90s era radar, but the Iraqi's didn't have any missiles that could do anything about the Tomahawk IIIs. In a major assault with plenty of jammers, can modern Russian radars burn through US jammers?

That's why Iran has developped a very good electronic warfare type of weapons.. maybe it will be of some use.

And Seekerof, proofs please about the F/A 22, and how many the US would be able to deploy?

That's why Iran has developped a very good electronic warfare type of weapons.. maybe it will be of some use.

Care to elaborate?

And Seekerof, proofs please about the F/A 22, and how many the US would be able to deploy?

Just what kind of "proofs" are you expecting here? Considering the situation.

But I will say that the F-22 was designed to operate within hostile airspace and to cope with double digit SAM systems. It has been tested against such scenarios and has proven highly successful in getting close enough to use JDAM's. And according to some if flown right it can even get close enough to an S-300 (without being shot down) to attack it.

Also currently the US has 26 F-22's available to go anywhere in the world (if need be) within a couple of days to deal with any situation which might arise. All curtsey of the first and currently only (though the 94th is almost there) F-22 operational squadron, the 27th FS based in Langley, Virginia.

[edit on 28-9-2006 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by Vitchilo
That's why Iran has developped a very good electronic warfare type of weapons.. maybe it will be of some use.

Indeed. Iran's electronic warfare capability certainly was useful for Hezbollah against Israel. There was a major discussion about it on DefenseTech.org

Originally posted by VitchiloAnd Seekerof, proofs please about the F/A 22, and how many the US would be able to deploy?

F/A-22 vs SAM Threat
Of particular interest to the Air Force is the F-22's ability to deal with "double digit SAMs." A double digit SAM, Air Force parlance for Russian-designed mobile surface-to-air missiles, is so named for the two digit designator in their NATO reporting name. The Russian-designed S-300P Angara, for instance, is designated "SA-10" by NATO countries. The "S-300PMU Favorit" is designated the "SA-20." Both Russia and China manufacture these weapons systems, and they are readily available on the market. These weapons are highly mobile and pose a threat to Air Force legacy aircraft such as the F-15 and F-16.

"It's a huge problem in the future if you think about a double digit SAM. A double digit SAM is equivalent to our (phased array tracking intercept of target missiles)," General Lewis said. "As you know, PATRIOTs shot down some of our own friendlies. And the friendlies knew they were being targeted by the PATRIOT. They tried the best they could and they still got shot down. That is the future if there are double digit SAMs in that environment. You have got to go in there and kill them. If you can't kill them, you will be denied air space. That is what we envision."

The F/A-22 is every bit its hype. It is invisable on ground radar over 60,000 ft., as it turns out F/A-22s simply don't give off enough signiture for a ground radar to track. Some beaming techniques have supposedly had limited success, but you have to know the exact position of the F/A-22 just to achieve detection, nevermind track the plane.

The only reports I have heard about regarding a F/A-22s being tracked over a significant period of time on radar required a combination of multiple radars from the AEGIS system, the Advanced Hawkeye, and F/A-18 Super Hornets with AESA radar, a technological combination only available in one nation today, the US Navy. Had the F/A-22 had any jamming support at all, it probably wouldn't of worked.

The F/A-22 stealth is currently ahead of the radar tracking curve. Radar systems will undoubtably eventually catch up, meaning stealth will have to make advances again to remain competitive.