“We’re not sure if any of our aircraft can defeat the S-300.” - Pentagon Official

[FAH1223]

[xiimaaya]

Kkkk kkk trillion dollars was wasted on that flying turkey F35over 2 decades and in the end it can't defeat a 30yr old missile defense. Wait till s500 goes to production

[SahanGalbeed]

The ripple effect of the Iraqi invasion . A bad strategic move somewhere can deny you a good one later somewhere else .The russians are cashing in on that . The US just doesn't have the appetite for it .

[jalaaludin5]

bi'r-ruh bi'd-dem nefdik ya Assad!
bi'r-ruh bi'd-dem nefdik ya Assad!
bi'r-ruh bi'd-dem nefdik ya Assad!  
-
-
-

[mahoka]

The s-500 is being developed by Russia

[FAH1223]

The s-500 is being developed by Russia

S-400 is in Tartus too.

[gurey25]

Whoever made that statement was full of bull.
What a pu.zz.y , for the first time in decades the US airforce and Navy are going to get a taste of their own medicine
and they dont seem to have the stomach for it.

The US has an answer to the S-300, its a whole doctrine called SEAD( Suppression of air defense)
that they developed in vietnam.
There is no magic bullet, it will be a long and hard grinding fight, you will suffer heavy losses but you can suppress all air defenses .

The problem is that this is not 1970, and even though the vietnamese were brave , talented and with the same mickey mouse
,downgraded equipment that the arabs got, literrally slaughtered the US bomber force in vietnam.
Technology has moved leaps and bounds, and the S-300 system and its accompanied systems is the worlds best,
but its not invinsible, there will be no shortcuts and easy victories, you need to smash your airforce against it until it breaks.
and this will be very expensive.

[gurey25]

The s-500 is being developed by Russia

S-400 is in Tartus too.

S-500 is focused on anti-ballistic missiles, hypersonic planes.
It is practically the same system as the S-400 and the S-300.

The Russians follow and evolutionary development approach, which is the most economical and efficient.
The West continues to try to develop several new systems at the same time.
This is expensive, time consuming as fixing the bugs in the design and production will take years.
but its very profitable for the corporations, it all comes down to money.
I find it intriguing because this is identical to the NAZI's, they had some of the best scientists and engineers in the world
and had a head start in several revolutionary technologies, but they fudge the whole thing by having massivley inefficient millitary industrial system, full of duplication of efforts, overblown costs and factional infighting and massive corruption.
During Operation paperclip, they got allot of german scientists and engineers moved to the US and join their programs,
they must have had a bigger impact than we though, because the US millitary industrial complex , their research and design methods etc are a mirror image of NAZI germany in the 40's.



for example, the S-400 is simply an S-300 with a new radar system,allot of smaller systems also electronics that can upgraded quickly
and the missiles are basically the same as the S-300, with the addition of one missile with slightly more range.

[LeJusticier]

S-500 ground-to-air systems is designed to shoot satellite as well

[gurey25]

S-500 ground-to-air systems is designed to shoot satellite as well

The first sign of WW3 is no GPS.
Its part of nearly everyone who is anyones doctrine to go after satellites first.
If google maps does not work for several hours,
i would suggest everyone read the shahada, go home and be with your loved ones.

[Jabuutawi]

It is a hyperbole on the part of the Pentagon official. It is a way to garner more discretionary money from Congress. My money is on USAF to neutralize Russian S-300/400 and even 500 missiles.

America would deploy what they call Global Strike Task Force, essentially a multi-prong attack. A strike package of F-22s and B2s.

This is how it will all play out:

The Raptors “kick down the door” using their unique combination of stealth, high altitude and blistering speed to target the nodes of the integrated air defense system so that the B-2s can proceed to their targets unmolested. In tandem with cruise missiles and satellite tracking of targets on the ground and electronic jamming. This multi-prong attack would "blind" S-300 missiles and render them impotent.

[gurey25]

It is a hyperbole on the part of the Pentagon official. It is a way to garner more discretionary money from Congress. My money is on USAF to neutralize Russian S-300/400 and even 500 missiles.

America would deploy what they call Global Strike Task Force, essentially a multi-prong attack. A strike package of F-22s and B2s.

This is how it will all play out:

The Raptors “kick down the door” using their unique combination of stealth, high altitude and blistering speed to target the nodes of the integrated air defense system so that the B-2s can proceed to their targets unmolested. In tandem with cruise missiles and satellite tracking of targets on the ground and electronic jamming. This multi-prong attack would "blind" S-300 missiles and render them impotent.

it is hyperbole,
and what you described is the doctrine i mentioned earlier.
This will work, but at what cost.
This scenario will play out if it were syrians manning the systems,
but these are russians.
There is also skill level, its an artform, more than science.
The most important aspect is deception, the russians call it maskirovka.
Its not just simply hiding , its an all encompassing way of thinking.
The Sun Tzu - art of war craze hit Russia during the early 1900's, by the 1920 it was well on the way of influencing the thought of russians. Maskirovka was mature by WW2.

This is not just camouflage, as i said earlier its an all encompassing way of thinking.
A clue on how effective it is during modern war is the performance of NATO in Kosovo.
After bombing the serbs and making them surrender.
After the war it was discovered that NATO bombing had very little effect on Serbian millitary, with only 10% of its targets hit.
The serbs surrendered because NATO went after public property, and infrastructure.

Remember this will be a highly complex environment with massive jamming on both sides,
and electronic warfare is one of the few areas Russia is ahead.
This means that NATO will be not only trying kill fake physical targets like inflatable tanks and missile launchers,
but also digital fake targets. and unlike the serbs the russians have offensive capability so for every fake target hit, the russians will most likely hit a real target, and stealth is almost dead.
NATO will also find communication difficult , and forget about drones, it will be a hostile environment for drones and they wont last 1 minute in the air.


No this will be brutal and costly.

[AwRastaale]

Boys don't get too excited, this is a basic military strategy. Keep in mind it's not something from a classified document but an official who was most likely instructed to air such calculated statement.

China's ancient military strategist, Sun Tzu, in his The Art of War, taught us;

All warfare is based on deception.

Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable;
when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

The American official had you all fooled.

[SahanGalbeed]

Gurey

The most important aspect is deception, the russians call it maskirovka.
Its not just simply hiding , its an all encompassing way of thinking.

MOSCOW — Deep in the Russian countryside, the grass sways in a late-summer breeze. In the distance, the sun glistens off the golden spires of a village church. It is, to all appearances, a typically Russian scene of imperturbable rural tranquillity.

Until a sleek MIG-31 fighter jet suddenly appears in a field, its muscular, stubby wings spreading to reveal their trademark red star insignia. A few moments later, a missile launcher pops up beside it.

Cars on a nearby road pull over, the drivers gaping in amazement at what appear to be fearsome weapons, encountered so unexpectedly in this serene spot. And then, as quickly as they appeared, the jet and missile launcher vanish.

“If you study the major battles of history, you see that trickery wins every time,” Aleksei A. Komarov, the military engineer in charge of this sleight of hand, said with a sly smile. “Nobody ever wins honestly.”
Mr. Komarov oversees military sales at Rusbal, a hot air balloon company that also provides the Ministry of Defense with one of Russia’s lesser-known military threats: a growing arsenal of inflatable tanks, jets and missile launchers, including the MIG in the field.

At a factory behind high concrete walls not far from here, workers toiling in secret with little more than sewing machines and green fabric are churning out the ultimate in soft power: decoys that appear lifelike from as close as 300 yards and can pop up and then vanish in mere minutes.

As Russia under President Vladimir V. Putin has muscled its way back onto the geopolitical stage, the Kremlin has employed a range of stealthy tactics: silencing critics abroad, hitching the Orthodox Church to its conservative counterrevolution, spreading false information to audiences in Europe and even, according to the Obama administration, meddling in American presidential politics by hacking the Democratic Party’s computers.
One of the newer entries to that list is an updating of the Russian military’s longtime interest in operations of deceit and disguise, a repertoire of lethal tricks known as maskirovka, or masking. It is a psychological warfare doctrine that is becoming an increasingly critical element in the country’s geopolitical ambitions.

Russia’s most recent military deployments began with operations involving this doctrine: with literally masked and mystery soldiers in Crimea in 2014, soldiers said to be “vacationing” or “volunteering” in eastern Ukraine and a “humanitarian airlift” to Syria in 2015.

As the Russian incursion in Ukraine unfolded, Moscow sent a “humanitarian” convoy of whitewashed military vehicles to the rebellious eastern provinces. The trucks were later found to be mostly empty, prompting speculation that they had been sent there to deter a Ukrainian counteroffensive against rebels.
The idea behind maskirovka is to keep the enemy guessing, never admitting your true intentions, always denying your activities and using all means political and military to maintain an edge of surprise for your soldiers. The doctrine, military analysts say, is in this sense “multilevel.” It draws no distinction between disguising a soldier as a bush or a tree with green and patterned clothing, a lie of a sort, and high-level political disinformation and cunning evasions.
Thus at a news conference immediately after the invasion of Crimea, Mr. Putin flatly denied that the “green men” appearing on television screens were Russians, saying anyone could buy a military uniform and put it on. It was only five weeks later, after his annexation of the peninsula, that he admitted that the troops were Russian.

And last month, the Ministry of Defense denied Washington’s assertion that Russian warplanes had attacked a humanitarian convoy in Syria. It said first that the trucks could have been hit by a rebel mortar, then that an American Predator drone was responsible and finally that the cargo had simply caught fire.
Maskirovka goes well beyond the simple camouflage used by all armies and encompasses a range of ideas about misdirection and misinformation, as useful today as it has been for decades. Soviet maps, for example, often included inaccuracies that frustrated drivers but served a national security purpose: If taken by a spy, they would confuse an invading army as apparently useful roads, for example, led into swamps.

In fact, nearly every Russian and Soviet deployment over the past half century, from the Prague Spring to Afghanistan, Chechnya and Ukraine, opened with a simple but effective trick: soldiers appearing first in mufti or unmarked uniforms. In 1968, for example, an Aeroflot flight arrived in Prague carrying a disproportionate number of healthy young men, who subsequently seized the airport.

Soldiers disguised as tourists sailed to Syria in 1983 in what became known as the “comrade tourist” ruse. The appearance of mysterious, camouflaged soldiers in Kabul, Afghanistan, and Grozny, Chechnya, presaged wider deployments in 1979 and 1994.

Experts fear that the next theater for such tactics may be the Baltic region, home to significant minorities of ethnic Russians as well as a major Russian military base at Kaliningrad.

The array of possibilities for Russia in the Baltics is vast. Analysts have speculated, for example, that an aging Russian military ship might feign a mechanical breakdown and beach on a Baltic sandbar. Soon, marines would deploy to “protect” it.

That incursion might not be enough to elicit a full-scale response from NATO, but if left to stand, it could undermine the alliance’s credibility, analysts say.

“The fun part about the Baltics, from the Russian perspective, is that NATO’s credibility rests on every useless piece of land, so you don’t have to take more than a tiny slice,” said Michael Kofman, a military analyst at the Kennan Institute in Washington.
Col. David M. Glantz, a leading expert on Russian disguise operations, said Russia viewed war “in many, many facets.”

To be sure, other militaries use decoys. The Russian doctrine of maskirovka, though, differs from deception operations by other major militaries in its blending of strategic and tactical deception, and in its use in war and in peace.

In one storied example, the Soviets decided to call their space launchpad Baikonur, after a small Kazakh settlement of that name a few hundred miles away, hoping that in an attack, enemy bombers might hit the insignificant village by mistake.

“They look at war as chess, and we look at it as checkers,” said Colonel Glantz, a former professor at the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.

A well-constructed Russian maskirovka ruse, like a good Russian play, typically builds an underlying narrative before introducing the plot twist.

Maskirovka is “designed to manipulate the adversary’s picture of reality, misinform it and eventually interfere with the decision-making process of individuals, organizations, governments and societies,” Dima Adamsky, an authority on Russian psychological warfare, wrote in a paper published last year. The opening moves, if played well, will “appear benign to the target.”

In Georgia, the game had already begun days before Gocha Kojayev, an Interior Ministry officer, and some fellow officers fell victim in the aftermath of the 2008 war with Russia.

Part of a team clearing a battlefield of unexploded matériel near South Ossetia, Mr. Kojayev was sent to collect a small, yellow-painted surveillance drone that had fluttered to earth in an apple orchard — a seemingly harmless object. Indeed, so many drones had crashed in the area that the Georgians had taken to snickering at their shoddy construction.

Sensing danger at the last moment, however, Mr. Kojayev stepped back as a colleague picked up the drone, which was sprung with explosives. Two men were killed, and eight others, including Mr. Kojayev, were wounded.

The earlier crashes had desensitized the soldiers to danger. “This was a trick,” he said. “We thought they were of poor quality, but they were crashing them intentionally.”
Unfurled in the sunny field outside Moscow, a cloth decoy of an S-300 missile system — in the metal version, one of Russia’s most feared weapons ‚ looks like a large, unmade bed of camouflage-colored blankets.

“Pull it a bit this way,” one worker suggested. “Straighten it out here,” another said. With the flip of a switch on an electric air compressor, it bulged, lurched and took its form, like a gigantic marshmallow waiting for a roasting in World War III.

A hot air balloon enthusiast founded Rusbal in 1993 and later diversified into the inflatable children’s attractions that are springy play areas known as bouncy castles.
In fact, bouncy castle construction inspired the company — and the Russian military — to re-examine a decade-old Russian practice of using bulky rubber balloons for inflatables, leading to a technological advance in decoys around the turn of the millennium.

Although it forms a tight seal that does not require continuous inflation, rubber is far heavier than fabric. In a bouncy castle, a continuously running air compressor creates overpressure in a fabric structure that is not airtight.

The rubber tanks deflated, or even popped, if hit by a single bullet. But the fabric holds its form even if perforated by a spray of shrapnel.

“There was a lot of skepticism at first,” Maria A. Oparina, the director of Rusbal and daughter of the founder, said in an interview in a cafe in Moscow. Demonstrations, though, impressed the generals.

The company would not disclose how many inflatable tanks it made, because the numbers are classified, but Ms. Oparina said output had shot up over the past year. The contract forms one small part of Russia’s 10-year, $660 billion rearmament program that began in 2010. The factory now employs 80 people full time, most on the military side sewing inflatable weapons.

The company also works for export. It made about $3 million worth of inflatable decoys of the S-300 antiaircraft missile system to sell to Iran, but was left holding the goods when the Russian government suspended the sale of the actual missile system because of United Nations sanctions. The sale was completed this year, but Iran said it had no interest in the decoys.

The tanks and missile launchers are not just blowup, but made to be blown up, with their most obvious use as decoys for drawing expensive, precision fire such as cruise missiles or laser-guided bombs away from real weapons systems.

More subtly, their purpose is to clutter the enemy’s decision making, forcing commanders to waste precious time verifying whether a newly discovered target is real or just hot air.

They are intended for quick inflation and deflation: If they are left out for long periods, their airy nature becomes obvious to satellites, Ms. Oparina said, as they tend to blow around in the wind and swell and shrink in size.

The inflatable T-80 tank, one of the company’s standard products, weighs 154 pounds, costs about $16,000, totes in two duffel bags, inflates in about five minutes and vanishes just as quickly.

Sold separately: a device for stamping fake tank tracks in the ground.

“There are no gentlemen’s agreements in war,” Ms. Oparina said. “There’s no chivalry anymore. Nobody wears a red uniform. Nobody stands up to get shot at. It’s either you or me, and whoever has the best trick wins.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/world ... eapon.html


Nothing glorious about it !

[FAH1223]

Boys don't get too excited, this is a basic military strategy. Keep in mind it's not something from a classified document but an official who was most likely instructed to air such calculated statement.

China's ancient military strategist, Sun Tzu, in his The Art of War, taught us;

All warfare is based on deception.

Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable;
when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.

The American official had you all fooled.

I think like Gurey said, it's about the costs of equipment and men.