Jump to content

S 300 video

Sleek

By Sleek
in Lock On: Flaming Cliffs 1 & 2

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN

Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN

Posted
Posted

nice, i just love the way the second/fourth missile moves, no getting away from that thing in a hurry :)

Force_Feedback

Force_Feedback

Posted
Posted

There is also a 260mb MAKS2005 feature at patrick's, in which you see the S-300PMU1 at work (multiple small projectiles, fired up, high into the sky, on a ballistic path) and see it hit a very low flying drone (less than 20 meters) right in the middle, from above :)

 

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos.php?action=view&id=300

 

Enjoy (after a long wait, but it's worth it, especially when you understand Russian, though it's a bit propagandistic)

Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:

Guest IguanaKing

Guest IguanaKing

Posted
Posted

Thanks for the vid, Sleek. Its very impressive and I'm sure the S-300 has great capabilities. One thing I noticed though, is that, as it is with any high-speed guided missile, it takes a little while for the missile to accelerate, stabilize, and start guiding. Its a great video, but it seems to add more evidence against the probability of the successful interception of an AGM, such as a Maverick, which is usually only in the air for a few seconds. :cool:

GGTharos

GGTharos

Posted
Posted

By 'a few seconds' you mean 20-60? ;)

 

Patriots have intercepted TBMs about 8nm away (that is, the hit happened 8nm away) ... theoretically, a maverick carrying aricraft shouldn't even get that close.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Guest IguanaKing

Guest IguanaKing

Posted
Posted

Actually, they get a lot closer than 8nm. ;)

GGTharos

GGTharos

Posted
Posted

Yep ... you need some sort of EWR to hit'em farther out I think ... although from what I've read I'm not entirely clear on this - according to some documents the crew seem to have a minute or more to decide if they're going to fire or not.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Guest IguanaKing

Guest IguanaKing

Posted
Posted

What I meant was that a Maverick-equipped aircraft is going to get much closer than 8nm before the weapon is even launched. It seems like the better solution for the defender, in that scenario, is to hit the aircraft itself rather than trying to hit the missile it launches. :D Lets say the S-300 launches on a Maverick, which will cover 8nm in less than 40 seconds. The crew of the S-300 has to make a decision, commit to that decision and launch a missile which will only be stabilized and guiding at a certain downrange distance from the launcher. Can you imagine what the intercept angle at that point must be? I imagine its pretty steep. Can the missile itself achieve that angle? Possibly, but not very likely. ;) An interception of this type is not likely to be anything more than a lucky shot. The TBMs that Patriots intercept follow a completely different flight profile and are in the air for MUCH longer than a Maverick. ;) I don't think Russian OR American AD missile assets could EVER be capable of successfully intercepting a relatively short-range AGM...the laws of physics are against it at the moment. :D

GGTharos

GGTharos

Posted
Posted

Oh, well, yes. Actually I would expect low-alttiude defenses to nail that aircraft first rather than the Patriot/S300 (assuming that for some reason the Patriot didn't open fire on it earlier).

 

As I understand it though the dead zone around an S300 is pretty small - in any case, you don't need to hit - I think in those circumstances you'd use a command detonation instead with the missile diving in the maverick's way, and hope the frag will nail it.

 

But! That's a somewhat unlikely scenario since I'm pretty sure that any aircraft travelling low enough to get this close to an S300 would get intercepted by the surrouding SHORAD.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Guest IguanaKing

Guest IguanaKing

Posted
Posted

Yup...that's the way it should work. :D The S-300 is definitely not going to burn all his missiles against a guy who is trying to penetrate the outer ring. He has the range to do it, but he is there for a reason...to defend a higher-value target, not to launch on AGMs that may or may not be intended for him. Now...the 30mm cannon on the Tunguska, on the other hand...THAT has a little more promise for hitting an AGM. In that case, its just a matter of leading the target, and filling the air in front of it with enough lead. That's the advantage when the projectile itself isn't guided. ;) BTW...I STILL don't think the Tunguska's missiles stand more than a snowball's chance in hell of intercepting (not hitting, mind you;) ) a Maverick either.

Force_Feedback

Force_Feedback

Posted
Posted
any data that how many planes saved their asses against S300s?

 

AFAIK, it was never used in a conflict before. However, seeing those things intercepting Buk drone missiles flying at about 15 meters, in an erratic flight pattern, and still being blown away from above doesn't make you wonder why the US goverment was so concerned when Russia sold one S300 battery to Iran to guard its nuclear reactor.

Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:

Sleek

Sleek

Posted
  • Author
Posted
S200 manned by brave Ukrainians has a wonderful record against foreign airliner....

 

Ouch!

Be Good..Be Strong..:drink: ;)

 

-GI- Xfire

-GI- Xfire

Posted
Posted
Yup...that's the way it should work. :D The S-300 is definitely not going to burn all his missiles against a guy who is trying to penetrate the outer ring. He has the range to do it, but he is there for a reason...to defend a higher-value target, not to launch on AGMs that may or may not be intended for him. Now...the 30mm cannon on the Tunguska, on the other hand...THAT has a little more promise for hitting an AGM. In that case, its just a matter of leading the target, and filling the air in front of it with enough lead. That's the advantage when the projectile itself isn't guided. ;) BTW...I STILL don't think the Tunguska's missiles stand more than a snowball's chance in hell of intercepting (not hitting, mind you;) ) a Maverick either.

 

The S300 is used like other Sams in group defense.

So if you would survive the range of the s300 you would get into range of a buk or in short distance of tunguska or igla.

so the s300 will not have to decide to attack your mav. you wouldnt get into range to fire at the s300.

mfg

 

Geisterbaer 49th

Manny

Manny

Posted
Posted

Guys, give it a rest ... the debate rages on >>>>>==|====|==>

 

Apart from the inevitable interception as modeled in Lock-On, I am quite pleased A2G is not always as simple as load, lock, shoot, next. There is an element of challenge. I am certain if not at all possible, ED would not include it in their simulation. Notice this is not the case in any other simulation to date. There is no self-defense or protective measure. It's all load, lock, shoot, next....boring! Emloyment of tactics is what interests me. If one desires to just line up a buncha dumb AI and drop bombs on em well, visit titles such as Falcon 4:Allied Force.

Yellonet

Yellonet

Posted
Posted
If one desires to just line up a buncha dumb AI and drop bombs on em well, visit titles such as Falcon 4:Allied Force.
Go write that in a F4:AF forum :D

They need to be put in their place... F4's days as the number one sim, if it ever was, are over.

i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5

Manny

Manny

Posted
Posted
Go write that in a F4:AF forum :D

They need to be put in their place... F4's days as the number one sim, if it ever was, are over.

 

Lol! Yellonet. Why? Do users of Falcon 4.0, the only aircraft correctly modeled for that simulation being the F-16, think they have the best combat simulation?

 

Just remind them that what they presently use is based off stolen Hasbro Interactive source code for Falcon 4.0 that was subsequently modified illegally and distributed without permission of Hasbro who then sold their non-interest in the simulation to someone else.

 

Frankly I am surprised Hasbro didn't make a killin goin after those who used their Falcon 4.0 source code.

Guest IguanaKing

Guest IguanaKing

Posted
Posted
The S300 is used like other Sams in group defense.

So if you would survive the range of the s300 you would get into range of a buk or in short distance of tunguska or igla.

so the s300 will not have to decide to attack your mav. you wouldnt get into range to fire at the s300.

 

Ummm...did you actually watch that video? Do you think a vehicle like that would be used to defend mobile assets? I don't happen to agree. If the Russians use it in that manner...well...they're not quite the opponent I have come to respect. It seems a bit like using a PAC-3, which is tasked to defend an airbase, to attempt to shoot down an AGM which is guiding on an Avenger which is many miles away from that airbase, protecting a platoon of M1A2s. ;)

  • ED Team
Chizh

Chizh

Posted
  • ED Team
Posted

OT

I want present to you short video of Osa SAM.

You can find link to the video and photos on this page:

http://www.tetraedr.com/e_news2005.php#4

 

Tee direct link to the video:

http://www.tetraedr.com/file/osa-1t_3.zip

Единственный урок, который можно извлечь из истории, состоит в том, что люди не извлекают из истории никаких уроков. (С) Джордж Бернард Шоу

 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...