Almaz-Antey S-400 Triumph / SA-21 Growler TABM/SAM

I heard something like 900 million dollars for foreign buyers. Great system but is not immune especially if shorter range point defense systems arent guarding them. If true that is a sting and embarrassment.

One thing about Russians. They usually start conflicts with screwups but they do learn and adapt very well and ultimately know very little defeat. Guess we can only wait and see.
 
jsport said:
breakingdefense.com

What an S-400 kill and a spec ops raid reveal about Ukraine's ability to hit Russia - Breaking Defense

According to Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov, the Neptune preformed “flawlessly” during the Aug. 23 attack on a Russian Almaz-Antei S-400 “Triumf” air and missile defense complex.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...

We learn from the article details of the modifications done to its' seeker and autopilot to enable a land-attack mode:

The Neptune was first designed as an anti-ship missile, but Luch added in a GPS guidance capacity to supplement its seeker, which was designed by Radionix in Kyiv, one of the most capable defense electronics firms in Ukrainian industry. This gave the missile the flexibility to be re-purposed as a land-attack weapon.
Click to expand...
A senior Ukrainian designer, briefed on the Aug. 23 attack, told Breaking Defense that “the seeker was switched into the passive mode for this strike. There were also modifications made to incorporate digital scene matching into the guidance system.”
Click to expand...

In addition to enabling a land-attack mode these modifications should also make the Neptune more flexible as an AShM.
 
All air defense systems are vulnerable especially if you have excellent intelligence and attack during times of optimal weakness. That said I have serious doubts. Not just the events as is being described but if true and there was a successful attack I wonder very much if a x-35 variant was utilized. Almost all "osint experts" have shown to have a naked and emotional bias in this conflict that often they don't even try to hide.
 
TMA1 said:
All air defense systems are vulnerable especially if you have excellent intelligence and attack during times of optimal weakness.
Click to expand...

Correct and of course this assumes that the AA batteries have been competently deployed.

TMA1 said:
That said I have serious doubts.
Click to expand...

I'm highly inclined to believe reports, given that the SA-21 battery was supposed to be defended by an SA-22 Greyhound linked to the SA-21's surveillance radar yet it didn't do it's job. This suggests that the SA-21 battery's crew weren't doing their job perhaps slacking off due to low morale and this is assuming they were properly trained (The same goes for the SA-22 battery's crew) and then there's the possibility they've may've been loaded on vodka (Drinking on the job).
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
This suggests that the SA-21 battery's crew weren't doing their job perhaps slacking off due to low morale and this is assuming they were properly trained (The same goes for the SA-22 battery's crew) and then there's the possibility they've may've been load on vodka (Drinking on the job).
Click to expand...

This is some serious speculation on your side.

NMaude said:
SA-22 Greyhound linked to the SA-21's surveillance radar yet it didn't do it's job.
Click to expand...

Or what if they actually deployed separately. That Russian's mistake but the Pantsyrs have their own surveillance radar. It's more like they were not really in the same site where the S-300 was deployed.

=======

Aside from that tho. One thing i noticed with the destruction of Ukrainian and Russian AD Site is that they seem to emulate Vietnam war era model, namely a Pre-planned sites. So one surveys many potential sites then rotate the battery around it in a random fashion so that hopefully complicates enemy surveillance as one cant be sure which site is "manned" and which one was not or decoy.

So they weren't really utilized their "scout and shoot" ability. This open possibility, especially with drones to constant monitoring on which site is manned at what time and how long and maybe when they go online (just because radar looks deployed doesnt mean they actively radiates) Then strike at opportunity.
 
NMaude said:
I'm highly inclined to believe reports, given that the SA-21 battery was supposed to be defended by an SA-22 Greyhound linked to the SA-21's surveillance radar yet it didn't do it's job.
Click to expand...

You have to wonder how well SA-21 and SA-22's radar works over water, because thats where the missile will have approached from. Naval radars tend to have pretty sophisticated processing and adaptation to deal with over sea targets. If the missile has approached from the most obvious direction, North West, it will have popped over the horizon at less than 20 miles from the coast in amongst the clutter of the sea but also been masked by the cliffs and terrain around Dzhangul or around the south east of Mayak. By the time it may have been visible by the AD systems it will probably have been on its final run less than 7 miles away, probably less, and at exceptionally low level and high speed. Thats a challenging target for anyone.

Mind you they didn't pick up and engage the UAV that was filming the engagement...
 
timmymagic said:
Mind you they didn't pick up and engage the UAV that was filming the engagement...
Click to expand...

Or the battery were simply offline at the moment and not radiating in the first place.

I would say it's Russian's complacency in the first place, for maybe re-using the site multiple times or not updating their EMCON schedule allowing it to be mapped by Ukrainians.

NMaude said:
Yes it is but based on what I've read from various sources over the past year suggest that this is very likely.
Click to expand...

yeah let's hope your sources aren't on crack too in the first place.
 
Russian mod has said over a dozen fighters have been shot down with what sounds like 40N6 missiles linked with the A-50U awacs. If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
 
TMA1 said:
If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
Click to expand...

The F-16s that will soon be supplied to Ukraine are a great deal newer than the late Soviet-era relics their MiG-29s are, I suspect the Russians will find them a lot harder to engage and shutdown than MiG-29s also those A-50U AWACS will be priority targets.
 
TMA1 said:
Russian mod has said over a dozen fighters have been shot down with what sounds like 40N6 missiles linked with the A-50U awacs. If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
Click to expand...
It almost certainly is meant to threaten the F-16s, but I don't believe that it will be effective. The F-16s all have much newer defenses than the MiG29s UkAF has been flying.
 
It also depends on how well the SA-21's crew has been trained, how much experience they have and how well the battery has been integrated into the local defence network.

Scott Kenny said:
The F-16s all have much newer defenses than the MiG29s UkAF has been flying.
Click to expand...

Not only much newer and hence better ECM but those F-16s will be able to take full advantage of the AGM-88s already supplied to the UkAF even if they're older models.
 
TMA1 said:
Russian mod has said over a dozen fighters have been shot down with what sounds like 40N6 missiles linked with the A-50U awacs. If this is true I wonder if it is meant tmto threaten our sending of f-16 fighters.
Click to expand...
Nothing on liveuamap or twitter feed about it. Oil refinery in Krasnodor Krai and drone base in Fedosia got hit within the last 24 though and some S-400 destroyed by ATACMS in Luhansk prior to that.

liveuamap.com

Ukraine Interactive map - Ukraine Latest news on live map - liveuamap.com

Live Universal Awareness Map Liveuamap is a leading independent global news and information site dedicated to factual reporting of a variety of important topics including conflicts, human rights issues, protests, terrorism, weapons deployment, health matters, natural disasters, and weather...
liveuamap.com liveuamap.com
 
Those destroyed SA-21 batteries of great significance as they're very expensive (Around 900 million USD each IIRC), are difficult and expensive to replace due to western sanctions and Russia had only 46 batteries at the beginning of the Ukrainian invasion, I wonder what the total figure for the SA-21 Growler batteries are now?
 
It certainly is a drag on Russian air defense. There was a report about a month ago that SAMs were being pulled from the Kuril islands, likely to either offset loses in Ukraine or else bolster defense of Moscow.
 
So an SA-21 Growler battery was spotted by a Ukrainian drone and destroyed shortly afterwards?
 
SOC said:
Can it spot a 48N6 series missile at 400 kilometers? Because if not, given that the missile is not using radar guidance when fired, how will the E-2 know that its day just got far more interesting?
Click to expand...
I would like to add that the ЗУР 48Н6 S-400 is hypersonic. So it is difficult to knock it down even after detecting it.
 
NMaude said:
It also depends on how well the SA-21's crew has been trained, how much experience they have and how well the battery has been integrated into the local defence network.



Not only much newer and hence better ECM but those F-16s will be able to take full advantage of the AGM-88s already supplied to the UkAF even if they're older models.
Click to expand...
S-400 have much longer engagement range than AGM-88, especially with AEW&C support that there no longer radar horizon limit
2C74C693-CAB5-4AC6-9463-A91E056E8ACF.jpeg
 
Ronny said:
S-400 have much longer engagement range than AGM-88, especially with AEW&C support that there no longer radar horizon limit
Click to expand...

True but that's assuming the SA-21 batteries have been fully integrated into the local air-defence network and are being used to their full capabilities by a properly trained crew. Those SA-21 batteries destroyed recently in Luhansk by cluster-warhead ATACMS were no doubt decoyed by something like the ADM-160 MALD. Also given how sophisticated and expensive a single SA-21 batteries the loss each battery is a previous one to the Russians as they're losing a trained launch-crew, losing the interceptors and worst of all the associated radars, due to Western sanctions these are very difficult and expensive to replace with I suspect long production times. If the Ukrainians can keep up the steady attrition of SA-21 batteries then the Russians will be forced to rely more and more on the older and less capable SA-12/SA-20 batteries.

Edit: Those A-50 AEWACS aircraft are rare and are priority targets for interception and destruction by the Ukrainian air defences.
 
F-16s are not going to be a significantly greater threat to either the S400 batteries or opponent aircraft. They would however solve a lot of issues with parts and weapons streams, as well as making more weapons available (and some existing weapons donated incrementally more effective).
 
Having F-16s would for example enable the Ukrainians to make full use of the donated AGM-88s capabilities also they can carry a very large range of weapons including the JDAM and SDBs for example.
 
Josh_TN said:
F-16s are not going to be a significantly greater threat to either the S400 batteries or opponent aircraft. They would however solve a lot of issues with parts and weapons streams, as well as making more weapons available (and some existing weapons donated incrementally more effective).
Click to expand...
How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.
 
GregoryUSSR said:
How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.
Click to expand...
For example: with AGM-88, because Mig-29 and Su-27 can’t directly talk to the missile, and they also lack dedicated emitter locating system like ASQ-213 (which can not only find the direction but also the distance to target), so they lack ability to use some mode of AGM-88
The HARM has four basic operating modes. The Pre-Brief, Pre-Emptive or Position-Known (PB/PE/POS) mode is a Lock On After Launch (LOAL) mode, and is used for standoff maximum range attacks on emitters of a known type and location, within several degrees of the missile boresight. This is the basic mode used by dedicated defence suppression (SEAD) aircraft such as the F-4G and Tornado ECR, or F-16CJ/HTS. In PB/PE/POS mode, as used by the Tornado ECR or F-4G, the aircraft's Emitter Locating System (ELS) determines the identity and position of the target, which are downloaded to the missile. The launch aircraft will then toss the missile to impart the best possible range. The missile flies on inertial guidance until it acquires the target, and then homes to impact. The PB/PE/POS mode is essentially offensive and most commonly used when taking down an IADS.

A sub-mode of the PB/PE/POS mode is Equations-Of-Motion (EOM) mode which allows more precise selection of emitters at maximum range, in a high density environment. The EOM mode is more specific than PB mode in terms of target selection, and can engage off axis if required, but requires more precise target position information than the baseline PB mode. The target position data can be provided by an onboard receiver or datalinked from an external source (eg Rivet Joint to F-16CJ).

The Target Of Opportunity (TOO) mode, also termed the HARM as Sensor (HAS) or Direct Attack (DA) mode is a lock-on-before-launch (LOBL) mode in which the missile receiver is used before launch to acquire the target. This mode allows off axis attacks on emitters within the field of view of the seeker. It is typically used as an offensive mode by non-dedicated strike aircraft to suppress emitters.

The Self Protect or Launch Off RWR (SP/LOR) mode is a short to medium range mode used defensively to engage targets within 360 degrees of the launch aircraft. In SP mode the HARM is slaved to the aircraft's RWR and given a prioritised list of threats. The highest priority threat will be engaged after launch. The SP/LOR mode is similar to the TOO/HAS/DA mode, but provides a larger search footprint.
Click to expand...
 
GregoryUSSR said:
How can the old F-16 improve the effectiveness of other weapons? What's the connection here? All AID (aviation instrument of destruction) are weapons of the F-16 itself.
Click to expand...

The old F-16 has been fully integrated with things like JDAM and HARM and can target them dynamically in the air, vice those weapons being pre set for targets on the ground and fired by even older Soviet vintage aircraft in an improvised fashion.
 
Josh_TN said:
The old F-16 has been fully integrated with things like JDAM and HARM and can target them dynamically in the air, vice those weapons being pre set for targets on the ground and fired by even older Soviet vintage aircraft in an improvised fashion.
Click to expand...
The МИГ-29 and СУ-27 available in the ВСУ were put into service in 1982-85. F-16 in 1978. That is, the ВСУ planes will even be newer. Or are we talking about some new modification of the F-16? The whole question is the integration of the system. In fact, integrating the HARM system in the same МИГ-29 is not difficult at all (but of course I will not advise it). We have already shot down many dozens of HARM missiles. Many of them came to us in almost complete condition. We take it apart, let's see what's inside, of course. But that's not the point. As the respected Grandfather Biden said quite correctly: "The conflicts around Ukraine and Israel will bring progress to the world." It is already obvious that according to the results of it, many weapons systems and even individual types of troops can be safely thrown into the trash of history. We didn't understand a lot earlier. And you didn't understand a lot either. Including those lessons that you should have learned already after the Vietnam War.
 
Last edited:
sferrin said:
"REMOVED PENDING PDF CONVERSION"

Did you ever generate the PDF? Didn't see it anywhere. Also wondering if you have any details (that you can share) of any 40N6 tests. I get the impression it's an SM-6 analog.
Click to expand...
As of today, this document is still not online, are there any other way of getting it?
 
GregoryUSSR said:
Or are we talking about some new modification of the F-16?
Click to expand...
The Dutch F-16s destined for Ukraine have been upgraded throughout their service lives with the Dutch air force. Added since their introduction: adapted for and using Litening-, LANTIRN-, FLIR- and ECM-pods, night vision goggles, terrain following system, AN/APG-66v2 radar, integration of AIM-9X - IRIS-T - AMRAAM - GBU-47.
I would expect the Danish F-16s are much the same.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom