What's new

After S-400, More Contracts On The Way: Rosoboronexport

LOL STFU rapist. Got banned like a little bitch.

Your American daddy told you not to buy Russian yet you wanna have it your way. The question is for how long.

The Yanks have a reputation of twisting the neck of their own "allies" LOL Your turn will come. Only a matter of time. Don't think that Trump isn't noting down names.
Thats why Pakistanis never trust USA anymore on anything. Because USA are backstabbing idiots.
Go make deals with China full speed ahead.

Even with Russia, even if they have good relations with India, because Russians are more reliable than Americans are.
 
Thats why Pakistanis never trust USA anymore on anything. Because USA are backstabbing idiots.
Go make deals with China full speed ahead.

Even with Russia, even if they have good relations with India, because Russians are more reliable than Americans are.

This is India for you in a nutshell. Worship Trump, but buy Russian LOL
 
This is India for you in a nutshell. Worship Trump, but buy Russian LOL
But bhai, trusting USA was the fault of our ancestors during the Cold War. Even most of our exports go to USA still.

This is the fault of our stupid ancestors.

Its up to Imran Khan's to change these stupid policies as soon as possible, as USA desperately tries to maintain its world position.

But Hahaha, for how long will USA remain the largest economy? LOL.

The Rise of China will change everything.

When USA is finally eclipsed by a larger economy, then what?
USA won't be the best, won't be number 1.

Then the superlatives of praising USA won't matter.

The world will soon won't need USA, then what?
 
9M96E and 9M96E2 are HTK. 48N6E and 40N6 use explosives.
77N6-N series are HTK in the same category as 48N6E and 40N6.
Arguments with you, turn out inconclusive normally. However, I will give this a try.

Interceptors have a hit probability (in case you didn't knew), and this probability vary from interceptor to interceptor (50% - 100%), depending upon their individual characteristics.

9M96E and 9M96E2 are more accurate and maneuverable than 48N6E2, 48N6E3 and 40N6 respectively, but with compromises in range, speed and types of targets they can engage. YOU have an assortment of interceptors (to choose from) but their are respective trade-offs.

9_M96_E.png

Taken from ausairpower.net

9M96 family of interceptors employ crude 'shape-charged explosive technique' to engage potential targets, and their hit probability against ballistic missiles is 80%.

The 48N6 missile is reportedly suited for destroying medium-range ballistic missiles with a maximum range of 3,500-km flying at 4,800 meters per second, at a distance of 5 to 60 km and an altitude of 2 to 27 km. The warhead is able not only to deflect the incoming ballistic missile but also effectively destroy it. In the case of the better-known and extremely maneuverable 9M96 missile, the producer claims an 80 percent hit probability against a ballistic missile and a 70 percent kill probability against a particular part of a ballistic missile (i.e., warhead). - Declassified report - SSI - Keir Giles (2015)

---

Your blanket statements notwithstanding, PAC-3 MSE is a class apart from 9M96 family of interceptors, with relatively superior hit probability against ballistic missiles (> 95%), speed (> MACH 5), altitude (> 30 KM), and its range is reportedly 55 KM (but greater in reality). Being small, light-weight and incredibly maneuverable, PAC-3 MSE also offer meaningful capability against saturation attacks - very important.

images


The entire Patriot battery, armed with PAC-3 MSE, PAC-2 GEM-T and PAC-2 GEM-C interceptor suite [M903 configuration], translate into a meaningful capability against advanced ballistic threats (e.g. Russian 9K720 Iskander), and a large number of air-breathing targets in general including various types of cruise missiles.

PAC-3 MSE > 9M96 family of interceptors in the nutshell

The 48N6 family of interceptors are relatively less accurate and maneuverable than the 9N96 family of interceptors (size and weight among contributing factors), and also have significant constraints in AMD scenario:

Range = 5 - 60 KM
Altitude = 2 - 27 KM

Confirmation in the official source: http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/air-defence-systems/air-defense-systems-and-mounts/s-400-triumf/

- and also in the documents of Aviation Week. I have access to one, thankfully.

48N6E2 and 48N6E3 have the maximum flight range of 200 KM and 250 KM respectively, to engage aircraft; not in ABM scenario. However, these flight ranges sound good for marketing.

For instance: http://bastion-karpenko.narod.ru/S-400_MAKS-2011_012.JPG

PAC-3 MSE > 48N6 family of interceptors in the nutshell

WE are left with 40N6 now. Again, lot of unsubstantiated hype for this interceptor on the web so far. Below is the specifications of its derivative:

screenshot-ic-pics-livejournal-com-2018-08-25-14-27-14.jpg


S-400 have significant hype on its side due to spread of disinformation about its ABM capabilities by ill-informed journalists and fanboys alike - I give you this.

60 KM range and 27 KM altitude in ABM scenario, translate to defenses mainly suited for TBM and SRBM. 40N6 expands this battlespace but few can be deployed in a battery and intercept probability is uncertain. This is the crux.

Also, HTK is entirely dependent on the capability of the missiles themselves, and not the radars. The S-400 will also be equipped with 77N6-N series.
Of-course, characteristics of an interceptor is central to its hit probability. Nevertheless, any interceptor is designed to take cues from both command guidance (from the relevant Fire Control Radar) and onboard guidance, to engage a target. This is why a more capable FTR would be a contributing factor.

"The 48N6E missile has a large footprint; each TEL tube can hold only one. It has a 150 kilometer range and a 150 kilogram warhead. It uses a combination of radio command guidance and semi-active radar homing guidance. When this missile was introduced, it was relatively inaccurate and compensated for its poor accuracy with a 150 kilogram warhead. The early versions of the US Patriot SAM had a 90 kilogram warhead by contrast. A large warhead requires a larger and heavier missile, reducing range and speed. The 48N6E is a large general purpose missile with a large blast fragmentation warhead that can engage threats across the spectrum from low-altitude cruise missiles to high-altitude short-range ballistic missiles. This missile is loaded one per TEL tube.

The 9M96E1 missile has a much smaller footprint than the 48N6E: each TEL tube can hold up to four. It has a much smaller warhead of just 24 kilograms, as shown in Figure 3. This missile is essentially a “hit to kill” vehicle with a small blast fragmentation warhead that functions almost like a shaped charge, with timed detonation reacting to angle of impact with the target. This missile combines command guidance from the fire control radar with semi-active radar homing, a range of 21.6 nautical miles, and a capability to engage targets as low as 15 feet or as high as 66,000 feet."

Source: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Harmer_Strategic_Impact_S-300_Iran.pdf (PDF format)

Nothing he said is correct.

For example, he says we are not getting the 40N6, but we are. This is confirmed information.

He is telling a different story with the mobile mast. There are plenty of vantage points for the S-400's radars along the border, without having to use the mast.

Then he goes on to talk about hypersonic warheads, Pakistan has none in its inventory. And, to date, nobody has hypersonic warheads operational or hypersonic manoeuvrable missile defence. So he is just bringing up non-issues with the mobile mast and the anti-hypersonic capability.

And finally, his information about the number of targets tracked and engaged is obsolete.
You can take your dispute with him.

Let me know what he said to you.

No chance. THAAD will be nowhere near the S-500.
LMAO...YOU are a complete joke.

thaad-image02.jpg


fullscreen-capture-382017-44908-pm-bmp1.jpg


THAAD defeated an IRBM class target in a complex test in 2017 (FTT-18).

2017-07-17-Un-navire-despion-chinois-surveille-lessai-du-THAAD-09.jpg


FYI: That was a 4-stage ALBM target simulating an advanced IRBM class threat (first stage is air-launched; additional stages are solid-fueled), and it covered almost 4200 KM distance until it was shot down/intercepted.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-says-thaad-has-destroyed-its-first-mock-ibrm

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...f-alaska-for-the-first-time-during-thaad-test

---

S-500 offer ABM engagement capacity up to 100 KM in altitude (per Russian sources) which is on par with Israeli Arrow 3; between S-400 and THAAD.

There is no comparison between the PAC-3 and S-400.
See above. PAC-3 MSE changes things.

In fact, the PAC-3 lost to the S-300PMU2 in India in 2005.

Jun 15, 2005
https://www.nti.org/gsn/article/us-to-sell-india-pac-3-missile-defense-system/

June 17, 2005
http://aviationweek.com/awin/us-approves-sale-pac-3-india
With the U.S. visit of India Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee just days away, the United States has approved the sale of the Lockheed Martin-built Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) anti-missile defense system to India.
Doesn't tell us much.

Indian equipment procurement decisions are political in large part. There is also the element of mistrust between US and India so far.
 
Last edited:
Arguments with you, turn out inconclusive normally. However, I will give this a try.

Interceptors have a hit probability (in case you didn't knew), and this probability vary from interceptor to interceptor (50% - 100%), depending upon their individual characteristics.

9M96E and 9M96E2 are more accurate and maneuverable than 48N6E2, 48N6E3 and 40N6 respectively, but with compromises in range, speed and types of targets they can engage. YOU have an assortment of interceptors (to choose from) but their are respective trade-offs.

9_M96_E.png

Taken from ausairpower.net

9M96 family of interceptors employ crude 'shape-charged explosive technique' to engage potential targets, and their hit probability against ballistic missiles is 80%.

The 48N6 missile is reportedly suited for destroying medium-range ballistic missiles with a maximum range of 3,500-km flying at 4,800 meters per second, at a distance of 5 to 60 km and an altitude of 2 to 27 km. The warhead is able not only to deflect the incoming ballistic missile but also effectively destroy it. In the case of the better-known and extremely maneuverable 9M96 missile, the producer claims an 80 percent hit probability against a ballistic missile and a 70 percent kill probability against a particular part of a ballistic missile (i.e., warhead). - Declassified report - SSI - Keir Giles (2015)

---

Your blanket statements notwithstanding, PAC-3 MSE is a class apart from 9M96 family of interceptors, with relatively superior hit probability against ballistic missiles (> 95%), speed (> MACH 5), altitude (> 30 KM), and its range is reportedly 55 KM (but greater in reality). Being small, light-weight and incredibly maneuverable, PAC-3 MSE also offer meaningful capability against saturation attacks - very important.

images


The entire Patriot battery, armed with PAC-3 MSE, PAC-2 GEM-T and PAC-2 GEM-C interceptor suite [M903 configuration], translate into a meaningful capability against advanced ballistic threats (e.g. Russian 9K720 Iskander), and a large number of air-breathing targets in general including various types of cruise missiles.

PAC-3 MSE > 9M96 family of interceptors in the nutshell

The 48N6 family of interceptors are relatively less accurate and maneuverable than the 9N96 family of interceptors (size and weight among contributing factors), and also have significant constraints in AMD scenario:

Range = 5 - 60 KM
Altitude = 2 - 27 KM

Confirmation in the official source: http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/air-defence-systems/air-defense-systems-and-mounts/s-400-triumf/

- and also in the documents of Aviation Week. I have access to one, thankfully.

48N6E2 and 48N6E3 have the maximum flight range of 200 KM and 250 KM respectively, to engage aircraft; not in ABM scenario. However, these flight ranges sound good for marketing.

For instance: http://bastion-karpenko.narod.ru/S-400_MAKS-2011_012.JPG

PAC-3 MSE > 48N6 family of interceptors in the nutshell

WE are left with 40N6 now. Again, lot of unsubstantiated hype for this interceptor on the web so far. Below is the specifications of its derivative:

screenshot-ic-pics-livejournal-com-2018-08-25-14-27-14.jpg


S-400 have significant hype on its side due to spread of disinformation about its ABM capabilities by ill-informed journalists and fanboys alike - I give you this.

60 KM range and 27 KM altitude in ABM scenario, translate to defenses mainly suited for TBM and SRBM. 40N6 expands this battlespace but few can be deployed in a battery and engagement probability will remain uncertain. This is the crux.


Of-course, characteristics of an interceptor is central to its hit probability. Nevertheless, any interceptor is designed to take cues from both command guidance (from the relevant Fire Control Radar) and onboard guidance, to engage a target. This is why a more capable FTR would be a contributing factor.

"The 48N6E missile has a large footprint; each TEL tube can hold only one. It has a 150 kilometer range and a 150 kilogram warhead. It uses a combination of radio command guidance and semi-active radar homing guidance. When this missile was introduced, it was relatively inaccurate and compensated for its poor accuracy with a 150 kilogram warhead. The early versions of the US Patriot SAM had a 90 kilogram warhead by contrast. A large warhead requires a larger and heavier missile, reducing range and speed. The 48N6E is a large general purpose missile with a large blast fragmentation warhead that can engage threats across the spectrum from low-altitude cruise missiles to high-altitude short-range ballistic missiles. This missile is loaded one per TEL tube.

The 9M96E1 missile has a much smaller footprint than the 48N6E: each TEL tube can hold up to four. It has a much smaller warhead of just 24 kilograms, as shown in Figure 3. This missile is essentially a “hit to kill” vehicle with a small blast fragmentation warhead that functions almost like a shaped charge, with timed detonation reacting to angle of impact with the target. This missile combines command guidance from the fire control radar with semi-active radar homing, a range of 21.6 nautical miles, and a capability to engage targets as low as 15 feet or as high as 66,000 feet."

Source: https://www.criticalthreats.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Harmer_Strategic_Impact_S-300_Iran.pdf (PDF format)


You can take your dispute with him.

Let me know what he said to you.


LMAO...YOU are a complete joke.

thaad-image02.jpg


fullscreen-capture-382017-44908-pm-bmp1.jpg


THAAD defeated an IRBM class target in a complex test in 2017 (FTT-18).

2017-07-17-Un-navire-despion-chinois-surveille-lessai-du-THAAD-09.jpg


FYI: That was a 4-stage ALBM target simulating an advanced IRBM class threat (first stage is air-launched; additional stages are solid-fueled), and it covered about 4200 KM distance until it was shot down/intercepted.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...-says-thaad-has-destroyed-its-first-mock-ibrm

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...f-alaska-for-the-first-time-during-thaad-test

---

S-500 offer ABM engagement capacity up to 100 KM in altitude (per Russian sources) which is on par with Israeli Arrow 3; between S-400 and THAAD.


See above. PAC-3 MSE changes things.


Doesn't tell us much.

Indian equipment procurement decisions are political in large part. There is also the element of mistrust between US and India so far.

PAC-3 MSE is a recent development and is definitely superior to the 9M96E2. Both in terms of range and kill probability. It has a dual pulse motor and that makes a huge difference. So you can expect the MSE to have much greater range than the PAC-3. 9M96E2 is similar to PAC-3 instead. But I'd happily rate the PAAC-4 with David's Sling well above PAC-3 MSE.

As for the 40N6, nothing's been revealed yet, so don't rely on too much half information.

https://www.financialexpress.com/defence/india-likely-to-clinch-the-s-400-triumf-deal/1334359/
Air Marshal (retd) Anil Chopra said, “The system consists of four separate missiles that cover the entire range and altitude envelope from close quarters to nearly 570 km for heavy bombers and shorter ranges for incoming missiles.”

So stop believing our military gurus right now. Including the Colonel.

Just wait for more information to come out regarding the 40N6. Even the Americans have admitted that the THAAD that they offered to India in lieu of the S-400 is inferior, primarily because of the S-400's ability to perform air defence in all regimes. India rejected both Patriot and THAAD and chose the S-400 instead.

As you know, we do not need the PAC-3/PAC-3 MSE or THAAD for BMD since we have our own programs there. So our primary need from the S-400 is air defence. While the THAAD cannot perform air defence, the S-400 thoroughly trounces the PAC-3 MSE in air defence. And give it some time, you will see the Akash Mk2 specs pretty soon, and even you will agree that we do not need the Patriot.

Deagel lists the 40N6's altitude as 185Km.
http://www.deagel.com/Defensive-Weapons/40N6_a000990001.aspx

There are some estimates that the 40N6's altitude is well above 200Km, much closer to 250Km.

Anyway, I have a question for you. What would be your opinion of the S-400 versus the THAAD if the 40N6 is indeed an exo-atmospheric interceptor with an intercept altitude well above 150Km?
 
I believe some negotiations are going on for Pantsir systems to safeguard S-400 systems from low flying cruise missiles.
 
I believe some negotiations are going on for Pantsir systems to safeguard S-400 systems from low flying cruise missiles.

We definitely need AAA, but it doesn't have to be the Pantsir.

A better option would be something like the Bofors 40mm guns and the SPYDER/QRSAM.
 
Video by who? They are many amateur nowadays claiming as self expert making baseless, biased ranking without any proper datasheet.
and the objection has come from a friend who is chinese . lol
 
Not so fast...Will the US also lift financial sanctions on the manufacturer of S-400, Almas-Antey? Per Indian source, US will probably not life financial sanctions on the Russian entity and until India puts down the 15% down payment, the work won't start. Is the signing ceremony just another game by Modi prior to elections?

"In the case of the S-400, its manufacturer Almaz-Antey is on a US financial sanctions list that prohibits banking institutions from dealing with it, at the penalty of exclusion from the dollar trade controlled by Washington. While India has got exemptions from the US Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), financial sanctions that prevent money to be transferred for weapons purchases from Russia are still in effect.

"This will make it difficult to find banking entities in both nations willing to risk processing the payments.

"In fact, even payments for ongoing projects with Russia have been stalled this year. Talks on the S-400 deal had started before CAATSA, said people with knowledge of the matter. “We have done what we had to do in national interests,” said one of them. The US Embassy in New Delhi was noncommittal on India getting a waiver for the S-400 deal."


//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/66093860.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Has this changed (has India figured out how to make the payment yet)?
 
Not so fast...Will the US also lift financial sanctions on the manufacturer of S-400, Almas-Antey? Per Indian source, US will probably not life financial sanctions on the Russian entity and until India puts down the 15% down payment, the work won't start. Is the signing ceremony just another game by Modi prior to elections?

"In the case of the S-400, its manufacturer Almaz-Antey is on a US financial sanctions list that prohibits banking institutions from dealing with it, at the penalty of exclusion from the dollar trade controlled by Washington. While India has got exemptions from the US Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), financial sanctions that prevent money to be transferred for weapons purchases from Russia are still in effect.

"This will make it difficult to find banking entities in both nations willing to risk processing the payments.

"In fact, even payments for ongoing projects with Russia have been stalled this year. Talks on the S-400 deal had started before CAATSA, said people with knowledge of the matter. “We have done what we had to do in national interests,” said one of them. The US Embassy in New Delhi was noncommittal on India getting a waiver for the S-400 deal."


//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/66093860.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Has this changed (has India figured out how to make the payment yet)?

We have created alternate payment mechanisms that can bypass dollar trade.

But the waiver is expected to allow us to trade in dollars, or we wouldn't need a waiver.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom