Urusi ni boss

Urusi ni boss

Cassablanca said:
S-300 ni balaa, Urusi imesema itakuwa inazitambua ndege vita si tu zinazoingia ktk anga la Syria bali hata pale zinapokuwa zikijiandaa kuaza safari (take-off) ktk viwanja vya nchi za Ulaya na Israel.

Russia Says Its Syrian Air Defenses Can Track Aircraft In Europe, Israel

Israel inaiona Russia kama adui kwa kuingiza s-300 Syria

ANALYSIS: Russia's latest moves in Syria reveal it as an enemy
Click to expand...
Niliwahi kumwambia yule kijana wa Israel Ze kokuyo, kuwa Israel hataweza ruka tena Syria hii kitu ni balaa!
 
Kuna sehemu humo kwenye taarifa panasema

"Long-range radar isn't exactly a new phenomenon: U.S. ballistic missile defense radar like the BMEWS system has a range of three thousand miles, while an AWACS airborne early warning aircraft can spot aircraft flying four hundred miles away."

Alafu na nyingine inasema

"Russia has stationed long-range S-400 anti-aircraft missiles—that can hit aircraft 250 miles away—on its bases in Syria. In retaliation for the September 18th Israeli strike, Russia is also sending S-300 missiles—with a range of more than 100 miles—to the Syrian military."
 
Cassablanca said:
S-300 ni balaa, Urusi imesema itakuwa inazitambua ndege vita si tu zinazoingia ktk anga la Syria bali hata pale zinapokuwa zikijiandaa kuaza safari (take-off) ktk viwanja vya nchi za Ulaya na Israel.

Russia Says Its Syrian Air Defenses Can Track Aircraft In Europe, Israel

Israel inaiona Russia kama adui kwa kuingiza s-300 Syria

ANALYSIS: Russia's latest moves in Syria reveal it as an enemy
Click to expand...
waache Julia lia " Taifa teule waongee na Mungu na yeye awaletee za kwao
 
Volatility said:
Kuna sehemu humo kwenye taarifa panasema

"Long-range radar isn't exactly a new phenomenon: U.S. ballistic missile defense radar like the BMEWS system has a range of three thousand miles, while an AWACS airborne early warning aircraft can spot aircraft flying four hundred miles away."

Alafu na nyingine inasema

"Russia has stationed long-range S-400 anti-aircraft missiles—that can hit aircraft 250 miles away—on its bases in Syria. In retaliation for the September 18th Israeli strike, Russia is also sending s-300 missiles—with a range of more than 100 miles—to the Syrian military."
Click to expand...
Mkuu PAC-3 ya Mmarekani inaweza kudaka makombora ktk kimo cha takriban 30 km, wakati S-400 S-400 inaweza kudaka hata ktk kimo cha 150-160km.

Ukija ktk radar,S-400 yaweza kunasa na kuharibu aircraft iliyo hadi kimo cha 400km wakati PAC-3 rada yake mwisho wa kunasa ni 150km. S-400 yaweza kudaka ndege vita ktk umbali wa juu ambao radar ya PAC-3 na wenzake zinakuwa bado hata kuona target hiyo.

Inazungumzwa kuwaS-400 hazijatumika kwenye vita ukilinganisha na PAC-3 ya mmarekani. Lakini nchi za magharibi zaiheshimu zaidi S-400 baada ya kujifunza uwezo wa S-300 waliyopewa Greek na Urusi. Kumbuka S-300 ipo chini ya S-400 kiuwezo, hapo hatujaongelea S-500. Ikiwa simba mtoto ni hatari, basi bila shaka baba yake ni hatari zaidi.

Pitia maelezo hapa chini upate faida zaidi

How comparable are the American Patriot and Russian S-300/400 missile systems?

Ballistic Missile Defence:
Let us start with BMD capability as everybody seems interested about it these days. Both the systems are multi-role (can engage aircraft and ballistic missiles). The PAC-3( Later PAC-3 MSE) variant of the Patriot interceptor is a significant upgrade over the PAC-2, and has significant anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The advertised interception range against ballistic missiles is around 30kms. This will be significantly higher for aircraft engagement (probably over 150 kms). The older Patriot variants have significant battle experience. The new PAC-3 interceptors builds on those experiences and now can provide reliable defence for friendly forces under its protection.

The S-400 (an evolution of S-300 family) also fields significant anti-ballistic missile capabilities. It most probably uses the 48N6(E) or the humongous 40N6 interceptors for its anti-ballistic missile roles. The advertised max engagement altitude is approx 150 - 160 kms. There is no public info if these interceptors carry a purpose built interceptor to seek out incoming warheads for exo-atmospheric kills (like the SM-3 on Aegis BMD). Since there are no known real life instances (other than development tests) of an S-400 engaging a BM successfully, we will not know how effective the system really is.

Engagement ranges and Radars:
The S-400 is highly flexible when it comes to engagement ranges. The system uses multiple types of interceptors based on the targets range. The S-400 command node can use one of the following interceptors to bring down its target: The insane 40N6 (~ 400 kms) , the very long range 48N6 (~250 kms), the long range 9M96E2 ( ~120 kms) and medium range 9M96E (~ 40kms). The big interceptors (which are understandably harder on the pockets) need not be used on targets flying closer and can be reserved to harass slow moving, high value targets (like AWACS, Fuel tankers, transports etc). The Russians find this approach of arming a single system with multiple interceptors most suitable for their needs.

The patriot has a single type of interceptor (~150 kms range against aircrafts) for all types of targets, this approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. But suits the US / NATO and the other users just fine. But when it comes to detection and engagement ranges, the S-400 will probably detect, track and fire at a bogey long before the Patriot can even see it clearly.

Both the systems have excellent Radar and Command/control systems that can work on fully autonomous / semi-autonomous modes. Since the S-400 is expected to hit targets at extreme ranges, the radar is more powerful than the Patriots and has longer range.

So with the limited info above, one might declare the S-400 to be better, but that would probably not be fair.
These are, as mentioned earlier, very different classes of weapon systems and such comparisons don't yield accurate results. The Patriot has seen quite some combat, the S-400 not so much, but it's theoretical capabilities (and from what NATO learnt from a Greek S-300 battery) make the west treat the S-400 with immense respect. The mere mention of the S-300 / 400 deploying in a certain country has altered the perception of strategic balances in the middle east.
In the end, these are two very different systems built with different goals in mind, both are effective, both seem to make their users sleep peacefully. So 'yay' to that.

https://www.quora.com/How-comparable-are-the-American-Patriot-and-Russian-S-300-400-missile-systems#
 
Cassablanca said:
J
Mkuu PAC-3 ya Mmarekani inaweza kudaka makombora ktk kimo cha takriban 30 km, wakati S-400 S-400 inaweza kudaka hata ktk kimo cha 150-160km.

Ukija ktk radar,S-400 yaweza kunasa na kuharibu aircraft iliyo hadi kimo cha 400km wakati PAC-3 rada yake mwisho wa kunasa ni 150km. S-400 yaweza kudaka ndege vita ktk umbali wa juu ambao radar ya PAC-3 na wenzake zinakuwa bado hata kuona target hiyo.

Inazungumzwa kuwaS-400 hazijatumika kwenye vita ukilinganisha na PAC-3 ya mmarekani. Lakini nchi za magharibi zaiheshimu zaidi S-400 baada ya kujifunza uwezo wa S-300 waliyopewa Greek na Urusi. Kumbuka S-300 ipo chini ya S-400 kiuwezo, hapo hatujaongelea S-500. Ikiwa simba mtoto ni hatari, basi bila shaka baba yake ni hatari zaidi.

Pitia maelezo hapa chini upate faida zaidi

How comparable are the American Patriot and Russian S-300/400 missile systems?

Ballistic Missile Defence:
Let us start with BMD capability as everybody seems interested about it these days. Both the systems are multi-role (can engage aircraft and ballistic missiles). The PAC-3( Later PAC-3 MSE) variant of the Patriot interceptor is a significant upgrade over the PAC-2, and has significant anti-ballistic missile capabilities. The advertised interception range against ballistic missiles is around 30kms. This will be significantly higher for aircraft engagement (probably over 150 kms). The older Patriot variants have significant battle experience. The new PAC-3 interceptors builds on those experiences and now can provide reliable defence for friendly forces under its protection.

The S-400 (an evolution of S-300 family) also fields significant anti-ballistic missile capabilities. It most probably uses the 48N6(E) or the humongous 40N6 interceptors for its anti-ballistic missile roles. The advertised max engagement altitude is approx 150 - 160 kms. There is no public info if these interceptors carry a purpose built interceptor to seek out incoming warheads for exo-atmospheric kills (like the SM-3 on Aegis BMD). Since there are no known real life instances (other than development tests) of an S-400 engaging a BM successfully, we will not know how effective the system really is.

Engagement ranges and Radars:
The S-400 is highly flexible when it comes to engagement ranges. The system uses multiple types of interceptors based on the targets range. The S-400 command node can use one of the following interceptors to bring down its target: The insane 40N6 (~ 400 kms) , the very long range 48N6 (~250 kms), the long range 9M96E2 ( ~120 kms) and medium range 9M96E (~ 40kms). The big interceptors (which are understandably harder on the pockets) need not be used on targets flying closer and can be reserved to harass slow moving, high value targets (like AWACS, Fuel tankers, transports etc). The Russians find this approach of arming a single system with multiple interceptors most suitable for their needs.

The patriot has a single type of interceptor (~150 kms range against aircrafts) for all types of targets, this approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. But suits the US / NATO and the other users just fine. But when it comes to detection and engagement ranges, the S-400 will probably detect, track and fire at a bogey long before the Patriot can even see it clearly.

Both the systems have excellent Radar and Command/control systems that can work on fully autonomous / semi-autonomous modes. Since the S-400 is expected to hit targets at extreme ranges, the radar is more powerful than the Patriots and has longer range.

So with the limited info above, one might declare the S-400 to be better, but that would probably not be fair.
These are, as mentioned earlier, very different classes of weapon systems and such comparisons don't yield accurate results. The Patriot has seen quite some combat, the S-400 not so much, but it's theoretical capabilities (and from what NATO learnt from a Greek S-300 battery) make the west treat the S-400 with immense respect. The mere mention of the S-300 / 400 deploying in a certain country has altered the perception of strategic balances in the middle east.
In the end, these are two very different systems built with different goals in mind, both are effective, both seem to make their users sleep peacefully. So 'yay' to that.

https://www.quora.com/How-comparable-are-the-American-Patriot-and-Russian-S-300-400-missile-systems#
Click to expand...
Kama ni hivo Putin ndyo amri jeshi mkuu was Dunia wengine ni makonstebo wakati marekani ni koplo
 
STRUGGLE MAN said:
Tunaomba mjaribu kurusha sio ndege, ata kijiwe tu Syria majibu yatakayofuata usije humu kulialia
Click to expand...
Waambie walete chokochoko za kusaidia magaidi dhidi ya Israel wakione cha moto. Kipigo kipo palepale
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Our Community

Coming Soon

Regional Communities

Coming Soon
Back
Top Bottom
Menu
Forums
New posts
Log in
Register