S-300s for Iran

#1
Russia is to supply Iran with a new and lethal anti-aircraft system capable of shooting down American or Israeli fighter jets in the event of any strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Iran yesterday confirmed that Russia had agreed to deliver the S-300 air defence system, a move that is likely to irk the Bush administration and gives further proof of Russia and Iran's deepening strategic partnership.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2232345,00.html#article_continue
Are these things any good, or are the Russians unloading old technology on the Persians? The article claims the S-300 is superior to the Patriot which I find difficult to believe.

The S-300 had a range far superior to that of the US Patriot system, experts said. It could also shoot down cruise and ballistic missiles, they added.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2232345,00.html#article_continue
What's the stop the Yanks/Israelis from knocking them out as soon as they switch their radars on? And if they don’t switch on they’re useless.

 
#2
Not the first time these have caused problems.

I think this was the system that the Greek Cypriots were going to get which caused a bit of a stink with the Turks. If I recall correctly (someone feel free to put me right I'm I'm not) the range was somewhere in the region of 90Km as such it meant that the North of the Island would be covered easily too.

Couldn't comment on the Patriot thing though as definitely not an expert.

More info here.

Edited to add link
 
#3
Weren't the Persians supposed to have had this system late last/ earlier this year?
Sure there is a thread somewhere about it
 
#6
According to the wiki th3 SA-300 (Grumble) is the "closest" system the Russians have to Patriot.

They still need these

turned on though. (Flip tops, the radar vehicles)

Which should be easily removed by these....

or similar. (Alarm on a Tornado.)
 
#7
chocolate_frog said:
According to the wiki th3 SA-300 (Grumble) is the "closest" system the Russians have to Patriot.

They still need these

turned on though. (Flip tops, the radar vehicles)

Which should be easily removed by these....

or similar. (Alarm on a Tornado.)
That's what I thought. To park an S-300 near an Iranian nuke facility and flick that 'on' switch is a suicidal act.
 
#8
Given that the latest NIE concludes that Iran is not pursuing, and has not pursued since 2003, a nuclear weapons programme, it seems far less likely that this hypothetical engagement will ever take place.
 
#10
whitecity said:
Given that the latest NIE concludes that Iran is not pursuing, and has not pursued since 2003, a nuclear weapons programme, it seems far less likely that this hypothetical engagement will ever take place.
If my job was keeping an Iranian nuke plant free of US and Israeli jets I wouldn't place a huge amount of faith in the NIE.

Plus, think of the propaganda value of shooting down a load of Yanks illegally invading your airspace, parading them on TV in orange jump suits, where they criticise McDonalds and refer to George Bush as a war criminal.
 
#11
annakey said:
whitecity said:
Given that the latest NIE concludes that Iran is not pursuing, and has not pursued since 2003, a nuclear weapons programme, it seems far less likely that this hypothetical engagement will ever take place.
If my job was keeping an Iranian nuke plant free of US and Israeli jets I wouldn't place a huge amount of faith in the NIE.

Plus, think of the propaganda value of shooting down a load of Yanks illegally invading your airspace, parading them on TV in orange jump suits, where they criticise McDonalds and refer to George Bush as a war criminal.
The individual words make sense, but I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. I guess you have something in mind, but you haven't articulated it at all well - at least to me.
 
#12
whitecity said:
annakey said:
whitecity said:
Given that the latest NIE concludes that Iran is not pursuing, and has not pursued since 2003, a nuclear weapons programme, it seems far less likely that this hypothetical engagement will ever take place.
If my job was keeping an Iranian nuke plant free of US and Israeli jets I wouldn't place a huge amount of faith in the NIE.

Plus, think of the propaganda value of shooting down a load of Yanks illegally invading your airspace, parading them on TV in orange jump suits, where they criticise McDonalds and refer to George Bush as a war criminal.
The individual words make sense, but I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. I guess you have something in mind, but you haven't articulated it at all well - at least to me.
Sorry. I'm saying (1) the NIE is unlikely to dissuade hawks in Washington and Tel Aviv and (2) even if the alleged nuke plants are hit, if the Iranians can down and capture some US aviators they'll score a propaganda victory.

So assuming these things work they could, from the Persian point of view, be money well spent. But do they work? That's the key question. It was to discover the answer that I posted this thread.


:D
 
#13
annakey said:
whitecity said:
annakey said:
whitecity said:
Given that the latest NIE concludes that Iran is not pursuing, and has not pursued since 2003, a nuclear weapons programme, it seems far less likely that this hypothetical engagement will ever take place.
If my job was keeping an Iranian nuke plant free of US and Israeli jets I wouldn't place a huge amount of faith in the NIE.

Plus, think of the propaganda value of shooting down a load of Yanks illegally invading your airspace, parading them on TV in orange jump suits, where they criticise McDonalds and refer to George Bush as a war criminal.
The individual words make sense, but I have absolutely no idea what you mean by this. I guess you have something in mind, but you haven't articulated it at all well - at least to me.
Sorry. I'm saying (1) the NIE is unlikely to dissuade hawks in Washington and Tel Aviv and (2) even if the alleged nuke plants are hit, if the Iranians can down and capture some US aviators they'll score a propaganda victory.

So assuming these things work they could, from the Persian point of view, be money well spent. But do they work? That's the key question. It was to discover the answer that I posted this thread.


:D
Maybe we should hop over to Prune of E-Goat. There was a SEAD exercise in France in '05 were the Slovaks brought their SA-10's to play and let the old NATO countries have a go at them. Couldn't find any info/ results though.

T C
 
#14
This is not really news. Iran has been upgrading air defence capabilty for some years and they already have earlier versions of the S300 family but Russia has been under diplomatic pressure not to sell the latest varients

So it depends what varient they are now talking about and if it is just an increase in numbers of existing systems. Not really surprising that Iran has a complex layered air defence system and would be beefing it up, is it?
 
#15
annakey said:
Sorry. I'm saying (1) the NIE is unlikely to dissuade hawks in Washington and Tel Aviv and (2) even if the alleged nuke plants are hit, if the Iranians can down and capture some US aviators they'll score a propaganda victory.

So assuming these things work they could, from the Persian point of view, be money well spent. But do they work? That's the key question. It was to discover the answer that I posted this thread.
Aha!

Regarding your first point. I don't think you fully appreciate the profound impact the latest NIE has had on Beltway politicking. As it stands at the moment, airstrikes on Iran a VERY much off-the-table - irrespective of what the Whitehouse may say in public. That's not to say it won't change in the future, but for now, your thread is merely a hypothetical talking point not a realistic scenario.

And the second. In (very) simplistic terms, the S-300 has two key elements, tracking radar and missile. The missile (although it comes in various versions) is very capable and would present a significant threat to all conventional manned aircraft. Pilots of a B-2 or F-22 could feel relatively secure and a Typhoon2 pilot would stand a very good chance if good drills were applied. Everything else would find it very iffy indeed. The radar issue is a bit of a red herring, as all modern systems are digitally networked with real time targetting data. So, a HARM or ALARM takes out radar A, but missile is then guided data from radar B beyond the range of HARM/ALARM, then the missile takes over it's own tracking...

Since the Slovaks have an oldish system, and they never fired a missile, nobody can be really sure of the outcome. The US bought their own S-300 system a few years back. Pulled it apart, analysed the systems and then rebuilt it. Parked it in the desert and flew missions against it. The results are still highly classified. Hmmmmm!
 
#16
I'm thinking you guys are missing a key factor. It's not *always* anti-radar missiles that take out ADA sites.
 
#17
Also, factor in whether there are sufficent stocks of ALARM to do the job.


As a rep at a show put it.. "Carlesberg don't make Anti Radiation Missiles, but if they did.....!" and glanced at a model of ALARM.
 
#18
ghost_us said:
I'm thinking you guys are missing a key factor. It's not *always* anti-radar missiles that take out ADA sites.
No. Not missing the point at all. 'Radar' is often a red herring in modern warfare.

Take Allied Force 1999 as a case study. Most 'modern' radar fielded by the VJ was the AN/TPS-70 delivered in the mid-80s. For the most part, they relied on 60s and 70s technology from Soviet Union and UK (Marconi S600). The missile systems were just as archaic: S-125 was delivered in the mid to late 70s and the last KuB-M in 1982. Nevertheless, NATO never gained true air supremacy and even on the last night was coming under serious threat from the AD. NATO losses were kept to the miserly sum of 2 due to the ancient warheads being thrown at them. The S-300 missile is infinitely more capable than those fired by the VJ.

SandExporter said:
Also, factor in whether there are sufficent stocks of ALARM to do the job.

As a rep at a show put it.. "Carlesberg don't make Anti Radiation Missiles, but if they did.....!" and glanced at a model of ALARM.
The 6 (yes, six) fired by the RAF during Allied Force achieved the outstanding success of the square root of Fnuk All. Did they perform any better during Desert Fox a year earlier? Or, during subsequent strikes against Iraq?

Edited to correct factual error. During Allied Force, the VJ fielded the S-125 Neva system not the S-75 Dvina which had been retired in 1994. Apologies.
 
#19
Am I not right in the belief that rapier is the only SAM that system that can even detect stealth aircraft...supposedly?
 
#20
307 said:
Am I not right in the belief that rapier is the only SAM that system that can even detect stealth aircraft...supposedly?
I'd hear something similar. Went to school with a kid who's dad was a Civi rapier nerd type. The yanks tried to 'aquire' their radar when they picked one up at a civi airshow. The dad may have been pulling my plonker but I honestly don't he has a sense of humour.

T C
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads