Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon

[Immanuel]

Then why are the Chinese complaining about not having it and is nowhere to be seen?'

К примеру, в январе 2017-го года один из многочисленных китайских военно-аналитических ресурсов, не на шутку встревоженный отсутствием ЗУР 40Н6 в составе полученных «Четырёхсоток», даже пустился проводить целое расследование о возможном наличии этих ракет на вооружении российских 40Р6 «Триумф», опираясь на наши и западные источники. Упомянули китайцы и о 350-400 - километровой дальнобойной ЗУР 9М82МВ из боевого комплекта модернизированного войскового ЗРК С-300В4, которую очень часто путают с 40Н6; и о закрывающих небо над АвБ Хмеймим «сирийских» С-400, которые, по данным американской космической разведки, имеют стандартные 4-хзарядные ВПУ 5П85СМ2 с зенитными управляемыми ракетами 48Н6ДМ без каких-либо «намёков» на 2-хзарядные ВПУ для ракет 40Н6.

https://topwar.ru/108185-triumfy-bez-izdeliy-40n6-naskolko-hromaet-oboronosposobnost-vks-rossii.html



Of course the Rafale will see the S-400 fire immediately, the missiles are as big as a house. Not to mention it will know exactly when it has a target lock.



Rafale has been flying around the S-400 in Syria for years. Spectra has already sniffed all the trons out of that radar and added all the wave forms to the threat library. Pantsir isn't rated to shoot down Mach 3 missiles and it will be too late for S-400 to try to intercept it. The entire area will be incinerated by a 300kt fire ball.



You think it is so easy to shoot down maneuvering Mach 3 missiles hitting the deck? Can we use you as the test subject?

As for your source about the 40N6, can you post a more credible source than some blog.

As for the S-400, I meant the Rafale can't detect a 'Fire unit' which can pop up in under 5 minutes while staying completely hidden all along.

If the Rafale has sniffed out all the trons of the radar, well the same can be said, the Russians have sniffed the Rafale just the same and can counter jam or have effective counters. Such capability goes both ways. Heck the Russians probably have a great deal of data about F-22s, F-35s, EFs and Rafale.

Pantsir S-2 also has lovely autocannons, plenty of missiles with proximity fuzes, such missiles don't have to hit to kill, as for rating VS super sonic missiles, a twin shot at the ASMP-A still gives the Pantsir a great chance of killing the missile. ASMP-A doesn't cruise at mach 3 at low level, it is not the fastest let alone the most maneuverable cruise missile in the world at low altitude, that title solely belongs to the Brahmos and it's future iterations.

 

[Immanuel]

Why IADS is not being considered.....

If one UHF/VHF radar is scanning the area. Rest of tracking or targeting radars are shut. There could be multiple batteries of BuK and x band tracking component of S400 armed with 9M96E2 missiles quietly waiting for Saturation attacks. Let's not even forget the point defense like Pantisr S1/S2.

I don't meant to say that S-400 is impregnable, but it's going to cost a fortune to do so.

Very true, no system is impregnable and there is cost to everything, the cost of taking on a well trained full scale S-400 regiment and associated systems is quite hefty and the challenger (regardless of who it is) should be willing to put atleast 2 sqds of advanced 4.5 gen or 5th gen fighters, associated weapons, cruise missiles, decoys etc. in play and expect an equal amount of resistance from the defender. Also to keep in mind a well trained, well entreched and prepared defender always has an advantage.

 

[BON PLAN]

ASMP-A doesn't cruise at mach 3 at low level, it is not the fastest let alone the most maneuverable cruise missile in the world at low altitude, that title solely belongs to the Brahmos and it's future iterations.

ASMP A is said to be mach2+ at low altitude (nearly mach 2.5 in low alt and mach 3.5 in high alt).

Manoeuvrable? it is. At a time the platform was intended to be used for a futur anti ship missile. And ships are well equiped in CIWS and others defense missiles, so to attack it you need a manoeuvrable weapon.
more or less agile than Brahmos? I don't know. But agility is part of the design.
And Brahmos is a massive missile, with very small fins. Is it so agile? Is the pitot air intake able to support high G turn? I don't know, but it's questionnable.

But I would be pleased to see it in the french navy arsenal.

 

[BON PLAN]

Very true, no system is impregnable and there is cost to everything, the cost of taking on a well trained full scale S-400 regiment and associated systems is quite hefty and the challenger (regardless of who it is) should be willing to put atleast 2 sqds of advanced 4.5 gen or 5th gen fighters, associated weapons, cruise missiles, decoys etc. in play and expect an equal amount of resistance from the defender. Also to keep in mind a well trained, well entreched and prepared defender always has an advantage.

The strategy is the same as during Vietnam : force the SAM battery to use all its missile (with lure UAV, electronical measures, weapons shoot) and fired against it after.
Yes it will be costly.
Yes it's not 100% guaranteed.
Yes it's a risky business. For the 2 sides. As during Vietnam.

 

[Flame Thrower]

ASMP A is said to be mach2+ at low altitude (nearly mach 2.5 in low alt and mach 3.5 in high alt).

Manoeuvrable? it is. At a time the platform was intended to be used for a futur anti ship missile. And ships are well equiped in CIWS and others defense missiles, so to attack it you need a manoeuvrable weapon.
more or less agile than Brahmos? I don't know. But agility is part of the design.
And Brahmos is a massive missile, with very small fins. Is it so agile? Is the pitot air intake able to support high G turn? I don't know, but it's questionnable.

But I would be pleased to see it in the french navy arsenal.

S maneuver in the terminal phase is what makes Brahmos deadly.

Ships don't even get to down this one using long range as the cruise altitude is would be very less.

Worst part is they come in as a pack to overload any existing CIWS.

ASMP might be as fast as Brahmos, maybe launched in packs, but I doubt on the terminal maneuverability. Without terminal maneuverability, the number of ASMPs attacking the target would at least be doubled. Thus increase in the cost and complexity and chances of error and possiblity of a downed fighter.

Most importantly ASMP has to deal with one of the best point defense SAM and multiple of'em. When I mean multiple, ships have one or two CIWS systems. If missiles are programmed to engage a ship from it's vulnerable side(maybe only one CIWS might take on Brahmos) then chances of hitting ships increase drastically.

But on land targets, Point defenses would be placed to cover all the nook and corners effectively.

All I meant to say is there is a world of difference in scenarios of Brahmos hitting ships and ASMP hitting a target defended by S-400(IADS)

 

[Armand2REP]

If the Rafale has sniffed out all the trons of the radar, well the same can be said, the Russians have sniffed the Rafale just the same and can counter jam or have effective counters. Such capability goes both ways. Heck the Russians probably have a great deal of data about F-22s, F-35s, EFs and Rafale.

RBE2 AESA over Syria never needed to go active, it was under an AWACs data link the entire time so Russia has no signals intelligence on it. Russia does not have the capability to jam a 1000+ module AESA, no one does.

Pantsir S-2 also has lovely autocannons, plenty of missiles with proximity fuzes, such missiles don't have to hit to kill, as for rating VS super sonic missiles, a twin shot at the ASMP-A still gives the Pantsir a great chance of killing the missile. ASMP-A doesn't cruise at mach 3 at low level, it is not the fastest let alone the most maneuverable cruise missile in the world at low altitude, that title solely belongs to the Brahmos and it's future iterations.

Considering the blast radius of ASMP-A it is a pretty good bet it will get nowhere near the autocannons of a Pantsir. The missiles don't even go fast enough to catch it. It is the fastest cruise missile in the world.

 

[Immanuel]

RBE2 AESA over Syria never needed to go active, it was under an AWACs data link the entire time so Russia has no signals intelligence on it. Russia does not have the capability to jam a 1000+ module AESA, no one does.

Considering the blast radius of ASMP-A it is a pretty good bet it will get nowhere near the autocannons of a Pantsir. The missiles don't even go fast enough to catch it. It is the fastest cruise missile in the world.

Well they may not have the ability to jam it but they have the ability to track and trace X-band radars and jamming aircraft. Don't be ridiculous, Brahmos is the only missile in the world capable of 5-10 m cruise altitude at mach 3. ASMP is capable of mach 3 at altitude and at low evel it is mach 2 a whole mach 1 slower than the Brahmos. Moreso, ASMP doesn't have terminal maneuvers.

 

[Armand2REP]

Well they may not have the ability to jam it but they have the ability to track and trace X-band radars and jamming aircraft.

What kind of signal processing does an S-400 battery have? The CPU is based on Mikron's 90nm die shrink. It can certainly process its own signals but it wasn't designed like a Spectra suite to process foreign signals. Rafale has an MDPU made up of 19 super computers. S-400 is much more simple, it only has one job; to detect and destroy incoming radar tracks. If Russia wants to sniff some trons they need something a bit more up to the task.

Don't be ridiculous, Brahmos is the only missile in the world capable of 5-10 m cruise altitude at mach 3. ASMP is capable of mach 3 at altitude and at low evel it is mach 2 a whole mach 1 slower than the Brahmos. Moreso, ASMP doesn't have terminal maneuvers.

ASMP be nimble, ASMP be quick, it has no problem nuking your candlestick.

 

[Immanuel]

ASMP A is said to be mach2+ at low altitude (nearly mach 2.5 in low alt and mach 3.5 in high alt).

Manoeuvrable? it is. At a time the platform was intended to be used for a futur anti ship missile. And ships are well equiped in CIWS and others defense missiles, so to attack it you need a manoeuvrable weapon.
more or less agile than Brahmos? I don't know. But agility is part of the design.
And Brahmos is a massive missile, with very small fins. Is it so agile? Is the pitot air intake able to support high G turn? I don't know, but it's questionnable.

But I would be pleased to see it in the french navy arsenal.

Brahmos has already demonstrated 70 degree step dive maneuvers, 90 degree dive will tested soon enough. As for 'said to be' speeds, let's stick to what is claimed, ASMP low level cruise is at mach 2 and high level is at mach 3, it was never used a Anti ship missiles probably because they couldn't get it maneuver it enough in a terminal phase, it's ok to accept it's limitations, it's an old design.

 

[Immanuel]

What kind of signal processing does an S-400 battery have? The CPU is based on Mikron's 90nm die shrink. It can certainly process its own signals but it wasn't designed like a Spectra suite to process foreign signals. Rafale has an MDPU made up of 19 super computers. S-400 is much more simple, it only has one job; to detect and destroy incoming radar tracks. If Russia wants to sniff some trons they need something a bit more up to the task.
ASMP be nimble, ASMP be quick, it has no problem nuking your candlestick.

ASMP be nimble, ASMP be quick, it has no problem nuking my candlestick, till it run's into a proverbial ditch, when smacked by a integrated net of Dicks.

 

[Sancho]

Please use the Rafale or a dedicated S400 thread.

 

[BON PLAN]

Well they may not have the ability to jam it but they have the ability to track and trace X-band radars and jamming aircraft. Don't be ridiculous, Brahmos is the only missile in the world capable of 5-10 m cruise altitude at mach 3. ASMP is capable of mach 3 at altitude and at low evel it is mach 2 a whole mach 1 slower than the Brahmos. Moreso, ASMP doesn't have terminal maneuvers.

ASMP is capable of mach 3 at altitude and at low evel it is mach 2 a whole mach 1 slower than the Brahmos. = Probably. Maybe not a whole mach, but Brahmos may be faster.

Moreso, ASMP doesn't have terminal maneuvers. = Why not? The inertial guidage can (and do), some dozen kilometers from the target, generate some well established terminal manoeuvers.

 

[BON PLAN]

ASMP low level cruise is at mach 2 and high level is at mach 3, it was never used a Anti ship missiles probably because they couldn't get it maneuver it enough in a terminal phase, it's ok to accept it's limitations, it's an old design.

ASMP A A = advanced.
It's a totally new design. not even the same dimensions than ASMP. another stato.

the rest is pure BS and Sci Fi from yourself.

 

[Sancho]

Sieh dir den Tweet von @defense_news an:

 

[asianobserve]

Sieh dir den Tweet von @defense_news an:

The only way the F-35 will lose against EF in Belgium is if politics wins.

 

[Armand2REP]

The only way the F-35 will lose against EF in Belgium is if politics wins.

If the F-35 loses it won't be the EF winning.

 

[asianobserve]

If the F-35 loses it won't be the EF winning.

Then it will be because of "bribes" that the Belgian MOD talked about before...

 

[Armand2REP]

Then it will be because of "bribes" that the Belgian MOD talked about before...

There is actually a political movement to the common defence that once Brexit is complete, anyone outside of the block will not be able to sell weapons to it.

 

[asianobserve]

There is actually a political movement to the common defence that once Brexit is complete, anyone outside of the block will not be able to sell weapons to it.

So the US will not be able to sell weapons to EU countries since it is outside the block... I don't think so.

Even if there's such a movement inside EU I don't think that it can be implemented. First, that will be against WTO rules for discrimination, second, a lot of EF suppliers are from the EU, third, UK is a critical member of NATO.

 

[Armand2REP]

So the US will not be able to sell weapons to EU countries since it is outside the block... I don't think so.

If the US doesn't stop it's protectionist practices, I think so. The first step has already begun with the €1 billion annual pool for R&D funding only available to EU manufacturers.

Even if there's such a movement inside EU I don't think that it can be implemented. First, that will be against WTO rules for discrimination, second, a lot of EF suppliers are from the EU, third, UK is a critical member of NATO.

The WTO doesn't cover military products. There is no rule in NATO that says members must buy US equipment. The EF is on it's way out, a new French-German project has already begun.