India S-400 Acquisition - News Updates and Discussions

IndianHawk

New Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,675
Country flag
MKI happened eons ago. The US started restricting Russian defense efforts starting Ukraine. But the US has so far been selective in its implementation depending on the importance to the US of the potential Russian client.

In Turkey's case, aside from strategic considerations, the other US fear with Erdogan's S-400 misadventure is the very likely possibility that Russian technicians can gain access to F-35 data in Turkey.

So you see, it's not really S-400 capabilities that the US is worried about. Especially so now that it has and its Israeli allies have gathered a lot of electronic data on S-400 in Syria and the Israelis in particular is continually testing S-400 with its ops in and around Syrian airspace.
It is all that plus s400 capabilities. It disturbs the balance within NATO. Giving turkey an edge over
NATO just as it gives India tremendous advantage over Pakistan and that limits the role USA and us technology (f16 to Pak) can play against India.

It renders older us plane like f16-15-18 vulnerable and their export opportunities dwindle. Even f35 is not so secure from S400.

And once a nation tests power of s400 if wants more see the Turkish effort to join s500 development which will render f35 very vulnerable.

S400 and it's future versions are very dangerous to USA direct and indirect authority.

That is why so much effort by USA against this particular system.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk
 

Absolut_Vodka

Quarantined Abdul
Banned
Joined
Feb 16, 2019
Messages
1,413
Likes
7,073
Country flag
India will never go for F 35. It requires authorization codes before any op and run by servers of US DoD.

India won't even trust USA with F21. Imagine if same F21 with weapons package and avionics is offered by France or Russia, India would have jumped at it no?
 

Vijyes

New Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2016
Messages
1,978
Likes
1,723
India will never go for F 35. It requires authorization codes before any op and run by servers of US DoD.

India won't even trust USA with F21. Imagine if same F21 with weapons package and avionics is offered by France or Russia, India would have jumped at it no?
India will not jump at anything without Technology transfer. Technology transfer is the key and anyone who doesn't give it is not a desirable vendor
 

Vijyes

New Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2016
Messages
1,978
Likes
1,723
MKI happened eons ago. The US started restricting Russian defense efforts starting Ukraine. But the US has so far been selective in its implementation depending on the importance to the US of the potential Russian client.

In Turkey's case, aside from strategic considerations, the other US fear with Erdogan's S-400 misadventure is the very likely possibility that Russian technicians can gain access to F-35 data in Turkey.

So you see, it's not really S-400 capabilities that the US is worried about. Especially so now that it has and its Israeli allies have gathered a lot of electronic data on S-400 in Syria and the Israelis in particular is continually testing S-400 with its ops in and around Syrian airspace.
USA is worried that it will lose influence and hence dependency of other countries which maintain strength of USA. It is not about hurting Russian but just about maintaining USA as the dominant supplier of weapons to everyone and in turn create an ecosystem of spare parts supply and other forms of dependence which can be used a strategic leverage.

CAATSA, however is useless against anyone who already doesn't depend on USA. O
 

aarav

जय परशुराम‍।
New Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2015
Messages
1,408
Likes
5,399
Country flag
Don’t Believe the Russian Hype

xxx

The most notable example of such fearmongering is the often-cited claim that the Russian S-400 air defense system can create no-go zones reaching 400 kilometers (250 miles) from Kaliningrad. If true—or just believed to be true—this could have major consequences. If NATO is seen as unable to protect its Baltic members from Russian aggression, this puts its fundamental collective defense commitment into question. Thus, Russia has a strategic interest in making its missile capabilities seem more threatening than they are.

Drawing on expertise at the Swedish Defense Research Agency, we have published a report—“Bursting the Bubble”—that takes a closer look at Russia’s A2/AD capabilities in the Baltic Sea Region. We find that Russia’s long-range missile systems, though capable, fall notably short of the Kremlin’s maximalist claims. The technological limitations of the Russian missile systems, vulnerabilities apparent from their field operations in Syria, and the range of possible countermeasures available to NATO, suggest that Russia’s no-go “bubbles” are smaller than claimed, more penetrable, and arguably also burstable.

Claims of far-reaching Russian A2/AD capabilities are mainly based on three systems: the S-400, the Bastion anti-ship system, and the Iskander ballistic missile. But early analyses have often equated maximum range with effective range, underestimated the inherent problems of hitting moving targets at large distances, and ignored a wide range of possible countermeasures. Together, this has led to the widespread overestimation Russia’s missile capabilities.

The S-400 system is often said to have a 250-mile range and to be capable of intercepting a wide range of targets, from transport aircraft to fighter jets, using a set of different missiles. However, the longest-range missile in the system, the 40N6, is not yet operational and has been plagued by problems in development and testing. Currently, the S-400 system is mainly a threat to large high-value aircraft such as Airborne Warning and Control System planes at medium to high altitudes (between 10,000 and 30,000 feet), at a range of 120 to 150 miles.

In contrast, the effective range against agile fighter jets and cruise missiles operating at low altitudes can be as little as 12 to 22 miles. Moreover, while an S-400 battery can use several search radars to find targets, it is dependent on a single engagement radar to track targets and to guide the missiles in flight. This makes the battery vulnerable to attacks targeting the engagement radar and to attacks by swarms of cruise missiles.

xxx

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/0...en-kaliningrad-baltic-states-annexation-nato/
Foreign policy is Pentagon sponsored site ,The Russian SAM also took out the U2 spy planes in the cold war which was deemed to be out of any Soviet SAM range, similar instance can be seen with stealth bomber of NATO downed by Serbian SAM system of Russian origin,so article alludes that system might not be effective at maximum ranges ,same can be said about Patriot system ,other point about a swarm attack and ARM and cruise missiles,these hitjob of an article has nothing substantial but general points of limitations of SAMs,as far India is concerned S400 is a done deal ,US has already lost a negotiating power after GSP withdrawal,India and PM Modi won't back down from the deal,S400 has certain role for IAF ,we aren't fighting NATO's Stealth Fighters ,most advance aircraft enemy can bring is F16 and Su35,S400 it essential part of Integrated layered Air defense system India is building,any bait like F35 won't change her mind.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,558
Country flag
India will not jump at anything without Technology transfer. Technology transfer is the key and anyone who doesn't give it is not a desirable vendor
Nobody will transfer the tech of their latest fighter.
 

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
New Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
32,663
Likes
151,106
Country flag
Every stupid statement that is coming out of the U.S And it’s lackies in India is because they are trying stop data localisation laws that are about to be passed.

Look at it from this perspective and every thing will be clear to you. Once data localisation laws are in place American SM companies will come under Indian judicial scrutiny, and the Americans loose their edge in controlling India’s narrative on SM.
 

WolfPack86

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
10,571
Likes
16,993
Country flag
India must go head purchase S-400 missile system and ignore America warning. If America put sanction on India America is bigger loser. America will lose India support against China. When will India will get S-400 missle system.
 

Shashank Nayak

New Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
5,153
Likes
17,261
Country flag
Every stupid statement that is coming out of the U.S And it’s lackies in India is because they are trying stop data localisation laws that are about to be passed.

Look at it from this perspective and every thing will be clear to you. Once data localisation laws are in place American SM companies will come under Indian judicial scrutiny, and the Americans loose their edge in controlling India’s narrative on SM.
Perfect.. and NSA would not be able to run its analytics programs on social media data stored on Indian servers..
 

Jameson Emoni

New Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
1,473
Likes
4,250
Every stupid statement that is coming out of the U.S And it’s lackies in India is because they are trying stop data localisation laws that are about to be passed.

Look at it from this perspective and every thing will be clear to you. Once data localisation laws are in place American SM companies will come under Indian judicial scrutiny, and the Americans loose their edge in controlling India’s narrative on SM.
The bias against BJP by all SM companies seemed quite deliberate.
 

Jameson Emoni

New Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
1,473
Likes
4,250
India will never go for F 35. It requires authorization codes before any op and run by servers of US DoD.

India won't even trust USA with F21. Imagine if same F21 with weapons package and avionics is offered by France or Russia, India would have jumped at it no?
I think the main reason is cost. A F-35 costs way more than a S-400 missile. An A2/AD weapon like S-400 evolves more easily than a complicated airplane like F-35. For example: F-35 is barely out but S-400 has already morphed into S-500 which is a deadlier version of S-400.

However, you cannot carry out airstrike with a defensive weapon's platform like A2/AD so essentially you need weapons like F-35 that can penetrate enemy space to carry out strike missions. Indian military needs both offensive and defensive capabilities.

The real question is: Can India afford both S-400 and F-35?
 
Last edited:

IndianHawk

New Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,675
Country flag
I think the main reason is cost. A F-35 costs way more than a S-400 missile. An A2/AD weapon like S-400 evolves more easily than a complicated airplane like F-35. For example: F-35 is barely out but S-400 has already morphed into S-500 which is a deadlier version of S-400.

However, you cannot carry out offensive airstrike with an A2/AD weapon so essentially you need weapons like F-35 that can penetrate enemy space to carry out missions. Indian military needs both offensive and defensive capabilities.
That is why amca is coming. India will develop amca stealth by looking at capabilities of s400 systems too. So that it can beat s400 and it's numerous Chinese copies once in service.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk
 

Jameson Emoni

New Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
1,473
Likes
4,250
That is why amca is coming. India will develop amca stealth by looking at capabilities of s400 systems too. So that it can beat s400 and it's numerous Chinese copies once in service.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk
A2/AD weapons are asymmetric response to a sophisticated offense. Asymmetric weapon's design relies on fundamental vulnerabilities of a complicated weapon system. An aircraft on a strike mission in an enemy territory is vulnerable to detection and elimination. It mitigates these threats by various BVR techniques that can jam detection radars and if needed seek them out for destruction. As a last resort, among other things, the invading aircraft also uses specialized maneuvers and deflection tools to escape AAM or SAM missile attack. The ever increasing velocity of modern SAMs have made it very difficult for invading aircraft so current generation strike aircraft heavly rely on stealth. However with the use of multiple radars that can randomly shift the intensity of emitted radiation, it becomes very difficult for invading aircraft to seek and destroy them before getting hit by one of the high speed SAM missiles.

Unless there is some drastic shift in paradigm, I personally think A2/AD platforms will continue to have upper hand for considerable time to come. This does not mean we should not build or acquire aircraft with stealth capabilities.
 
Last edited:

itsme

New Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
743
Likes
1,382
Country flag
Can someone help me understand isn't it better to go for THAAD instead of S400? For the sole reason China and Turkey has them which means there are chances for PAF and PLAAF to figure out its weakness and holes and develop a counter strategy against our S400s? In case of THAAD we dont have to worry about this.
 

Sanglamorre

New Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
5,968
Likes
27,171
Country flag
Can someone help me understand isn't it better to go for THAAD instead of S400? For the sole reason China and Turkey has them which means there are chances for PAF and PLAAF to figure out its weakness and holes and develop a counter strategy against our S400s? In case of THAAD we dont have to worry about this.
THAAD is made for US requirements, which means it's good against ICBMs thrown at it, but not very good for defence against ingressing aircraft and short range missiles and drones.

Russia on the other hand makes equipment to defend its homeland. This is something we need to understand: the western powers make equipment for invading and conducting battles from a distance. The eastern powers make equipment to defend their homeland and fight wars close by.
 

Cutting Edge 2

Space Power
New Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2017
Messages
984
Likes
1,969
THAAD is made for US requirements, which means it's good against ICBMs thrown at it, but not very good for defence against ingressing aircraft and short range missiles and drones.

Russia on the other hand makes equipment to defend its homeland. This is something we need to understand: the western powers make equipment for invading and conducting battles from a distance. The eastern powers make equipment to defend their homeland and fight wars close by.
Well said,:yo:

Also I want to add to that, western powers have virtually unlimited budget while Russia (eastern bloc) have to set their priories and get maximum bang out of their buck.
 

Jameson Emoni

New Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2018
Messages
1,473
Likes
4,250
Can someone help me understand isn't it better to go for THAAD instead of S400? For the sole reason China and Turkey has them which means there are chances for PAF and PLAAF to figure out its weakness and holes and develop a counter strategy against our S400s? In case of THAAD we dont have to worry about this.
I believe THAAD was not available to India at the time India submitted RFP for an A2/AD system. At that time US only offered Patriot. S-400 due to its more comprehensive range, came out as a winner against Patriot. If US had made Patriot and THAAD both available to India during the trial, I think there was a good chance that Patriot/THAAD would have emerged as a winner. I think F-35 had the similar story; it was not available to India when India submitted RFP for a multi-role fighter. US offered F-16 and F-18 only. Therefore it was an easy win for French Rafale.
 

Vijyes

New Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2016
Messages
1,978
Likes
1,723
I believe THAAD was not available to India at the time India submitted RFP for an A2/AD system. At that time US only offered Patriot. S-400 due to its more comprehensive range, came out as a winner against Patriot. If US had made Patriot and THAAD both available to India during the trial, I think there was a good chance that Patriot/THAAD would have emerged as a winner. I think F-35 had the similar story; it was not available to India when India submitted RFP for a multi-role fighter. US offered F-16 and F-18 only. Therefore it was an easy win for French Rafale.
This is a superficial speculation. THAAD is not same as S400. Also, there was no competitive bidding for S400 with any other system. Several other conditions like technology sharing also factor

Similarly, Rafale was not bought just due to lack of F35. Even if F35 was offered for sale, condition of offsets would still give F35 the edge.
 

Articles

Top