S500 VS F35 and F22

The American portal estimated the possibilities of Russian anti-aircraft missile system "Prometheus" in the battle against the American fighters of the fifth generation.



The Russians created a relatively inexpensive weapon with an air defense system, and the US fighter squadron became useless and meaningless

And comments on the video.



Soon, the Russians will free ordinary Americans from the power of madmen in the White House and the Pentagon.

And we can again, as in 1945, jointly destroy terrorism and tolerant idiots both in the US and Russia .... And all over the world.

What do you think about it?

 

Here's another interesting video. Now we can say that the fighters of the fourth generation of the US Naval Aviation are not protected against the air defense of Iran and the DPRK



The Yemeni rebels posted a video on the Internet that clearly shows how the surface-to-air missile strikes the F-15 Saudi Air Force. Judging by the shots presented, the Yemeni insurgents received at their disposal anti-aircraft missile systems capable of overcoming the defenses of the fourth-generation "Eagle" fighters manufactured by the American company McDonald Douglas.
These aircraft are equipped with the same protection - enemy radiation warning systems, as well as a kit for the ejection of heat traps and dipole reflectors as F / A-18, which form the backbone of the fleet of the United States carrier fleet.

What modification was the dead F-15, is unknown. But it is worth taking into account the information that starting in 2015, "McDonald Douglas" delivers the upgraded F-15E, and this is a 4 ++ fighter with the appropriate avionics. Which specific missile the aircraft was shot down is also unknown.

 

Great. That will save us a lot of money. We won't need to fix our broken fighter planes.

 

The Saudi F-15 was apparently not shot down.

Saudi F-15 Survives Hit From Yemeni Surface-To-Air Missile

https://www.funker530.com/survives-hit-yemeni/

I was skeptical when the video ended as soon as the missile/projectile hit the plane.

 

Well, there is no factual evidence or proof in that video that the S-500 can shoot down an F-35/F-22 with any regularity.

Or that it's radar can even see an F-35 or especially the stealthier F-22.

I am not saying it can't...but that video does not prove that it can.

 

This money is still stealing officials in the Pentagon and the White House ... But the Russians are happy to help you.

 

Perhaps you are right and the plane survived. Today, it is very often possible to fall into the trap the propaganda of one side or another. For example, most recently Saudi Arabia and Trump assured the whole world that the "Patriots" shot down a Yemeni rocket, but later it turned out that the "Patriots" could not bring down this missile.

 

F-15 are big, tough birds. Much tougher than the f-22 and f-35 divas. It's built to fight.

 

If the time ever comes, it wont make any difference

 

Given that the vast majority of our air force consists of 4th gen fighters .. the fact that the Houthi's in Yemen can hit these aircraft with Surface to air missiles - and it is highly doubtful that this was something nearly as advanced as the Russian stuff.... this is a problem.

 

Given that your link states that the Saudi's admit that an F-15 was hit by a Houthi SAM .. what is there to be skeptical about.

It matters not if the plane "luckily" managed to make it back .. it will never fly again. The point here the vast majority of our fighters are 4th gen. The fact that a relatively unsophisticated SAM (its not like the Houthi's have modern Russian technology) hit one of our planes is troubling.

 

If aircraft were immune to SAM batteries there'd be no use for SAM batteries. **** happens.

An F-117 Nighthawk was shot down in 1999 because NATO assume they were immune. Had the pilots known that wasn't the case they likely would have been more careful.

 

The chances of Russia deciding to shoot an American jet down are extremely small, the chances they would be able to fire a second time are even slimmer. My Illusions are not Destroyed and impressed I am not.

You really need to step it up ther trolly boy.

 

If you hope to obtain technical details about Western stealth units ... forget about that.

In Italy we produce F35.

So ... fairies flies, at least this is what traditions say. May be they are stealth creatures ... one never knows.

P.S. is this post a nonsense? Yes it is, since a thread about classified weapons or units is simply a nonsense. Without public and confirmed information we are discussing about fairies.

I can sustain, in this thread, that Italian engineers are producing F35 able to annihilate S500 devices. Nice ... how could someone prove I'm wrong?

 

They shot Tom Hanks down over Moscow.

 

Really? I do not doubt it, but can you give me a link to this?

I had no idea it did not bring it down.

 

Where is your link to proof of this? My guess is that you are just assuming.

F-15's are not cheap. If it managed to fly back to Saudi Arabia and landed on her own...I am quite sure it is repairable.


Plus, we do not know the circumstances of the hit. There are untold reasons as to why the missile struck home. Pilot error, lucky shot...who knows.
For one thing, the plane appeared to be flying relatively straight and level. Not the best way to avoid incoming missiles.

Anyway, the F-15 was designed in the 1960's. That it can be hit in 2017 is no big shock.

But again, I need to know the exact circumstances of the entire incident before I am passing final judgement.

 

Those fighters typically wouldn't try to get past 1st class air defenses. From what I've seen, the US takes out air defense systems with Wild Weasel type units using missiles such as AGM-88 to take out the radar systems controlling the SAM before sending in the other fighters and bombers.

 

During the war in Yugoslavia the Serbs hit 2 F117A stealth bombers. One crashed but the other was able to make it back. The plane that made it back could not be repaired.

Perhaps it is possible to fix the F-15 but this is unlikely. It is not like you just patch it up with Bondo and paint over it. Whether or not the plane can be fixed is irrelevant to the central point in any case. That it was hit with a relatively low teck Houthi missile is what is relevant.

The F-15 Eagle is an improved and enhanced version of the F-15 that was developed later and entered service in 1989. Either way... aircraft of this era make up the vast majority of our air force.

I agree that this is not a "big shock". Missile technology has advanced in leaps and bounds over the past 3 decades. What is a bit disconcerting is that this technology has filtered down to small rebel groups and that relatively low tech versions of this technology is able to hit F-15's.

I passed judgment a long time ago. The Serbs also shot down an F-16 during the war in Yugoslavia. This was using modified 1960's Russian missile technology.

After the wall fell Russia realized it could not compete with the US ship for ship/plane for plane. What the did was focus on niche technologies such as missiles. In the mid 1990's they introduced the "Sunburn". This was a Super sonic anti ship cruise missile that skims along the ocean. This missile is not detected until it breaks the horizon at which point the ship has 45-50 seconds to react.

At the time we had little or no realistic defense and these missiles were over a decade ahead of anything we had. The new versions (Onyx and so on) are faster, stealthy and smart - doing evasive maneuvers prior to impact. Ship reaction time is reduced to 25-30 seconds.

The Russian idea has turned out to be a good one. You can build a whole lot of missiles at 1 M a pop for the cost of a 10 Billion dollar aircraft carrier (10,000 for those who are not good at math).

A carrier group might get lucky and manage to shoot down 1 or two of these missiles but, against a full scale missile attack involving many sorties - no contest.

Russia then started coordinating its efforts on missile technology with China and India. The Indian version is called the Brahmos.
The latest Russian missile effort is called the Zircon and its hypersonic.

https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/russia-develops-mach-six-anti-ship-missile

Russia also leads the world in Surface to Air missile technology. S-300, S-400 and now S-500 System. If our planes can be hit by some lower tech SAM used by the Houthis (they do not have the S-300 system never mind the more advanced versions) .. good luck against something more sophisticated.

The problem is that missile technology has advanced much faster than the ability to defend against such threats.

Such technology is on the verge of rendering much of our navy and air force obsolete. I would argue that it has relatively obsolete against a modern power possessing this advanced missile technology. Certainly Russia and China.

What is more is that this advanced technology is filtering down into less sophisticated systems .. making even small groups such as the Houthi's a much bigger threat than most would expect.

Those who study cycles in history have been expecting this for a long time. Empires rise due to technological innovation leading to military superiority leading to economic hegemony.

The fall happens due to the natural and almost unstoppable tendency of technology to spread. Once technology starts to spread the cost of projecting power increases with time ... to the point where the empire bankrupts itself trying to protect its hegemony (otherwise known as policing the world)

We are witnessing this happen.

 

Well, the second one was never confirmed. Besides, the F-117 was a whole different ball game. It's bread-and-butter was stealth. You cannot just patch it back together and hope...it has to maintain it's radar semi-invisibility. Not so with the F-15...it has virtually no radar invisibility.

We do not know the circumstances of the hit. Plus, we do know that the pilot was not taking evasive action...which seems pretty stupid to me.
It appears the Saudi pilot assumed the Houthi's could not shoot them down, so just flew straight and relatively level, deployed a few flares and figured that was enough.
Again, we know very few of the circumstances.

We have no idea what the S-500 is capable of doing. None. It has not even been used in anger yet. I do not even think the S-400 was used in anger yet (which the S-500 is based on).
So there is no way to know it's capabilities.
And both Russia and America will say how great it is. Russia so they can sell a lot of them and get some hard cash. America, so Lockheed Martin can say 'see, our 4'th generation fighters are no good...we need to build WAY more F-35's'.

I am not believing in these missiles until they see combat and excel.

But, America is intending to build **** loads of F-35's anyway...so what's the big deal?

 

It is not like we are completely ignorant of the capabilities of Soviet missiles. They sell the S-300 on the global market.
We also know that planes (F-15, F-16 and "stealthy" F117) have been hit by missiles that are much more inferior to the S-300, never mind the newer generation S-400, S-500.

So we know at least that much. We also know the advances in computer technology over the last 3 decades and we also know that it is much easier to build a new missile than it is to build a new plane.

As far as the F-35 is concerned... this is a lemon of an aircraft. Many countries such as Australia, Canada and Germany do not want them anymore because the reviews are so bad. (This is assuming we can actually get the thing in the air .... have we done this yet ? As of June of last year they were grounded indefinitely due to oxygen issues)

This plane was supposed to be ready more than decade ago and it is still not ready. Manned fighters will be replaced by piloted drones AI in the relatively near future. Already AI technology has been incorporated into missiles. It is a simple physical reality that a man can only withstand a g-force of around 8. A missile or unmanned plane does not have this limitation.

It is high time we stopped trying to police the world anyway. It is far to expensive and will only get more expensive as technology continues to expand. Trying to project power in the way that we are doing ( living in the fantasy world of past glory rather than the real world) is endangering our long term economic security. I realize it is hard to let go of the "necessary illusion" but that is what it is.

China and Russia are laughing the opportunity we squandered. We are still in a very good position but if we continue to go down the path we are going we are going to squander more of this opportunity away.

There is no massive army massing at our gates trying to invade the homeland. Going to war with Russia means MAD .. Mutually Assured Destruction and so there is no point in building up a conventional force to defend against Russia or other present or future superpowers.

The only reason we are maintaining the over 1 Trillion/per year annual spend (Total Military Spending) is to put money into the pockets of the international financiers who own the military industrial complex and the banks.

 

There is point in building up conventional forces vs other superpowers.

A blocking force.
War can be won in the manouvre phase. Quite without giving battle at all.



Drones have a critical weakness, they can be hacked.
Far from drones being the ultimate future of air weapons, they are a technology that like stealth, gives temporary advantage until countered.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...east/saudi-missile-defense.html?smid=tw-share

 

A) I HATE America trying to police the world. The Founding Fathers wanted a small peace time army with a huge militia...and I agree with that.
B) I HATE the F-35 for anyone except the Marines - they need new fighter-bombers and the F-35B is their only V/STOL choice. I was always for building more F-22's and use a navalised version for the Navy. They are better in almost every way to the F-35 and they do not cost that much more.
C) I assume you are talking about unmanned fighters. But how can you guarantee that at no time in the future, people won't be able to hack such a plane? Remote-controlled vehicles can - as far as I am aware - ALWAYS be hacked eventually.
Sure, they have huge advantages. But until there is no way possible to hack one, I do not think they are practical for your whole fighter force.
I like unmanned bombers. Just pre-program them and launch them so they cannot be jammed (like the X-47B).

 

One of the few areas that I agree with you. I also have voiced concern about too many weapons systems depend on a particular tech, in this case satellite control. How has the F-35B performed?