But HiBEX was a very short range ABM. HEDI: High EndoAtmospheric…

May be HEDI did 200 g at the end of its path. As far I know, it was IR guided. So, with such an extreme acceleration in the thick layers of the atmosphere it would be blinded. Also, its big fins will “burn”. Obviously above 20.000 m such problems are considerably lighted. Just my opinion. Had HEDI loitering capability? On the other hand Sprint would have capability to intercept at lower levels.
It will be interesting to know burn-out times and speeds to made some guess about peak and average accelerations.

Well, sooner or later NATO will have to reconciliate with the fact that was unable to cause damage to a much smaller, older and constrained armed force. That conclusion was not only outlined in Belgrade, but also in Moscow, Beijing, Teheran and even in many western capitals. It can be accepted or not. But it cannot be changed.

Even S-400 will not prevent attacks on civillian infrastructure. Off-course it can rise the cost of such attacks.

The Serbian SA network operated, albeit with reduced efficiency, but operated. So the term “successful” doesn’t correspond to such a SEAD campaign.

But, it was rendered ineffective? It operated in a “hide & snipe” mode but operated. Lets ignore the numerous planes damaged. A F-117, a couple of F16 plus 2 dozen Tomahawks downed indicate that operated. Tomahawks were consistently downed along the whole conflict. True, its efficiency was downgraded by the enormous NATO air-power, but the “hide & snipe” was the right operating mode because a frontal engagement would lead to the complete annihilation of the SAM system.

Also I accept than the maintenance subject played a role in the Apache inactivity. But the didn’t tried to support the Albanese guerrillas while these guerrillas were decimated by the VJ. Apaches also flown some carefully publicitated show-off & bragging missions … on Albania. This is a strong indicative that NATO considered Kosovo not safe enough to the Apaches.

The NATO required HARMS for their missions and did succeed

No. It did’t succeed. Lots ended on ground. The SEAD campaing failed.

Like I said, I took no pleasure in the air bombing of Serbia, but I’m guessing unlike you I was a witness to the mass graves uncovered in Bosnia-Herzegovina, saw what the Serb backed militias did in that country, and when they tried to ethnically cleanse Kosovo using similar tactics then as far as I’m concerned they lost the right to make any complaints about what NATO did. Call it moral equivalence, but if you think collateral damage of war is the same as genocide against civilians that’s your own values at work.

So, Usama was right using moral arguments to justify the destruction of the WTC. 😮 Jihadist even can claim to have “moral superiority”. Ehhh, he also can claim some sort of Clausewitzian rationality behind the attack: To induct the “evil west” to attack some Muslim countries in order to bleed them in the Muslim heartland.

Military equipment unable to fullfill that is useless.

That’s true. But it can hide the inability of NATO to destroy Serbian militar hardware. It is senseless to deny this obvious inability.

Serbs not given up so soon and NATO was forced to start the ground operation, they would have paid a very high blood price for the inflated figures of Serb forces they thought they destroyed.

That’s also true. The Serbian fault was the inability to force NATO to start the ground campaing were NATO troops were to be subject to bleed. In fact the Serbian Army just terminated the albanian terrorists and then … to sleep. NATO soldiers didn`t come.

Conclusion:

The Serb capitulation was not caused by the military losses but rather the damage being done to civilian infrastructure.