Russia had conceived a Pegasus-style system called Burlak at one point, and advertised the Tu-160 as a launch aircraft. A BLACKJACK with a Burlak mockup was exhibited at the Paris airshow a while back to show off the concept. Nothing more became of it as far as I know.
That makes perfectly good sense, I should’ve thought of that. Forgot about the second seat for the IAF 😀
Is there any reason why, with uprated engines, STOBAR wouldn’t be acceptable for a navalized EF-2000?
I wonder why they specifiy that the IAF jet will have different wings? Are they going to be that much different, and what for?
Well the thing I figured out is working great on Czech and Russian, so…
The Navy needs a new class of 6-7000 tonn SSN for protection.
Not really. Russian SSBN patrols typically take place around the Barents Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk. With that in mind, ASW ships can still provide a great deal of protection, as can land-based aviation. Now if they wanted to start patrolling in the North Atlantic on the other side of the GIUK gap, or in the mid Pacific, then I’d agree with you. But as far as I know they aren’t doing that and don’t have plans to do so in the near future either.
Tor-M2E should be the new wheeled variant of the system. Provides a bit better mobility in some areas. Same basic capability as the tracked Tor-M1 though.
Way back when this project was first announced there was a mention of Yakovlev having involvement with a potential STOL or V/STOL variant. My guess is that either Yakovlev or Sukhoi has worked to manipulate the vectored thrust engines to allow for short takeoff and landing capability.
What is so good about Tor-M1 complex , couple of countries have purchased it ?
Tor-M1 is a particularly nasty low altitude air defense system. The missile is very maneuverable and the system is highly mobile. The only drawback is that it can be easily overflown, but that makes you more visible to airborne radar sets, like those found in the Su-30MK2V. The Tor-M1 is perfect for point defense of important targets as it can take down PGMs, ARMs, and cruise missiles, and on a battlefield it can obliterate helicopters and low-flying strike aircraft. The ability to engage air to ground munitions makes it well suited for defending long-range SAM systems like the S-300P as well. Perhaps Russia is testing the waters with a short-range SAM sale to predict any potential irritation over a bigger system?
Cuba and Belarus? Doubt it. Belarus would be covered by proximity most likely, and Cuba wishes it could afford something like that. But Syria and Venezuela are certainly interesting. Syria isn’t that much better off economically than Cuba, but something like the S-500 might be up their alley to remove Israel’s Jericho ballistic missiles from the equation. Venezuela might go after the S-500 to make a point, but it’d be a waste of money as it is a ballistic missile defense system. They’d be more intelligent going after the S-400.
China has shown no interest in BMD since the failure of their earlier programs, maybe they’d be interested? Same goes for India, although they seem content to pursue the domestic route so far.
I doubt Western Europe would be allowed near the S-500. That’d likely result in some components being spirited away to the USA for study.
Yes swerve – but what about the Aegis engagement envelope. Surely a cruiser located on the east side of Taiwan – would cover the Tanker support. I can’t see why the authors remove that aspect in the analysis.
Depends on where the tanker support is located. Terrain on Formosa would wipe away a good deal of the AEGIS engagement envelope if it is trying to defend something in the strait.
The plane prototype already exists, and is based in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Borisov said.
I wonder, will the first flight be made at KnAAPO, or will they ship it to Zhukovskiy for initial trials?
That’s just putting a new spin on the development of the S-500 system based on the current political climate, nothing more.
[color=red]Just realized this one hit 20 pages, fire up Episode V when there is more info to pass around.[/color]
lock on was achieved at 319.5 km and target was destroyed at 228km. u dont activate lockon 100km further than target. ur in search/tracking mode.
Wrong. Launch range was 228 km. Read the article. Plus it was a test environment, the radar may have been undergoing an evaluation as well. And this has been translated from Russian, they may have meant that they had begun tracking the target at 320 km. Either way they clearly state that the launch distance was 228 km.
why it cant? larger radars and missiles have more sensitive seekers.
Because you’re just making that up with absolutely no evidence whatsoever other than “missiles are fast” or something equally absurd.