Can Tomahawk missiles be stopped? S-400 couldn't do shit.

>>33601728
>S-400 didn't do shit
ftfy

>using top of the line missile defense systems to take down a tomahawk thats blowing up a gas tank

>>33601728
Why waste the money on an old airbase with planes in repair parked.

>>33601753
Would be great for marketing, this is one of russia top bets for exports. Also they allow their protected country to be attacked.

>>33601791
and if they failed it would be been bad for their exports. Why chance it on that target?

>>33601728
>Can Tomahawk missiles be stopped? S-400 couldn't do shit.
No anon, Russians are incapable of defeating American hardware.

>>33601738
Russia literally had no reason not to shoot them down. It wouldn't have started a war with the US and would have demonstrated RUSSIA STR000NK

Assad: Vlad, what the fuck? Why no use S-400
Vlad: Not want to make big show. How about some new Migs?
Assad: Are you jewing me?
Vlad: Happy Passover

>>33604044
>Vlad: Happy Passover
kek

>>33604028
>Given advanced warning about the strike
>Shoot them down anyway
>Literally no reason not to interfere with a US strike against not your troops
You're dumb.

>>33601728
It would probably cost more money to destroy the cruise missiles than just repair the base.

Didn't like 10 get shot down?

>>33601728
You know what can stop a Tomahawk? A system of morals which prevents such aggresive weaponary from being created. Missiles are bad, mmkay?

>>33605410
No.
You may think, but...
Still no.

File: 1472509028588.jpg (169KB, 1200x677px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1200x677px

>>33601728
>>33601728
>People actually think the S-400 is some sort of AA wonder weapon that can magically take anything down and is the only piece of anti air the the Russians have
>What is Tor and Pantsir

>>33601728
>flying under 100ft

good luck

>>33605247
Russia was against the strikes and bitched about them for days. Shooting down cruise missiles would have been a great demonstration of strength and Russian power.

>>33601728
I doubt an S-400 can hit a target flying as low as a Tomahawk. I could be wrong though.

Russia didn't fire anything, syria by themselves managed to down 37 of the 58, 1 crashed itself lol

File: Buk.jpg (189KB, 1242x810px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1242x810px

How about Buks?

S-300, S-400 and Pantsir were all in Syria. None of them had any effect on the airbase strike. That tells you everything you need to know.

>>33605594
Being against the strikes is not the same as wanting to escalate conflict with the US. Interfering with the US strike would have been a great way to get three more full DDGs worth of explosives to come their way.

Would have definitely been a great demonstration of strength and power after they got their shit pushed in by 200 missiles actually aimed at them.

Again, you're dumb.

If the S-400 is so hot shit why doesn't Russia publish their radar data to show they could have taken down the Tomahawks if they wanted to? That would be a simple way to restore their credibility.

>>33605613

these strikes have made it easy to pick out the vatniks trying to defend their shitty AA defences.

File: 1490543339137.jpg (289KB, 840x839px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 840x839px

>>33605696
>wants russia to publish classified radar tracking data


fuck off, idiot.

>>33605709
>shitty AA defences
>defences
Also
>Russians pullout, no AA was used
>AA is shit!
Really makes me think, if you're going to be retarded could you actually say something that isn't baseless?
Hell even saying that the Russians are pussies for not standing up is more legitimate.

File: 1484148098251.jpg (35KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x360px

>using S-400 to shoot down subsonic yankjunk

AHAHHAHAAAXAXAXAXAXAXAXA

>>33605739

When that Malaysian airliner was shot down by a Buk in Ukraine, the Russians published their radar data trying to prove a Ukrainian Su-25 shot down the plane. Makes you think ...

>>33605410
60 were launched, 58 hit the base, one had a booster separation failure and hit the ocean, another had a guidance failure and was aborted over Lebanon.

>>33605973
whats this i heard about only
28 hitting the base?

>>33606175

You must have heard that from Baghdad Bob.

>>33605625
No. Those are optimized for stopping airliners.

>>33606175
>Number changes every time

That was the Russian version until basically every single source ever confirmed 58/59 hit, including eventually the Russians.

>>33605764
>could you actually say something that isn't baseless?

Well, he did say the strikes made it easy to pick out the vatniks in these threads, and you are radiating maximum butthurt on all frequencies.

Well, low alt cruise missiles fly under radar horizon right up until they're almost on you.

High alt SAMs aren't going to do shit to them

Low alt SAMs can get some if they're running on automatic, but it's a numbers game here; more inbound than you have to throw out, then you lose

Nothing is going to stop a 70+ Tomahawk spam on you; that's just how it goes

>>33606175
28? What do you mean 25 missiles hit? You think laughable americanski technologie could even manage to make 23 missiles hit? They couldn't even hit a static airbase with 20 missiles. 15 of their most advanced missiles might have hit and didn't even take out any functional aircraft.

File: vatnikbuttrage.jpg (37KB, 604x483px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 604x483px

>>33605776
The US used a patriot to shoot down a consumer drone just to prove a point.
Weak and insignificant russia failed to hit a single missle despite them being much easier to track and hit.
Besides, russia can't claim cost savings on account of not engaging because the amount of desperate damage control needed to be done by the vatnik shill brigades.

This episode humiliated russia immensely, no matter how you spin it.
Russia swore up and down it would protect Assad forces no matter what.
That leaves us with the following alternatives.
>the US told putin to bend over and take it like the good little whore he is and putin stood down the russian defenses
>russian S-400, Tor-M1 and pantsir are worthless piles of trash, only hyped by russian propaganda
>russia lies and won't protect allies despite what putin whines and cries in the UN

Personally I find the second option most likely, russia has never ever shown their systems capable of engaging anything else than slow flying targets at high altitude.
This will hurt sales since now everyone knows russian trash is as useful as a hat made of chocolate hat in Texas.

>>33601728
>I believe Russian's attempted to shoot down American missiles over a mud country
>I believe that Russian's would risk the loss of global customers over sand people

hahaha kill yourself.

As I recall, that Russian public relations general dude initially said 23 Tomahawks hit and they didn't know where the other 36 went. Isn't an air defense system supposed to keep track of unknown objects flying around in your airspace? ha ha

>>33606334
>risk the loss of global customers
What fucking customers? They are sanctioned by anyone who matters and Iran, Uzbekistan and your other pet dictators wouldn't care about what USA said in any case.
Now they have shown that their systems are completely incapable at defeating a bog standard cruise missile strike, no one will buy it other than those who russia orders to do so.
If russia was capable but didn't engage, it shows how russia will fall to their knees when the US tells them to suck their dick. No one who would buy a complicated system if they know support would dry up as soon as the US tells russia to bend over.

>>33606202

According to Russia the Malaysian airliner was shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25. They even showed radar plots trying to prove it. I have to admit nobody beats the Russians at lying in public with a straight face.

>>33603973
>>No anon, Russians are incapable of defeating American hardware.
At least, that is what you should believe, lol.

>>33605410
Other stories says 59 launched (1 failure) 23 hit the base (or rather territory around the base, since the base was operational again in less than 12 hours). 36 missing, supposedly destroyed. And guess, how many missiles S-400 division have on the ready? 36.

File: 1491824398132m.jpg (88KB, 488x1024px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 488x1024px

>>33606535
Then the russian MoD came out and admitted that they are lying whores and that at least 44 targets where hit.
Independent sources confirmed 58 strikes and that russia lies, is so poor they have to sell their women as whores and that their word is worth less than the piss and vomit stains on their pants has been known since time immemorial.

Russia should get rid of all its air defense systems and find some other way to defend their country. Air defense has brought them nothing but grief:

Soviet/Russian air defense failed to stop a Cessna that eventually landed in Red Square. The resulting loss of confidence in the military was a factor leading to the demise of the Soviet Union.

Russian air defense forces shot down a Korean airliner that accidentally entered their airspace leading to global condemnation and scorn and also contributing to the demise of the Soviet Union.

Russian Buk missile shot down a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine leading to massive sanctions and crippling the Russian economy.

Russian S-400 proves impotent against Tomahawk missile strikes resulting in global humiliation at the failure of Russian military technology and potential loss of sales.

I wonder what will be the next sad addition to this list?

>>33606665
>I wonder what will be the next sad addition to this list?
I'm going to put my money on Russian S-400 shooting down Russian fighters.

>>33605696
My guess is Russia doesn't feel the need to justify their actions to some fat autists on the internet. I'm sure they the last thing Russians are interested in is "restoring their lost credibility"

>>33606287
>>33606287
this. end of thread.

>>33606535

>2 roubles have been deposited into your account, comrade.

>>33605696
You do realize most people don't even grasp the concept of credibility, and will just follow the claims that suit their views the best ?

https://twitter.com/XSovietNews/status/851526686260830208
they don't want to

>>33606912
Rubles are no good in deutschland.
>>33606572
It allways make me laugh, when /k state anonimous "independant sourses" as a "proof" of something. Realy displays the intellectual level good.

>>33604028
>Russia literally had no reason not to shoot them down.
How can such braindead autists even exist on /k/?
/k/ is supposed to be a board about smart and mature topics for smart and mature people.

File: 1490556613832.gif (899KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 600x600px

>>33601738

http://www.rferl.org/a/weher-was-the-s-300-s-400-missile-defense-systems/28417014.html
>Aytech Bizhev, the former deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force, told Interfax that the "flight path was set to bypass our missile-defense system so that they would not enter our strike range. The Americans are also not idiots."
>He told the Russian news agency that the Tomahawks would have been much less effective had they entered the range of Russian air defense. "We can't rule out that a part of the rockets would be able to get through with such a huge mass strike, but we have not only S-400s there, but also Pantsirs that are very effective against these kinds of cruise missiles at low altitudes. It would have been an entirely different picture."

>>33607036
Why would they? Best case scenario, they take them down; and any chance at getting sanctions lifted are gone for at least another 4 years. You realize Russia's economy is in ruins, right?

Worst case scenario, they are ineffective and both Iran and Syria never buy another S300 or S400.

All for what? A puppet in a mud country? They can keep control of their airbase without Assad.

>>33607067
This is exactly what I'm saying.

>>33601849
So they're shit?

@33607081
You don't even deserve a (You)

File: vatnik.jpg (74KB, 604x451px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 604x451px

>>33606470
>According to Russia the Malaysian airliner was shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25.

Yea, and Korean Air 007 was shot down by Americans, and Katyn was done by Nazis.
Die of alcoholism, vatnik scum.

>>33606983
>Realy displays the intellectual level good.
I can't actually tell if you did that on purpose..

>>33607092
Did you even read his post?

>>33601728
>Can Tomahawk missiles be stopped?
Yes (it's been done a few times before, in Iraq and Serbia), but not reliably. Air defense has always been a game of attrition - you'll never fully stop any single given attack, but keep at it long enough and maybe the enemy will eventually run out of bombers. Wasting your efforts on cruise missiles doesn't really help much.

I'm not trying to say anything about American superiority here. This holds equally true with the roles reversed.

>>33607092
You can't even read properly, why are you here in the first place. Just to shitpost? You're the reason why this board is shit now.

>>33604028
If Putin interfered, he'd risk ruining his bottom bitch's plan to not look like Putin's bottom bitch.

>>33607072
my bad I assumed you were replying to someone who said greentext.

>>33607092

How can you construe my post which suggests the Russians are lying as somehow being pro-Russian? Maybe English isn't your first language? If so, you are forgiven. I really wish we had country flags here like they do on /pol.

File: 1491599987508.png (67KB, 768x629px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 768x629px

>>33601728
Isn't it there to protect the Russian grouping in Latakia only?

Trying to shoot down the strike and only hitting some of them would be worse than not getting involved IMO, especially when they're trying to market the system commercially.

>>33607242

>I really wish we had country flags here like they do on /pol.
Not that other anon, but oh boy so do I. I should have pushed harder with the survey during the board alterations period, when there was an emerging strong majority in favor.

>>33606470
Man this is such a blatantly absurd claim, a ground attack plane that can't fly high enough to intercept a 777, or fast enough to keep pace with it.

I mean, Christ, it would take so little effort to make that lie even slightly plausible.

>>33607256
Do we know who made the claim? Russian government or random news organisation?

File: Syria Russian Airbase.jpg (230KB, 640x1077px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 640x1077px

>>33601728
It could, but it would be impractical to do so. Radar horizon makes targeting low flying targets that are far away hard, so unless the missiles are passing close to the S400's radar, it probably won't see them.

Ideally you'd have a short range SAM system ( Pantsir) close to the target for this sort of thing.

Syrian radar sites at the base got wrecked, so presumably whatever air defences they did have there were ineffective.

File: RussianMediaBuk.png (1MB, 1651x892px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1651x892px

>>33607266
> Russian government or random news organisation?
There is no real distinction between those, separate parts of the same propaganda machine.

But I do believe this was the Krelmin party line for a while at any rate.

File: 1034940436.jpg (870KB, 3077x2046px) Image search: [Google]

870KB, 3077x2046px

>>33607275
Distinguishing an active Syrian AA site from a scrapyard is sometimes difficult, considering they operate at about the same level of readyness.

File: Shayrat SatPics.png (487KB, 800x457px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 800x457px

>>33607275
Whoops wrong pic of Russian base getting wrecked.

>>33607284
What are the criss-cross lines?

>>33601728
>It's another CSI five-cent thread with 2 rupee KGB gopniks responding

Mr. Smith needs his burger king and Comrade Vlad needs his cigarettes I guess.

>>33607287
Not sure, they're not on the Google earth pics.

If I gad to guess I'd say they're just dirt tracks from vehicles crossing the dirt between the runways

>>33607275
>T4 airbase
Why do Arabs do this? If you can't think of an honorable person to name it after, at least just name it after the closest town or something.

>>33607036
>/k/ is supposed to be a board about smart and mature topics for smart and mature people.

That why we don't swallow vatnik bullshit

File: 1029959085.jpg (885KB, 3077x2046px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 3077x2046px

>>33607298
They're too uniform for that.

>>33607300
It was probably a "bare base", never activated before the war.

Basically just an airstrip and some outbuildings.

>>33607310
It was active before the war mouthbreather. A simple Google search could have produced that answer. This is why I hate this board nowadays -- no one bothers to simply search before spouting off. It was not a bare base.

File: 1035488185.jpg (703KB, 3031x2045px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 3031x2045px

>>33607300
It's also called Palmyra airbase.

>>33607310
It's a pretty important base, active before the war.

File: Capture.jpg (155KB, 1153x862px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1153x862px

>>33607306
Actually, on closer inspections some of them are on google maps.

Definitely dirt tracks. Probably made by bulldozers or whatever dug those earthworks out

>>33607332
How bizzare.

>>33607324
>"bare base"

He'd rather just make up bullshit military terms and expect us to believe them.

>>33607287
Maybe they're anti-erosion barriers of some sort to minimize dust. Or just chalk markers for paradrop exercises.
>>33607310
The biggest "super" airbases in all of Iraq were named "H-1, H-2 and H-3." That's it. Just "H" and a number. Knowing Saddam you'd think he'd name them "Fury of Babylon" or "Doom of Judea" or some shit like that.

>>33607363
That's because the British named the base H1 Sherlock.

>>33606331
do not ever underestimate russian weapons and weapon smiths, a huge mistake. just one glance at some of the stuff they have and use at their military proves that point for example look at their main battle tank t90 which is built on a base of t72 it is proven to be one ofe the best and most reliable tanks in the world which can be used under all weather conditions in all parts of the world spanning from arctic to sahara desert , they build it so it would be reliable and could go anywhere needed to go. take a look at their main assault rilfe which is basically just a modified ak47 and is PROVEN ti be THE MOST RELIABLE easiest to handle clean fix and shoot in the world. if there is one thing russia is good at that is making weapons.

CTR is getting old, Hurrr Durr vatnik, don't you have a spirit cooking session to attend ?

>>33607491
One Maverick missile later, that Slavic garbage can is nothing but a hole in the ground. Hope you're having a good morning.

>>33607491
No, they're really not.

>>33605973
nice lies cnn

>>33607657
See >>33607284

Stick to /pol/ with your shilling, the retards there gobble it all up and it has more traffic so your employer gets more worth out of the rubles he spends on you.

>>33607491
>T-90
Is inferior to all its potential adversaries.
Leo2A5, M1A2, Chally 2 and Leclerc beats it handily.
All the AK47 got going for it is ease of maintenance, in ergonomics, accuracy and reliability in mud the AR-15 beats it.

>>33606331
You're thinking of Saudi Arabia. They shot the drone with a patriot missile.

>>33606293
Probably the most accurate example of how these russkis and sand people determined the number

File: tmp_16276-Screenshot_20170411-080718354905603.png (427KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

427KB, 720x1280px

>>33604028
Imagine for a second what CNN and the democrats would've saying if Putin shot $90m of America missiles out of the air in defence of a base they're already saying chemical weapons attacks are being launched out of

>>33607491
Hi there, Ivan

>>33605594
>Shooting down cruise missiles would have been a great demonstration of strength and Russian power.
Yeah exactly why they didnt fucking do it retard
Russians don't want to be big and strong
They want to be able to resist 'Western bullying'

>>33606293
>didn't even take out any functional aircraft.
yeah just look all the aircraft they hit are nonfunctional

>>33607858
>Leo2A5, M1A2, Chally 2 and Leclerc beats it handily.
Yeah but 2 T90s beats 1 of any of those

baka americans and their kill counts
you had great kill counts in Vietnam fuckheads

>subsonic NOE missiles cannot be intercepted
>supersonic AShMs going NOE will be killed every time they get near carriers

really makes you think

>>33607957
>Russians don't want to be big and strong
Except that you are dead wrong on that point.
Slava Rossiya!!!! and Russia STROOOONK!!!! is the sole reason as to why russia acts so brutish at the world stage. If they wanted to really hurt NATO they would have spent ~1 GDP on their military and more on building good relationship with their neighbours.
As it stands now, NATO sees growing support even in formerly neutral nations and what was formerly strong supporters of russia is rapidly falling into the arms of the west.
All russia cares about is being able to subjugate and cause suffering in what they perceive as their rightful clay.

It depends on the location of the radar. The launcher can't do shit if the radar doesn't see the TLAM. Russians can say they have the best radar in the world but it's worthless if the TLAM literally flies under the radar. The TLAM is a low flying cruise missile so it's especially effective at evading long range radar.

>>33606331
>hat made of chocolate hat
What did he mean by this

>>33607491
Ah, this is refreshing. An actual propoganda guzzling patriot. I like you comrad. You're still wrong, but at least you're more sincere than the ones getting paid to do this.

>>33608027
youre an idiot
i wonder what country north of mexico and south of canada youre from

>>33608009
Too bad there are only ~400 T-90As in service then.
The regular T-90 is just a T-72 with a fancy name, worthless garbage.
Russia is both outnumbered and outgunned when it comes to quality tanks.

>>33608067
Yeah well Russia can win a war in the Gulf

>>33608053
Try a country slightly to the west of what is called the whore house of Europe or russia in official papers.
No one except russians believe russian propaganda and we most certainly know you don't "just want to stand up to NATO".
You want buffer states to bully.

File: laughinggirls.gif (3MB, 445x247px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 445x247px

>>33608075
>russia
>win a war

>>33607081
No, they can justify it by saying syria should have asked them for more/payed more to have them deployed to cover that base aswell. The tomahawks avoided the russian air defences, thats all the 'proof' russia needs to sell them. Shoulda bought more, goy.

>>33601728

If the Tomahawks were flying at low altitude they couldn't do shit

>>33608103
I know right
who loses in Afghanistan
it's laughable

>>33608121
Not the US at least. Losing in Afghanistan is for old and busted has-been of empires like russia and UK.

File: 1444049247726.jpg (72KB, 300x319px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 300x319px

>>33607491

>>33601728
Yes they can be stopped, Russians are too stupid to do so.

>>33608151
UK held Iraq
(While we were holding 1/5 of the rest of it)

>>33608021
>supersonic
>NOE

And this isn't addressing the difference between flying over land vs water.

>>33608093
>No one except russians believe russian propaganda
I mix with a few random Russians and it's funny to talk international politics with them.

The guys I meet are all illegal English teachers pretending to be british, so they're not the most honourable sorts of people to start with and most of them are pro-Putin nationalists because that's practically his demographic.

They love Putin, eat up everything he does and laugh at his photo ops of him doing manly shit and generally wish they could be like him.

They don't fucking believe the propaganda though, they know it's bullshit but generally just take a kind of plausible-deniability posture where they say "well the government SAYS that the Ukranians shot it down" and wink and nudge a bit.

E.G. Those kind of guys accept that Putin probably had that guy assassinated in London but say he was a scumbag that had it coming.

File: b98c1460a0b8460a232f6d745eaf2bc3.jpg (45KB, 508x519px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 508x519px

>>33607282
On 28 September 2016, the JIT gave a press conference in which it confirmed that the aircraft was shot down with a 9M38 Buk missile which it concluded had been fired from a rebel-controlled field near Pervomaisky, a town 6 km (3.7 mi) south of Snizhne.[116] It also found the Buk missile system used had been transported from Russia into Ukraine on the day of the crash, and then back into Russia after the crash, with one missile less than it arrived with.[8][117] The JIT said they had identified 100 people, witnesses as well as suspects, who were involved in the movement of the Buk launcher, though they had not yet identified a clear chain of command to assess culpability, which was a matter for ongoing investigation. The Dutch chief prosecutor said "the evidence must stand before a court" which would render final judgement.[8] During the investigation, the JIT interviewed 200 witnesses, collected half a million photos and videos and analysed 150,000 intercepted phone calls.[116][221]

All Russia had to do was declare the airfields safe spaces where the patriarchal phallus shaped missiles are not welcome

>>33605625

It's a highly capable system.

>>33601749

Pretty sad that not even a "top of the line" system can blow up an unmanned aircraft from the 70's

And we're expected to believe this thing can kill F-22's? lfmaooo

>>33606983

>Independent sources are bad
>Only state-run media is reliable!

File: 1468310870617.png (124KB, 564x692px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 564x692px

Amerishits sure are on the loose ITT.
>>33607858
>Wet amerishit dreams
Amerishit, please.
>>33608067
Gee, good that even the basic T-72B is better than most overweight amerishit junk in amerishit service. Let alone the modern T-72B3.
>>33608103
>Amerishit shithole
>Winning a war
Top kek, amerishit.
>>33608151
>Amerishit shithole
>Won in Afghanistan
More like ran away unable to deal with the mess amerishits caused themselves by allying and supporting mujahideen islamshit towelhead goatfuckers a couple decades earlier.

File: images.jpg (6KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 225x225px

>>33608048
Texas is hot, the chocolate would melt

>>33606430
>What fucking customers?
South America, India , Southeast Asia even China is a customer.

>They are sanctioned by anyone who matters
They are sanctioned by basically NATO countries who would never buy russian.

File: 12322 zubr l-180 kefallinia.jpg (190KB, 1152x768px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1152x768px

>>33609194
>who would never buy russian

>>33606202

And they get the job done. Freaking Malaysians flying over warzones and shit.

>>33609142

>Galactically assmad vatnik projecting insecurities on others through ad hominem.

Gee, who'd of thunk it?

>>33609262
>Amerishit can't handle being an amerishit
Poor amerishit, are you more upset that your amerishit junk is useless or that amerishit shithole can't win a war?

>>33609262
We already had Armatard in another thread of those yesterday, this post also aligns with his posting start time.

>>33609194
You are a dumb nigger.

>>33609332
>are you more upset that your amerishit junk is useless

Tell me more about the missile strike in Syria.

>Muh undeadable S-400
>Muh undeadable Krakusha
>Muh undeadable Tor
>Muh undeadable Pantsir
>Muh subsonic petards
>Muh defend Syria against US
>Muh RT report, muh photo op takeoffs

>>33604044

Topkek, but you mean SU-22s

>>33609361
You are a fat, beta, virgin, autistic, faggot with no friends, kill yourself subhuman trash

>>33609142
Fucking lel at this ass annihilated vatnik.
One can tell the fact that he's shaking with rage daily over the fact that Reagan outskilled the russians, collapsed their evil empire and now rub their balls over all russia holds dear.

>>33609142
>T-72B3.
>low powered 125 mm gun
>poor armor
>bad stabilizers
>fucking IR floodlights in TYOOL 2017
>good

If you need to bully some Centurion in some dirthole, sure, but we're talking good tanks here.
Take you cold war trash to africa, mr vatnik :^)

>>33608242
Whether or not they hit there target is mainly down to the ground based radar, if they are on the move they are only able to use the trucks radar or even the missiles search radar, both (in the case of only having one truck) would be ineffective to down an f22, if an f22 would be stupid enough to fly deep into Russian radar range there is no doubt that the ground based radar could get a image to the missile.

>>33607947
>trump tries to start war
>trump fails to act as proper commander in chief
>trump is a shitty military commander
>Trump's planned military strike was a failure done on purpose with Putin's authority to make america look weak

something like that.

>>33605594
>Shooting down cruise missiles would have been a great demonstration of strength and Russian power.

That would have been a risky gamble.
Neither sides are sure if the S-400 can shoot down a large strike of US cruise missiles.

If they had tried and succeeded to intercept the strike, that would have been great.
But the chances of making a flawless interception were low.
And even if it had been perfect, people would have shrugged :
>It was just a set up demonstration
>Russia knew in advance the targets
>knew the timetable
>knew the type of missiles
>knew their numbers.
>it's like hitting a well-prepared target
>not a real battle interception
ect...

If the Russians had tried and failed to intercept the strike, even partially, it would have blown back hard :
>Are warned well in advanced of the strike
>Only 90 cruise missiles
>Cruise missiles = slow targets
>The targets and timetable were known
>Russia can't into anti-missile
ect...

If they did nothing, sure, there will be people screaming that the S-400 is worthless.
But then, at US HQ, everyone will still be uncertain of the S-400's true capabilities so nobody will try something really stupid yet.
The potential customers aren't trully certain of the S-400's true capabilities, since they aren't idiots too and can see the difference between a failed action and a lack of action.
And the Russians can always save face by saying that they didn't fail to intercept : they choose to NOT intercept for various reasons.
>saving a dozen old planes isn't worth a hundred or so interception missiles
>let the yanks waste tax-payer money
>Assad still has hundreds of planes
ect...

Really, not doing anything was the safer bet :
- they lost a bit of diplomatic credibility because they officially let Assad be bitchslapped.
- they lost none of their military credibility because they didn't "fail" to intercept any missile.
- Trump won't challenge Russia further because he doesn't need to

>>33609214
Sorry for asking this but how does buying military equipment from a foreing country work? Like, do you also get the blueprints upon purchase and if not how is maintenance done? Do they also sell parts separately? What about ammunition? For example, let's say I buy a pack of 20 Mi-28s. Will the ammunition come included as well? Doesn't it expire or something? Sorry for asking such dumb questions, just curious about the topic. My first post ITT by the way, I'm not anyone her.e

>>33609392
Who controls Aleppo, amerishit? Say the line.
>>33609895
>Amerishit projections
Top kek, amerishit. Spare me of your inferiority complex.
>>33609970
>Amerishit bullshit
Amerishit, please. Everyone saw your overweight amerishit BBQ barn getting fried in actual combat.

>>33610230
>projections
I don't see a fractured US and a strong russian lead world, do I?
What I do see is the US leading the world and a NATO gobbling up parts of a former empire more fractured than your ass :^)

>>33610219
>Sorry for asking this but how does buying military equipment from a foreing country work?
You buy stuff directly or build them (partly) under license.
>Like, do you also get the blueprints upon purchase and if not how is maintenance done?
You get mainenance manuals and spare parts or send it back for larger maintenance in some cases depending on contracts and what needs to be done. When you are building it under license you get some parts of the blueprints, with additional infos about what it must be able to do, you dont get all explainations on how which part adds to the whole function (e.g. you get the plans for a wing, but not the test data from it or how it performs in specific cases). Some parts of the product for example software is often never given directly, you get the electronic parts with it installed already instead.
>Do they also sell parts separately?
Yes, no, maybe. Depends on the contracts.
>What about ammunition? For example, let's say I buy a pack of 20 Mi-28s. Will the ammunition come included as well?
While deals often are set up in one big cluster(fuck), ammunition is scaleable rather freely, but you dont get the ammunition for free. Stuff like artillery shells or regular rifle cartidges are often bought or produced independently.
>Doesn't it expire or something?
Yes, ammunition generally has a "best use before" time. It often performs tolerably good even long after this time, but the more complex something is the more likely is it can fail. Something like the Tomahwak doesnt have much stuff that can work only halfassed and it will still perform like it should.

>>33610230
>Who controls Aleppo, amerishit? Say the line.

Of course you have to deflect lol Get fucked nigger.

>>33610230
>Amerishit
The only shit the US is taking us one huge smelly dump all over russias tanks.
Everyone knows that faced with modern equipment the T-72B3 is just a speedbump and a burning grave for three malnourished vatniks.

>>33609142
Im not even American, but there is no need to be this bitter about anything. Its just a thread on a tuvalese Westphalian sovereignty discussion webzone

>>33610379
>>33610371
>>33610351
Start reading this post >>33601142 and continue with the followed up, so you got a heads start on who you are dealing with. Or you could do a little bullshit bingo over all the things he cant stop doing.

>>33610366
Thank you very much for explaining.
Do you agree it's always preferable for a country to develop its own industry rather than buying things? Because from what you're saying it seems like a bit of a complicated process. I was daydreaming maybe my country could buy some 20 or 30 F-35s like so many other countries are doing, but it seems like a very costly thing to do, specially considering maintenance and everything.

File: 1480521611355.jpg (27KB, 314x246px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 314x246px

>>33607036

>/k/ is supposed to be a board about smart and mature topics for smart and mature people.

Are you being serious right now?

>>33610230
If Russian tanks are so good, why is every nation that was exclusively armed by the Warsaw Pact tripping over themselves to buy Western. More than just tanks, missiles, planes and helicopters.

File: C5Pa1ouUkAAej70.jpg (153KB, 700x895px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 700x895px

>>33610579
>optics
>electronics
>synthetic materials like condura
>trucks

>>33610424
Generally speaking: World powers, multiple nations working together or nations with a long history of developing such stuff build their own stuff, the smaller a country gets the smaller the need for big stuff is and the smaller the need to develope big stuff gets. To give you an idea, the R&D and further development cost on military stuff often is in the range of 5%-25% and keep in mind this on the whole package. If one nation wants to develope it only for themself in a small scale, those percentage on the whole would already be bigger than the whole costs for it, also ignoring that this said nation needs an industry to develope such stuff in the first place. Lets looks from the other side of the spectrum: ammunition, spare parts and the like, this is something that every nation best should produce on their own or at least have multiple possibilities to get them by buying. This is a reason why nations decide to build some stuff under license, even when it means that it would cost more or perform a bit worse. Also there are often niches needs that need to be filled and asking someone else to do it for you, can easily cost you more. To the F-35 question: This is simply something no one can make themself on such a small scale, buy it or leave it, but all costs and pros and cons must be taken into account. I consider it somewhat of a new standard of the planes, but that comes with a lot problems that doesnt should be forgotten. In the end it is a question of is it really what is needed in that country or if they simply can afford it.

>>33610473
Its one of the boards that are generally a bit mature then a lot of other boards, specially taken into account the number of people posting here.

>>33610653
Unless your India. Every attempt to make a major weapons system either crash and burn or requires some significant foreign help.

>>33608021

Lots of terrain to hide behind out in the ocean, eh comrad?

>>33601728
Russians were asleep though. So the fault lies with the operator.

>>33609142
This is either that Armatard anon or someone impersonating him.

>>33610757
There are hills between the russian base and the route taken by the missiles, they can take a programed rote, they didn't go the short way

>>33605613
You can count craters in the Sat photos of the base, the only interaction between Tomahawks and Syria's air defence network was when Tomahawks hit the air defence at the airbase.

>>33606522
then explain why RUSSIA STR0NK couldn't do shit?

File: 1448603943407.jpg (62KB, 440x594px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 440x594px

Heh, the last time the USA went up against a Russian-supplied air defence system you lost ten thousand aircraft.

>>33606665

>Russia sets up huge air defense network in Syria facing Cyprus
>RAF fly a bunch of 80's Tornados through it less than 24 hours later without giving a fuck

Sure, no way would Russia have fired. But no warnings, no known radio contact, no dissuasion at all. They shot big, chimped out on media about NOW NATO CANT FLY and then when the time came to back it up their system either didn't notice or their people in control bitched out.

Days later Coalition air was flying through the umbrella like it wasn't even there. Psych-warfare in anti-air defeated on day 1.

Russia should just post classifieds in Vietnam offering an all-expenses paid trip to Moscow for retired S-75 operators.

>>33613192
The last time the US went up against a russian SAM system the US throatfucked russia.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=60ihI7VU2OY
Note how they at times reported multiple launches at a time but still russia was so shit at air defenses that they could only hit two aircrafts.

>>33613192
>0.4 losses per 1,000 sorties
Congratulations, you managed slightly worse than the Gulf War's ~0.5 losses per 1k sorties.

>>33613367
How was the russian rate in syria with the russian carrier in comparisson? One should keep in mind they were literally facing no real AA.

>>33613192
>guaranteedreplies.jpeg

>>33613465
Well, according to
>http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/6842/russian-carrier-headed-home-after-just-two-months-off-syrian-coast
They flew 420 sorties. However, according to sattelite pics here:
>http://www.janes.com/article/65775/russian-carrier-jets-flying-from-syria-not-kuznetsov
It doesn't look like all of those were off of Kuznetsov.

Assuming the best case though, that gives us a loss rate of a little under 2.4 losses per 1k sorties - higher than the US loss rate in WW2.

>>33608194
>They don't fucking believe the propaganda though, they know it's bullshit but generally just take a kind of plausible-deniability posture where they say "well the government SAYS that the Ukranians shot it down" and wink and nudge a bit.
They sound like Trump supporters

File: Mikoyan_MiG-29K_of_the_Indian_Navy.jpg (242KB, 1500x1068px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1500x1068px

>>33613577
Forgot to add - that loss rate is a bit inflated thanks to statistics. The only loss was a MiG-29K in an accident, and with so few sorties flown I kind of want to give them the benefit of a doubt until they've at least flown a couple thousand sorties.

However, knowing the Russian Navy, I don't think we'll ever see a couple thousand sorties flown off the Kuznetsov for the rest of that carrier's lifetime.

>>33613577
Didnt they lost 2 planes?

>>33613621
>The only loss was a MiG-29K in an accident
No
>>33613642
Yes

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a24155/kuznetsov-second-crash-in-three-weeks/
>Russia's Sad, Smokey Aircraft Carrier Loses Second Fighter in Two Weeks
The site is shit, but the headline really made me laugh.

>>33613663
oh damn I forgot about that one. Double that number then.
>~4.8 losses per 1k sorties.

>>33610168
winner winner! :D

>>33607858

>leo2 and M1a2 in same sentence

kys

>>33608103

>single handedly won ww2

>>33601728
B-but OP, muh stronk russian s-400 radar can detect over 100 targets and defeat stealth at 150km s-surely the russians CHOSE not to engage.

File: lmaotucker.webm (623KB, 392x540px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 392x540px

>>33601738
>>33601753
>>33601849
>>33605613
>>33605739

>>33601728
see
>>33614140

>>33614019
>North Africa and Italy
>Western Europe
>Pacific
no

File: 1455146326309.png (38KB, 694x304px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 694x304px

>>33613192
Note that this includes helicopters.

>>33613364
It's only throatfucking if you ignore the clusterfuck of a raid that happened less than a week before the one you picked, totally at random I'm sure.

>>33614835
>only showing Air Force losses
I feel bad for flinging shit at the other guy now that this popped up while I was looking at sources.

>>33614019
>won in one theatre and only with massive materiel support
ftfy

>>33610383
Yeah no. Let it go.

>>33607363
>Maybe they're anti-erosion barriers of some sort to minimize dust.
Wouldn't you want the same thing on the outside of the runways too?

I'm thinking it's probably a grid drawn up to help with training like you said. Either parachuting or possibly helping russians train syrians on orienteering after helo insertion. The helicopter can land, and then the troops can navigate using a map while the helicopter crew directs them based on the squares they need to cross. Some are slim and long, maybe they're roads while the bigger, more square ones are buildings or other terrain.

>>33613997
Which part of that post burned your bum?
Are you implying that the Leo2A5 is far superior or vice versa?

>>33614915
Post that raid then. Still, the Soviet made SAM system was not even close to stop the US from flattening Hanoi despite russias best efforts.

>>33607133
Putin is Trump's bottom bitch, he cucked Putin completely on the world stage.

>>33612803
They chose not to, you fucking moron

>>33609142
Bait

>>33619594
>w-we chose t-to be humiliated, p-promise
Russia got cucked to hell and back.

File: 1360681899063.jpg (44KB, 526x572px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 526x572px

>>33604044

>>33605613
Assad pls go.

File: 9bd514ce03c4c83f2b519117410e1223db53ca75.jpg (237KB, 732x700px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 732x700px

>>33606202

>>33618728
tl;dr the route used on 12/20 was predicted ahead of time by a SAM regiment, which parked itself directly under the B-52s, which permitted them to burn through the jamming and down enough aircraft for North Vietnam to quit negotiations. It's also worth noting that they were never given improved SAM models during the war because they had to be shipped through an increasingly hostile nation (China). The Soviets were confident that if they sent the very best south, it would mysteriously vanish along the way and a gorillion Chinese knockoffs would be pumped out immediately.

I really wish I still had my book of NVA fighter pilot interviews on hand, it had a great section on other parts of the air defense network.

>>33609163
That was obvious, the question was what did he man by saying hat twice.

>>33601728
>parking them 5 meters next to eachother
That is their first mistake.

>>33604028
S-400 is simply not designed to shoot down a mass strike of surface skimming cruise missile. The russian air sensor network doesn't have the coverage to survey each and every valley they could follow, nor do they have the number of missiles ready at a given time.

Now a dozen or so high flying F-22, that would be right up their (theoretical) alley.

>>33605551
As far as I know they are all attached to S-400 batteries as terminal defense weapons, if some more of them were spread around, assuming they have a short enough decision loop and/or are integrated into the russian IADS, that would work nicely