Almaz S-300: China's "Offensive" Air Defense

Hey vincelee, since thankfully you understand the importance of radar horizon, can you answer the question i posed here earlier? Do you have any information that would prove or disprove that china has the capability to guide their s300 batteries via awacs or similar platforms?

I don't. My personal opinion is that they can't. Why? Because this would require quite a bit of combined arm experience. Also, S-300 is a SARH missile, and I'm not aware of ANY, and I mean ANY, airborne system in the world that can guide a ground launched SARH missile when the primary guidance unit is a ground based radar. It may sound simple, but I don't think it is, at all.....just like the monopoly similation I'm doing right now, total pain in the ass.

it's called RADAR HORIZON.

Click to expand...

Yeah, uhhhh, what is your point?

my point is, you can't just take specs from paper and toss it around. Practical engagement range of the radar against low flying targets is limited by radar horizon, which isn't very low in the S-300's case.

Point is that, due to curvature of the earth, any plane/missile keeping under some 100 m of altitude can't be detected by the sam battery until its some 40 km away from the said battery. So while the theoretical range of the system, limited by the missile i imagine, is 150 km, the actual range in the case where taiwanese know they have to keep low, is much lower. But hey, that's not so bad either. Flying low has its drawbacks. Bigger drag meaning lower top speed, bigger fuel consumption, a danger for inexperienced pilot, etc...

Didn't see vince's post until i posted this. but just to add, its not really a limitation of s300, but radar tech in general. Patriot batteries would fare no better in the same scenario. (PAC3 with active radar terminal guidance might have an edge, though)

PAC3's range is what? 15-20 KM? It's used in the terminal defense role only. Cough Cough.

I've always wanted to know if AD radars can use ionosphere bouncing to acquire targets.....probably not since the precision won't be there.

I know, PAC3 should be short ranged, but i can not find a credible source stating its range, anywhere on the net. And i like to think of myself as a decent googler. Figures i've seen range from 30-70 km, and even some ridiculous 200 km plus claims, which are probably mixed up with standards or something.

Speaking of standards... why would they give them such long range, especially in the sm-2 block IV version if USN didn't have means to guide those missiles to its target? I would think E-2 are capable of providing illumination of the targets, instead of ship based illuminators. They have been tested on guiding phoenixes to the target back in their days.

Bouncing off ionosphere, as far as i know, requires huge arrays. Up to 100 m long, or something like that. And, yeah, precision isn't there, but if the missile had some independent terminal guidance - it could probably be done.

well, SM-2 can theoretically be used to hit bombers. I guess that's where the requirement came in-as the Soviet naval arm employed more and more standoff munition, a requirement came up to counter these by making them...non-standoff.

And of course there is the inherent anti ship role of all SM-2s.

my point is, you can't just take specs from paper and toss it around. Practical engagement range of the radar against low flying targets is limited by radar horizon, which isn't very low in the S-300's case.

Click to expand...

Naturally, but the curvature of the Earth isn't that big of a factor from that far off. It is a factor, but certainly not big enough to act like my point is horribly flawed. It would severely limit Taiwanese airpoower regardless. To stay under the radar would severely limit the Taiwanese as far as offensive and defensive action. Chinese fighters will be able to safely fly through some parts of Taiwanese airspace as any attempt at interception would be an interceptor into air defense range.

The point is denial of airspace.

Taking those islands close to the mainland may not be so easy. They're very defendable, being quite mountainous/forrested, with lots of defensive fortifications, though not heavily manned. And such an action would take away any surprise.

But, they're also mountainous. Putting a battery on the mountain would help increase its horizon range, probably. I wonder if you can see the coast of Taiwan from their peaks...