SAM’s and such.

 

SAM’s and such.

  Russian made S-400’s.  Everyone wants them.

 More about them:

 https://sofrep.com/fightersweep/how-scary-is-the-russian-s-400-sam-system/#:~:text=In%20response%20to%20the%20downing%20of%20a%20Russian,deemed%20to%20be%20hostile%20to%20Russian%20air%20operations.

 http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html

 http://www.almaz-antey.ru/en/kontaktnaya-informatsiya/

  

The Ukrainians are using the predecessor s-300 against the Russians in the Ukrainian war.

 https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/03/s-300-the-air-defense-system-ukraine-is-using-to-battle-russias-air-force/

  

What is the U.S. equivalent of the s-400??

 “We don’t really have one. We have an air force with some of the best fighter aircraft and pilots in the world, and ten supercarriers who can park dozens of them off any coastline in the world, along with a worldwide network of allied bases where we can fly land-based fighters out of. We rely on them for our primary air defense and for offensive air superiority. Russia developed such air-defense missile systems because they know their actual aircraft won’t last long in a stand-up fight against ours. We didn’t develop one because we believe our planes and pilots are good enough that we don’t really NEED one.

 That said, we are not completely without anti-aircraft missile systems. We have the Patriot missiles, which have been demonstrating an ability to intercept ballistic missiles since the first Gulf War in 1991, although we haven’t had to actually use them in combat against enemy aircraft yet. We have the AEGIS system on board our warships, and a land-based version in development, which can shoot down satellites as well as ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and aircraft, although that too hasn’t really had to be tested in combat yet. We also have THAAD and a few other systems deployed in small numbers, but they haven’t been tested in combat either. No one has yet managed to get an air attack past our fighter planes to engage our air defense assets since the Vietnam War.

 By the same token, no one really knows yet how the S-300 or S-400 will fare in actual combat. But their predecessors have been tested a few times, and while they have given the occasional bloody nose to American or Israeli aircraft…they have not yet shown the ability to actually keep them from pretty much flying wherever they please, if they’re willing to take the occasional loss while doing so. Hopefully they will remain untested for a while longer yet. And the same goes for the advanced American near-equivalents.

  

A pretty good case could be made for the RIM-174, and the upgraded Patriot systems, but it is more important to understand the political and military ends being served.

 Russia's neighbors include states which may or may not be friendly at any given moment, and also includes the huge NATO alliance -right at Russia's doorstep. Her defenses need to be built accordingly, and the S-400 family is a logical part of that defense, and even includes a unit located so as to shoot down missiles from, of all people, North Korea.

 The continental United States, by contrast, has only friendly neighbors north and south, and vast oceans east and west. Where's the threat? What are we defending against? The threat is the fleet of ICBM's which could be launched from Russia. And for that, the United is working on variants of the THADD system. But let's get real, here: in the event of a launch of the ICBMs, everyone is basically toast, anyway, so a few S-400's or THAADs really won't matter.

 And that leaves everything else.

 And the "else" is big, referring to spheres of influence and operations. The United States projects power around the globe. Our "backyard" is basically everyone else's "front yard." In addition to air bases and troop deployments, an impressive navy is present. There's a reason for that. After WWII, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other military planners came to the conclusion that if there should ever be another major conflict, it would be fought on the enemy's turf, not ours. This central concept has been a core element of US foreign policy ever since. The development of military capacity can be tied directly to it.

 The United States is the only country with such a reach. With the exception of the Russian missiles in Cuba (now long gone), no one else -no one at all- maintains a foreign military presence in the Western Hemisphere. Such presence as is maintained at sea by potential adversaries is occasional and poses no real threat.

 Consequently our military hardware is designed for the scenario we actually have. The S-400 is simply not a "fit" with our actual need. It is a fit with the challenge faced by the Russians.

 We could, of course, make a "better" missile just to demonstrate the capacity to do so. But these things cost a lot of money, and it makes more sense to spend it where we get the most, ahem, "bang" for the buck.”

 Ray Gruszecki

March 16, 2022