Reply With QuoteI do agree.Originally Posted by Hisroyalhighness
I see. The joint missile system would be a bit controversial, especially in the eastern section of NATO, but that's beyond the point at this time.
It offered Gabala before. Back in 2004-2005 it was offering to build a joint missile-shield from the ground up altogether. This is really nothing new.
I do agree.
I see. The joint missile system would be a bit controversial, especially in the eastern section of NATO, but that's beyond the point at this time.
What Eastern section of NATO? Who cares what they think? This was a proposal not for a joint Eastern NATO-Russian system (and most of the Eastern NATO members were yet to even join NATO back then), but for a joint US-Russian missile defense system and such a proposal was made at the beggining of the last decade. You can find material on it if you look through the archives of RIA Novosti, but my own memory serves me well enough. If parts of it were to be based in Poland, Romania, etc... then sure, they would have a say in it - but there is hardly any guarantee that they would have been. More likely, those facilities now being built at great expense in the Czech Republic, Romania, etc... would simply have been built on the basis of Russian facilities & technologies in Russia and the former-USSR region.I see. The joint missile system would be a bit controversial, especially in the eastern section of NATO, but that's beyond the point at this time.
I can't possibly fathom how an antimissile shield can be any threat to Russia. The Russians should pull their heads out of their ass and deal with their real problems, like, you know, corruption and ****ty economy and all that.
Searched the archives (at least in English), found no articles. All I found where the news regarding the same shield, just called differently. I believe the previous proposal, if there ever was one, doesn't compare to the current one (I doubt it was ever seriously considered). Using facilities and antiquated equipment of the long gone Soviet Union is not exactly economical. That is probably the most significant point. While it may seem more cost effective, current solutions would feature off the shelf solutions and would be exactly suitable for the operational needs, as opposed to modifying older equipment. Any former USSR and Russian equipment would need some significant modifications, which may not be quite so cheap in the long run.
They are not.
I don't know what the details were; I'm simply assuming. They could have went for a radical new system on the basis of S-500-esque projects for all I know. The Russian and USSR assets were very much substantial and potentially useful, particularly in terms of radar coverage. And as for Russian equipment; it already had anti-ballistic missile systems in the form of the S-300VM; which is a very effective system and more developments could have been built on its basis. Not to mention the naval vessels outfitted with such a ballistic missile defense system too.
As for references, yeah they seem hard to come by; found some headlines here (can't read the articles though):
http://www.militarynews.ru/esearch.a...geNo=30&AndOr=
And another reference:
http://en.rian.ru/onlinenews/20040207/39907154.html
Arenīt you mistaking it for that Azerbaijan radar site proposal from 2007?
S-300VM is a terminal system more like SM-2 Block IV and PAC-3. It does not have exoatmospheric capability like THAAD, SM-3, and GBI.
No I'm not, this was a completely different set of proposals originating around 2000/2001, I remember it well. Sometimes the idea still floats up; just very recently there was talk again of the US and Russia creating a common missile defense system.
That's true. Though Russia does have some technology analogous to THAAD, etc... currently deployed around Moscow.
Anyway I think you get the gist of what I'm saying. The proposals in question would have likely employed a mixture of both American and Russian technologies, both terminal and exo-atmospheric, both Soviet-era Radar sites and new facilities, etc... to get a working, effective system in operation. The exact details are unknown and not necessarily all that important; rest assured that if the 2 countries did decide on it, they would figure out a way to get it done.
Same thing like how Russian anti-missiles in Cuba would be a threat to the US; one way or the other. Try pulling your own head out of your ass first.
Actually the new missile for the S400 the (40N6?)
Will have a ceiling of 185km, range of 400km and a speed of 12M.
Such as? 123456
Been hearing about it for years (literally). Never heard that it's anywhere near deployment, or has even got to flight testing.
Posting Permissions
