Russian S 400 air defense has been in news
for some time now due to its dreaded Anti Access Area Denial (A2AD) capabilities S 400 can track hundreds of target at a time,
engage up to 36 targets in parallel and simultaneously launch 72 missiles. The system has powerful hardware integrated
with ‘state of art’ software in the backend. S 400 uses multiple radars depending on threat
perception. The primary one is either the 91N6E Big Bird
Acquisition and Battle Management Radar or 92N6E Grave Stone Multimode Engagement Radar
These have a range of around 600 km. The main radar is complimented by target acquisition
radars like 67N6 Gamma De and 9N6 Protivnik Ge radars in L band, Nebo SVU in the Very High-Frequency band & Nebo m & Zebu M in multiband. Nebo SVU & Zebu M have claimed capability
against stealth aircraft. The radars are very resistant to jamming. S 400 deploys multiple missiles to cover its
strike envelope. 1. Short-range 9M96E (40 km) with an active radar
homing head having a speed of Mach 2.6 2. Medium-range 9M96E2 (120 km) with an active
radar homing head having a speed of Mach 3 3. Long-range 48N6 (250 km) with an active radar
homing head having a speed of Mach 14 4. Very-long-range 40N6 (400 km) with an active
radar homing head having a speed of Mach 14 Hence, these missiles are not only guided
by radars of S 400 but also have own active and semi-active radar homing capability enabling
them to keep chasing fast & maneuvering targets till the last moment. The maximum speed of targets for successful
elimination : Mach 14 or 4,800 m/sec. The vertical launch enables missiles of S
400 to have seamless 360-degree target envelop. As evident S 400 is a very capable system & touted to be a game changer by many military experts. In this video Defense Updates, lists 5 renowned
American weapons that are made obsolete by S 400. Let’s get started. The US Air Force officially retired MQ1 Predator
on March 9th, 2018. Predator is now replaced by more capable MQ
9 Reaper, which will be the backbone of US Air Force drone operations going forward. Reaper has an endurance of, 27 hours, a service
ceiling of 50,000 ft, a range of 1,151 mi or 1,852 km and max speed of 300 mph or 482
km/h It has the ability to carry around 2,500 lbs
or 1100 kg of weapons payload through its external hard points. The Reaper’s hard-points give it the ability
to deploy a combination of AGM-114 Hellfire, GBU-12 Paveway, and GBU-38 JDAM munitions. None of these air to ground weapon has the
range that can enable the Reaper to launch them from standoff distances. So, Reaper will need to get in close for a
strike and this will mean it will be in the range of S 400. But when in S 400 range, the slow speed and
limited maneuverability leaves Reaper with no escape route. Boeing AH-64 APACHE is the twin-turboshaft
attack helicopter well known for its deadly offensive prowess. Produced from 1983, the gunship has many variants. It has a maximum speed of 182 mph, 293 km/h
and a range of 295 mi or 476 km. It typically carries short-range air to ground
rockets like Hydra 70 and missiles like AGM-114 Hellfire variants; AIM-92 Stinger and Spike
missiles. These weapons have a very limited range and
AH-64 APACHE will have no way to engage S 400 without getting into its strike range. The AH-64 APACHE is a fast and agile gunship
compared to many of its peers. But this doesn’t change the fact that it was
never meant to dodge supersonic or hypersonic missiles that are employed by S 400. The dreaded gunship stands no chance against
S 400. F 16, F 16 & F 18 fighter jets have been the
workhorse for US Air Force. All of these jets have been kept relevant
with multiple upgrade package and are still considered to be some of the most capable
4th generation fighter jets. The excellent maneuverability and long-range
Air to Air missiles make them a very competent foe. But these jets were not designed to be stealthy
and have fairly large Radar Cross Section (RCS). So, when in the range they have a very low
probability of survival when attacked with a barrage of missiles from S 400. The best case scenario for these jets is to
launch standoff weapons without entering in S 400’s range. The leading options for this is the Joint Air-to-Surface
Standoff Missile – Extended Range (JASSM-ER) which has a range of 925+ km or 575+ mi. The missile is designed to be low observable
and uses GPS aided inertial navigation system for midcourse guidance and infrared homing
in the terminal stage. But due to its subsonic speed, the missile
will take at least 20 mins to travel the last 400 km. This means for 20 mins the missile will be
within the range of S 400 and it will get multiple shots. It is highly unlikely, that the missile will
be able to escape interception. The Tomahawk is the well known long-range,
all-weather, subsonic Land Attack cruise Missile. It is in service from 1983 and the missile
has been used by the American military on several occasions. The missile has a speed of about 550 mph or
890 km/h and maximum range of 2500 km. It is guided by GPS & INS and some variants
also have active radar homing. The missile can be launched from surface combatants,
submarines as well as from land-based launchers. The slow speed, coupled with decent size makes
it an easy target for agile and fast interceptor missiles of S 400. The missile may be able to evade an old air
defense system but has little odds against an advanced integrated air defense system
like the S 400. The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress is long-range,
subsonic, jet-powered strategic bomber. It has been operated by the United States
Air Force (USAF) since the 1950s. The B-52 was designed and built by Boeing,
which has continued to provide support and upgrades. Superior performance at high subsonic speeds
and relatively low operating costs have kept the B-52 in service despite the advent of
more advanced aircraft, including the variable-geometry B-1 Lancer, and the stealthy B-2 Spirit. After being upgraded between 2013 and 2015,
it is supposed to serve into the 2040s. The B-52s are expected to reach the end of
their service lives by 2045 and be replaced by B-21 Raiders. The B 52 is capable of carrying both conventional
as well as nuclear weapons. This includes normal gravity bombs and AGM-86
air-launched cruise missile. In case of any gravity bombs, B 52 will have
to be in the vicinity S 400 to drop the bombs, the slow & lumbering jet in all probability
will be engaged and taken down well before that. With AGM-86, the B 52 has a better option
than gravity bombs. The AGM-86 is a subsonic air-launched cruise
missile built by Boeing with a range of 1500+ mi or 2,400+ km enabling it to be launched
from well beyond the strike envelope of S 400 But as discussed earlier, the subsonic missiles
will have very little chance of getting a shot at S 400.


  1. A Reaper, Apache or B52 would never be used to try take out an S400. So they shouldn't even be mentioned in the video. There would not be any S200, S300 or S400 systems left by the time any 4th gen planes enter the area. The F22 and F35 would have already destroyed them.

  2. The Apache was never meant to engage against SAMS. Our 4th generation fighters are still relevant once SAMS have been destroyed by our stealth units. I would also think that B52 would have been obsolete since the very first SAM system but we all know that they were not design to enter heavily weaponized areas.

  3. Ok but what if you launch dozens of Drones at S-400 sites they cant shoot them all down, I have a feeling thats something Israel is going to do in Syria, force the Syrians to expend all their rockets.

  4. So far, in most conflicts, US and NATO forces systematically take apart Russian supplied air defenses such as the S300, S400, and others like a child taking apart a tinker toy model. NATO and US forces take those Russian air defenses very seriously, and they plan their strategies carefully, including the development of appropriate countermeasures to deal with them.

  5. Mostly bullshi. Usually not operated correctly. Overwhelm-able. Portions of this already defeated by Israelis. Believe it if I see it. In the meantime …

  6. This video is sponsored by the US defence industry trying to sell the government more and better high cost weapons.

  7. Cheap USA MALD-N and MALD-X decoys will be used to exhaust S-400 missiles. Then the USA HARM missiles will destroy the russian radars followed by bombers that will destroy military targets. You should understand by now that countermeasures are are always cheaper.

  8. Obsolete? None of those things were ment for advanced aaad systems. Those systems will be taken out before these things ever see the battle field.
    Attack helicopters made the tank obsolete.
    Tanks made the rifle obsolete.
    The gatling gun made war obsolete. Etc.
    It's a great system, game changing sure, but not game ending.

  9. alert and ready to a war and battle marine navy usa china russia north korea sauth korea istarel australie ready to a war and battle philippines butuan city obrero poruk 1 thats my intank location noclear streke ans meshell streke ok sopport allweys ok

  10. GREAT VIDEO, as usual. russia will also have several other layers of protection within forty miles, including pansir short range missiles. The threat is no longer russia, it is china. And the area of battle is off their shores. We are showing no ability to before "friends" with Russia, and we are driving them to china.

  11. The easiest way to defeat this S-400 system (and any anti-air system) is to fool it into thinking that they are firing at real targets when actually they are firing at drones made to look like the real thing. So let them have their S-400's are there are just only so many missile that they can afford to buy – which will be eventually be wasted firing at dummy targets.

  12. Linebacker II over North Viet Nam (December 1972) by the B52s was a devastating loss but not to the U.S. Over 700 sorties and over the most heavily fortified cities on earth at the time consisting of AAA batteries, SAM sites and fighter interceptor protection only 17 B52s were lost. But the B52s did their job to the point were after three days there was not much to bomb anymore. All targets were destroyed or heavily damaged including two MIG-21s shot down by B52 tail gunners. So yes they are not the fastest plane in the sky but they are an absolutely lethal and capable adversary to contend with. For the folks that think the B52s today are the same as they were when first built you are just kidding yourself they look alike but are completely different aircraft. And for those think a missile flying at Mach14 can intercept anything and its all over…A Ballistic Missile fired from the U.S reentering against its assigned target is traveling at close to 16,000 miles per hour or MACH 20.

  13. Static air defences will always lose to SEAD as they never have the initiative of when and where to attack and more importantly; they can't concentrate their forces as an air force can. An air force will always be able to do all of the above and with dedicated and advanced SEAD capabilities defeating an integrated air defence system such as the S 300 and S 400 will be a matter of mathematical certainty – it is only of how much time it will take to defeat those.

  14. Check out our history with Vietnam. Didn't go so well. I think we lost. Lot of hotshots got shot down. Hmm. Seems we're on a loosing streak since Korea. Kinda sucking in Afghanistan too. Taliban is kicking the army's ass. They ain't got no Anti air. Back to sleep Zombies.

  15. What is are failing to say is , if they were going to attack . They would overload those systems with fake attacks and real attacks so they can hit their radars . Thousands of missiles would be launched to overload the systems , and waste their ammunition.

  16. The B-52 was obsolete 20 years ago, and many wondered how long it would have been kept flying (the guys of Boeing that designed its would have looked at you as a lunatic, if you told them it would be still operative in the 21st century).

    It keeps going on simply because it is still the best option for its role: carpet bombing unprotected areas once SMS and interceptors have been removed from the tactical equation.

    To say that it is made obsolete by the S-400 is disingenuous – it has been obsolete at least these last 30 years. But sometimes, obsolete is just what you need to do the job.

    I draw on Intuos2 digitizes – 15 years old, obsolete thrice over, but they do the trick.

  17. Each of the aircraft you listed as "obsolete" against a weapon they are not designated to destroy is like saying the T-15 Armada is obsolete because of a capable B-2 spirit with MOABs. I expected you to have F-35 explained on that list. C'mon…I'm still a fan, but this is a new low on your channel.

  18. S400 has disrupted entire military calculation and equations of US led NATO and has clearly given a unbeatable military lead to the Russians and it's allies

  19. The analysis omits tactics which is critical in the employment of any weapons system. Not sure how low the S-400 can detect an inbound target, but it is damn hard to track and target terrain hugging missiles and aircraft–especially when combined with stealth designs. Also new weapons that swarm the S-400 and decoys that prevent the S-400 from distinguishing between real aircraft/missiles and the decoys will make it harder to deter attacks.

    Once the S-400 integrated system is neutralized, then all of those "obsolete" systems become effective again.

  20. you either go in with many attack fighters and accept x amount of losses to break in or you stage a covert ground attack to eliminate one installation at a time, or maybe a full blown blitzkrieg!

  21. You would be kind of stupid to send helicopters to take out an S400 battery, and thats clearly not there job, same goes for not stealthy planes unless they can stay out of range. Btw the newest F-18's might also be able to jam the incoming S400 missiles.

    When it comes to drones and missiles it's all about availability and price. Enough old units could bleed the S400 out, and even if the US units did cost 5 times more then the S400's they have the money to back it.

  22. People are very gulible on this thread it seems. If you think this system has made any of these American weapons redundant, I have this beautiful beachfront property in Arizona for sale you might be interested in…

  23. Yeah ok so you mean to say these weapon systems will now be Obsolete because of the s400 , now that is assuming every theater of war will have s400's guarding all potential targets , and it also assumes that the Russian statistical data is actual and not pure bs estimates. Next question is what did they test them against? definitely not with the so called obsolete weapons listed here. What I always found strange is the fact that if the Russian military had such ability to in effect render the Aegis combat system useless why were they so always complaining about it being used as an anti ballistic missile system in Eastern Europe ? i mean if you could kill it why worry about it? Because maybe they can't and all their bluster about they're weapons is pure bs based on no real data

  24. We don't need Sam's bc of our massive Air Force and command of the sea tomahawk anti ship, nuke,anti air and anti tank also we got laser tech dude talk like Russians got a death day, with long range missiles and electronic warfare the same will be shut down just like they
    The same got beat in vietnam
    Don't forget the USA is re arming

  25. Absolutely laughable.the history of the American Military over the last two decades is one of the destruction of Russian aircraft and Russian air defenses.these are defensive weapons and like all the fence of weapons they can be studied and destroyed. Not to mention the fact American technology is far in advance of any Russian technology.

  26. Fake propaganda. Nothing is obsolete due to the S400 except the S400 itself. The S400 was designed in the 90's as an UPGRADE to the S300. All it does is extend the range of the S300. That system has been defeated easily by US forces. It was actually obsolete before it even entered service in 2007

  27. I want one S-400 battery, I am currently a friendly nation, but given the right monetary stimuli, I would be willing to become a rogue state!!

    I would also be open to be given some tomahawk, hellfire, stinger, JDAMS etc , including the F-15, F-16, F-18 and B-52 bombers.. and a couple of armed Apache Attack Helicopters!!

    All said weapons and weapon system would go to a good home!!!

    Thank you in anticipation

  28. You have mixed times. Some of the equipment yo mention would be detected and shot by S125, S200. B52 were short down in Vietnam. Apeche though very agile would not go near. Sorry man, I think you mixed centuries.

  29. Those missiles with active and semi-active radar heads can be defeated by $100 dumb missiles properly configured and deployed.

  30. US alraedy no how to get by the S300 and 400 and 500 all they have to do is send in 100s of missles
    And that will make the battries on the S300 run out .. then send everything in to mop up the left overs

  31. you wouldn't use s400 against an incoming missile that's what the systems defending the s400 are for. pansir, buk and tor

  32. Let's assume the S400 is the greatest air defense system in the world. Let's say it does make obsolete the 5 weapon systems. The Russians will still need to deal with the saturation level against a country that has a 20 to one larger military budget and dozens of military bases surrounding the battlefield . You stated the system would have 72 missiles. A US destroyer can carry 96 tomahawk cruise missiles and the US has 68 and counting destroyers . 22 missile cruisers , 19 Virginia Class attack subs and 4 Ohio Class Cruise missile Subs. That could be over 10,000 tomahawks. The missiles could be fired from many directions at the same time . The S400 would have a fixed location easily plotted . The US would be fluid , evading locations maneuvering in heavily conflicted area's . The S400 wouldn't last an hour from the onslaught.

  33. Let's talk about the weapon systems the US had made obsolete on Russia. 1) the Bear Bomber (F22) The Entire Russian Navy (sea wolf and Virginia class attack subs)
    Russian satellites (SM3-IIA) Russian ICBMS (GBI) we just need 2500 instead of 65. Russian Air Force
    (187 Raptors and 358 F35's plus 1300 more by 2020 ) Along with over 5000 advanced combat aircraft. Plus nearly 1000 AH 64's
    Russia ( the new evading 14 warhead limited to 8 Mach 24 CCP 60' Trident II D5
    Missiles.) Russian bases ( the B61-12 variable yield nuclear bomb delivered by F22)
    Can also be delivered by most US jets except the B1B. For Now .

  34. S400 is beast of SAM in the world 🌏,. America 🇺🇸 as one option to bomb s400 site by satellite bases launching missile. Missile should be launched at 90 ° at a speed of 15 to 20 mach.

  35. I remember when we were told that American planes are invisible, than they became a little bit visible, and every year they "become" more visible… I am talking about F22 and B-2… So far those planes are not produced any more, because they are simply waste as Space Shuttle :))) So looks to me BS is everywhere for internal use.

  36. It's one thing to set stealth aircraft and hopefully track it But it is a whole different story coming up with a fire solution for those aircraft. The Russians are 20 years behind . That's why they are so desperate and threatening with doomsday annihilation of humanity missiles out of desperation. They won't likely use them because it would mean the end of their existence and many more military and civilian. Just like their. Wagner group that tried a multi spear headed assault on our troops in Syria and all but a few were sent home inn trash bags. The few that escaped we're crying about how they were ass fucked by our spec ops

  37. Russian propaganda at its finest. A sign of their weakness. Stealth Aircraft will dominate the skies for many decades to come. Get used it. 😘

  38. This must be the dumbest video Defense Updates had ever produced. Are they running out of topics to discuss? First of all, the video accepts all the specs Russia provides at face value. Yet, the S400 has never been combat-tested. Second, most of the weapons noted in this video would never be used in the event S400 actually works as advertised: hence, none are obsolete.

  39. These S400s will be neutralized by B-2 stealth bombers letting the other aircrafts and missiles have a field day. I doubt the Russians have anything other than empty vodka bottles to throw at the B-2 bombers

  40. Your background sounds are appalling and hard on the ears and very distracting please choose sounds that are harmonious to your voice?

  41. S400 is a very good system.. But if you know its location it like a sitting duck… All you need to do is to send multiple dammi and the system will be saturated.. So no problem to destroy such…

  42. There is Absolutely NO PROOF to such claim. Ergo: BOGUS conclusion. Bring in proof. Without it NO ONE will take ur idea.

  43. Silly people,just give Russian military Generals clubs,US generals clubs and put them all in an enclosed field and tell them last man standing wins. Cheap,effective and you can sell advertising ,T Shirts,DVDs etc You have it Yearly and everybody goes home happy except those that are dead but you can't have everything.

  44. To be brutally honest – S-400 is largely overhyped. Introduction of missile versions with active radar homing is a +, but very design of the system makes it a bit lacking in terms of number of missiles you can effectively use. Consider it being Seaceptor (short-to-mid rande)/patriot(mid range)/thaad(long range) in one system.
    Effectively a battery of 4 TEL will have 16 missiles for use in a single engagement. To ensure a kill, 2 missiles would have to be used for a single target. If missile load on TEL's is optimal, battery will be able to down 8 aircraft, but when engaged by stand-off munitions (let's say 2 fired by each aircraft) – there will be 24 targets in the sky – more than battery has missiles. And if TEL hasn't optimal missle load, some of missiles will be large anti-ballistic missiles (it can only carry two missiles in that case) which are useless for such targets, and some could be shorter range missiles that won't be able to engage aircraft firing stand-off munitions, they could only target munitions. And S-400 can't stack more than 4 smaller missiles anyway. (while dedicated systems can have 9-10 shorter range missiles)
    This system really requires it's user to field it in large numbers. Else it's a jack of all trades, master of none.

  45. The answer to s400 is the launch of missiles which is cheaper than s400 and let the s400 missiles strike them until it runs put pf missiles. Russia could only produce little of its touted missiles due to financial constraint. Their defense budget is roughly a tenth of the US whicj means that the US can produce double the amount of S400 missiles without hurting its pocket. Once the S400 are without those missiles than the US can easily take them down

  46. S400 havent shot anything out of the sky,never ever tested in combat,and then claim they make everything obsolete,LMAO.
    Typical russian propaganda.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *