How to disable S-300PMU system?

[Tony Pear]

S-300 PMU Air Defence System and latter version are thought the most powerful and effective in the world.

So, can stealth aircrafts be immunised against them? For non-stealth planes, how can avoid them? Are there any weapon can detect and destroy these systems?

 

[T.C.P]

S-300 PMU Air Defence System and latter version are thought the most powerful and effective in the world.

So, can stealth aircrafts be immunised against them? For non-stealth planes, how can avoid them? Are there any weapon can detect and destroy these systems?

The new Patriot systems are probably better than the S-300PMU.

The F-35 and the F-22 can probably beat any version of the S-300, at least Israel says so.

 

[Humming Drone]

S-300 PMU Air Defence System and latter version are thought the most powerful and effective in the world.

So, can stealth aircrafts be immunised against them? For non-stealth planes, how can avoid them? Are there any weapon can detect and destroy these systems?

Aircraft can not be "immunised" to Air Defense Systems, including stealth aircraft. Laws of physics still apply equally to everyone.

Planes can avoid detection in many ways, but I believe the best and universal method is superior planning, tactics, and execution. And it helps immensely to know the capabilities of a system you are going against.

Basic examples: Don't get detected by not flying into the detection radius around the Air Defense System location
Fly low to reduce detection radius, use terrain masking. Use element of surprise, fly when the OpFor system operators are least alert, confused, or not ready to address your threat.

Use passive and active countermeasures. Or outright show that Air Defense System who is Boss, by killing it (from the air or otherwise). (Anti-radiation missiles; smart munitions, especially stand-off; artillery; a raid by ground forces, including special forces; high-power jamming)

"Stealth" is really Low Observability - it gives the aircraft an additional edge against detection by reducing the effectiveness of opposing systems. It does not make the plane immune or invisible to detection. However, it does give commanders more freedom and flexibility in employing their assets because the stealth plane would be more difficult to detect vs. non-stealth place in absolutely most situations, all other things being equal.

 

[Feanor]

The new Patriot systems are probably better than the S-300PMU.

The F-35 and the F-22 can probably beat any version of the S-300, at least Israel says so.

I don't think anyone is in a position to accurately compare.

Also, to clarify are we talking about the PMU, or PMU1 or PMU2?

The best way to disable one is to blow it up. But jokes aside, probably with a combination of stand-off jamming, VLO strike platform, and stand-off attack.

 

[Tony Pear]

Aircraft can not be "immunised" to Air Defense Systems, including stealth aircraft. Laws of physics still apply equally to everyone.

Planes can avoid detection in many ways, but I believe the best and universal method is superior planning, tactics, and execution. And it helps immensely to know the capabilities of a system you are going against.

Basic examples: Don't get detected by not flying into the detection radius around the Air Defense System location
Fly low to reduce detection radius, use terrain masking. Use element of surprise, fly when the OpFor system operators are least alert, confused, or not ready to address your threat.

Use passive and active countermeasures. Or outright show that Air Defense System who is Boss, by killing it (from the air or otherwise). (Anti-radiation missiles; smart munitions, especially stand-off; artillery; a raid by ground forces, including special forces; high-power jamming)
"Stealth" is really Low Observability - it gives the aircraft an additional edge against detection by reducing the effectiveness of opposing systems. It does not make the plane immune or invisible to detection. However, it does give commanders more freedom and flexibility in employing their assets because the stealth plane would be more difficult to detect vs. non-stealth place in absolutely most situations, all other things being equal.

Are there anti-radiation missiles that can detect and destroy S-300PMU1?
Once 1 S-300 has been launched, can the target aircraft detect the thread and avoid it? Do you think flares or decoy can trick the missile?

 

[STURM]

Are there anti-radiation missiles that can detect and destroy S-300PMU1? Once 1 S-300 has been launched, can the target aircraft detect the thread and avoid it? Do you think flares or decoy can trick the missile?

I would think that any radar that is emitting could be targeted by anti-radiation missiles.
One factor that will play a part in determining if a pilot can evade a missile is how much warning time he gets. According to a Steven Zaloga article in AFM years ago, the S-300 [I presume an early version] sends out radar signals that can be confused by onboard sensors as clutter.

Are the Greek PMUs still operated? It goes without saying that these would have been thoroughly inspected by Greece's allies...

IMINT & Analysis: The Cypriot Missile Crisis

 

[fretburner]

The new Patriot systems are probably better than the S-300PMU.

How can you say this when the S-300 has a longer range?

 

[STURM]

How can you say this when the S-300 has a longer range?

Having a longer range doesn't automaticly make the S-300 'better'. There are other factors involved, such as how resistant would the S-300s search and guidance radars be against standoff Western jamming, how would the missiles seeker head cope with a low flying, rapidly maneuvering aircraft spitting out chaff, what is the operating cost of the S-300 compared to the Patriot, etc,?

Of course the same can be asked about the Patriot. The Patriot shotdown an RAF IDR in a ''blue on blue'' in 2003 due to a faulty IFF transpobder on the jet, but apart from this incident I'm not sure if it has shot down any other aircraft.

 

[Feanor]

How can you say this when the S-300 has a longer range?

Iirc the PMU1 and 2 do, not the PMU.

The Greek S-300s were operational a couple of years ago, they even had Russian specialists integrate them with the Tor-M1.

 

[Soner1980]

Iirc the PMU1 and 2 do, not the PMU.

The Greek S-300s were operational a couple of years ago, they even had Russian specialists integrate them with the Tor-M1.

I think the Tor-M1's all have been placed in the southern part of Cyprus, where as the Turkish side has Stingers and possibly Jernas/Rapiers too. The S-300PMU1 of Greece is placed in Krete, not known of it's status but I hope it is as Libya and Syria is now unstable.

 

[Relix7195]

how to disable an s 300 PMU

s 300 PMU will be the best of air defences some countries are able to come up with, to disable it you will have to push the limits of stealth aircraft and the use of drones will probably be applicable for obvious reasons. A good craft/pilot will have to out maneuver more than one missile and jammers and jammer missiles may be the best way to disable s 300.

 

[Feanor]

To really answer that question we would need to consider the context. Is it acting in isolation, or is it protected by point-ADS? Does it have additional sensors to rely on? What's the landscape looking like?

 

[fretburner]

Having a longer range doesn't automaticly make the S-300 'better'. There are other factors involved, such as how resistant would the S-300s search and guidance radars be against standoff Western jamming, how would the missiles seeker head cope with a low flying, rapidly maneuvering aircraft spitting out chaff, what is the operating cost of the S-300 compared to the Patriot, etc,?

Of course the same can be asked about the Patriot. The Patriot shotdown an RAF IDR in a ''blue on blue'' in 2003 due to a faulty IFF transpobder on the jet, but apart from this incident I'm not sure if it has shot down any other aircraft.

Most literature I find online say that the S300's engagement envelope is better than the Patriot's and that low flying cruise missiles are not an issue, with its radars able to "sort out" clutter. Of course these are mostly Russian Army or Manufacturer's claims. However, the S300 does have that reputation of being the best, which is rather telling since I haven't read anything about it being used in combat yet?

For example, the Exocet is highly regarded because of its "victories" in the Falkland Wars, whereas the Harpoon's "record" is not as good. The S300 probably couldn't claim it has shot down a number of Aircraft. Although, older Russian SAMs clearly have done so. Come to think of it, maybe that's why the S300 has that reputation -- because it's predecessors are so successful and it's generations ahead of those?

Iirc the PMU1 and 2 do, not the PMU.

The Greek S-300s were operational a couple of years ago, they even had Russian specialists integrate them with the Tor-M1.

The PMU1/2 are only deployed by Russia and China right? Although, many countries have wanted to acquire those.

 

[Feanor]

Algeria acquired the PMU1 or 2 (I don't remember which). Russia deploys PM versions, the PMU is an export designation.

 

[Tony Pear]

To really answer that question we would need to consider the context. Is it acting in isolation, or is it protected by point-ADS? Does it have additional sensors to rely on? What's the landscape looking like?

I meant an independent basic S-300PMU1. The landscape likes in Kosovo war.

 

[Feanor]

I'm just guessing, but overwhelm it with HARMs?

 

[Awang se]

If i'm not mistaken, the PMU use the Phased Array acquisition radar with very low sidelobes. this will make it difficult for ARM to target the fire control radar.

 

[polyvios]

As far as the Greek case of S-300 is concerned, we will have an interesting 'confrontation' when Turkey's F-35 enter service.

Hopefully until then the Greeks will have replace or upgrade their systems.

But the scenario of taking out the Greek SAM remains hot. Turkeys intention in a possible conflict is to take them out so that it can gain access to mainlad Greece and Aegean through the south border (making use of air refueling).

Up to now their plan is to use Popeye missiles and possibly HARM, but they will still have to approach very close over an almost open sea area.

 

[CheefCoach]

Almost all S 300 air deface system have range which is greater than Harm missiles. For example S 300PMU1 have maximum range of 150 km. Speed of his missiles are around 2000 m/s which is roughly 4 times quicker than speed of plane (F 16 for example) and at least twice as speed of harm missile. So if plane get inside of 110km circle around S 300PMU1 it can't run out, and maximum range of HARM is 105 km, and probably half of that, HARM can't make a lock. So SEAD plane must get to 50-60 km of S 300 so HARM can lock into him (before he can just power down radar after finished kill). If we add fact that HARM often get locked on decoys, and that S 300 is surrounded and defended by short range AA system like Tor or Pantsir (which are same as ship missile deface), using HARMs is not very good option. Planes can fly below the radar, but min altitude for S 300PMU1 is 100m, or 340 feet, so that operation is risky, because of ground hit or AA guns or man portal missiles.
Current US Air force solution is to use B2 bombers or F 22 fighters and destroy S 300 with bombs. Are those stealth planes really stealth, we won't know until they met in battle.