Talk:S-400 missile system

message: In russian version of the page max range is given as 200km
:again, this is a system not just a single unit thing like a single SAM. it has several types of missiles specialized in several things, which ones are you referring to? or are you referring to the tracking radar? or target acquisition radar? which radars? the system can have many types of radars depending on the configuration.
with that said, the 40N6 missile that the S-400 can use as a range of 400km.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.246.17.71 (talk) 00:22, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Range again 

message: * Stealth. Quote - However, U.S. Air Force officials were dismissive of the technique. “Just because something is technically possible doesn't make it tactically feasible,” one Air Force official with extensive stealth aircraft experience explained. In fact, the US Air Force recognized that a number of frequency bands and the radar can not only see really make effective stealth. But at the same time deny that these radars (any version) can be real creatures. However, the huge amount of suschestvet antistels radars in fact, such as Gamma-DE UHF range. The effective range of 240 kms (149 miles) to the target with radar cross-section of 0,1 m2 and covering a 360 gradsuov due to rotation (height from minus 2 to plus 60).http://www.almaz-antey.ru/en/catalogue/millitary_catalogue/1219/1241/1341http://nationalinterest.org/blog/could-russia-really-shoot-down-f-22-f-35-or-b-2-stealth-17986  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.162.80.64 (talk) 06:34, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Just because something is technically possible doesn't make it tactically feasible - but the current nevertheless made locators

message: 18 divisions of S-400 are planned for purchaise to 2015
It is probably divizion (battalion), but please check, because in English "division" implies a very big unit.
::divizion (дивизион), of course! But I aint sure that battalion is a proper translation for divizion (couple of batteries). --jno 09:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO battalion is the correct translation in western context. 88.192.88.80 (talk) 19:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right! There we have some misunderstandings with it becouse historicaly battalion in artylery (and later in anti-aircraft defence) was named divizion. So in western classification it must be battalion. 195.218.231.67 (talk) 15:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Is the original Russian ''diviziya'' or ''divizion'' here?

message: Just like many other names of soviet/russian weapon systems, this one was taken from the special list of codenames, but initially it was "Triumfator", which was shortened to "Triumf". This explanation was picked up from a private talks with development team member. --jno 09:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  JFYI: Name origin 

message: This is supposedly part of the S-400 family after Almaz and Antey merged, but I must wonder what's the rationale. For antimissile purposes, the new 40N6 ("big" missile) is superior (at least as opined by Russian unclassified sources) to the 9M82M in range, max engagement speed (and thus the range of the IRBM it could counter). Similarly, any of the 48N6 series is superior in range to the 9M82. Even the little dinky 9M96M/E2 has a longer range! So there is no apparent need to 'combine[s] the far range of the S-300VM missile and the advanced electronics of the S-400 missile'. Is there a good explanation for this (or even an official explanation? Kazuaki Shimazaki 13:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: S-400M Samodyerzhets

message: Any cules on what this thing looks like. Obviously it will be hard to get a picture of it as it is reletivly new. 
And secondly any clues on the future operators of the system, other then China. Thanks, Bogdan 18:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: The range is not 3,500km, it is only 400km see http://www.fas.org/news/russia/1999/FTS19990505000617.htm
:For the Nth time, people that edit the sentence are showing an ignorance of the factors involved. The missile's range is 400km. It can engage a ballistic missile out to 60km (IIRC). But the measure in the sentence is the range of the ballistic missile the S-400 can effectively target. The range of a ballistic missile roughly correlates to its speed. For example, short range Scud missiles (~100-200km) have a speed of 1.6-1.8km/s. Modified Scud missiles used by Saddam are in the 2km/s range and have ranges of about 500km. 3km/s corresponds to about 1000km range, 4.5km/s to 2500km and 4.8km/s to 3500km. In short. Reverting. Again. --Kazuaki Shimazaki 01:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RANGE

message: Hadn't we decided to stick with the Russian designations now that they are available? Why change it now to the NATO designation. For older Soviet missiles, this makes some sense because everyone in the West remembers the NATO designation, but this is not true for the newer weapons. I doubt anybody is any more familiar with SA-20 or SA-21 than the S-300 or S-400. Please explain the reason for the change. Kazuaki Shimazaki 01:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, Kazuaki. This issue was discussed many times now (on other weapon systems). I think we should rename it S-400_(missile). Just like the SA-10... ŦħęGɛя㎥ 04:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming of the Page

message: The sources states that it can intercept targets with a speed of 17280km/h but only ballistic missiles with a limited range to 3500km ?
Why not ICBMs were is the difference ? 
--Saiga 21:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the speed is the actual limit. Not being an expert, I suppose that in a missile flying a "purely" ballistic trajectory, the final speed is determined by the distance travelled. I remember that ICBM's reentry speed is as much as 7 km/s. --Kubanczyk 14:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interceptor can be easily slower than incoming warhead, but calculating warhead trajectory and then adjusting interceptor speed and trajectory is possible, so even slow missile (patriot in any version is much slower than S-300 or S-400) can hit warhead.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.103.105.40 (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 4,8km/s

message: The Jane's article quoted for the range of the 40N6 missile says 400km yet in on the page its repeatedly stated as 200km. Either change the citation or the range but get it right people. Until a new citation turns up I'm sticking the range back up to 400km. 81.158.11.190 (talk) 21:45, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Range, Yet Again 

message: "It overshadows the capabilities of the other systems from the S-300 series, with the aim of bring it closer to the capabilities of the MIM-104E Patriot."
This should be rewritten, MIM-104E version (I think it's designation for PAC2 export version of system) is not comparable to S-400 (nor in terms of range, speed, warhead weigt, operation mode etc), so why should S-400 be developed with aim to come closer to capabilities of system that is in another class (don't wanna say inferior because S-400 nor S-300 was combat tested, simply because nobody have attacked countries possesing those systems). Plus 104E version is not even listed in wiki page about patriot. I think this should be rewritten...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.103.105.40 (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  aim to bring it closer to capabilities of MIM-104E Patriot? 

message: Whoever is claiming that the Saudi deal has stalled due to U.S./Isreali pressure needs to get a citation which actually supports said claim or stop adding it. The article only states about Iran being rejected from buying S-300s due to foreign pressure, not Saudi Arabia. As such I'm deleting the claim and will continue to do so until someone finds evidence to support it. 217.43.185.227 (talk) 02:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The reference you keep removing says "Katz noted that some Russian sources "also see pressure from Washington as a reason why Riyadh hasn't signed a major arms agreement with Moscow."  read it all the way though. Jeff Song (talk) 22:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saudi Arabia Deal 

message: launcher? Or maybe even in the wheels? The minimum unit-division. what battalion? be read carefully?
1 division include:1 panoramic radar,1 sector radar,1 guidance radar,8-12 launchers, 8-12 recharge vehicle, Rocket passive and does not work without the complex. measured in the divisions.
Launcher does not work alone--188.255.41.104 (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is English language wikipedia.  You have to write in English.  Also what you write is not supported by the sources you quote.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What English language word is used to describe a system consisting of command and control, search and fire control radars, and 8-12 launchers 

message: Have we settled on battalion ?  The battery (of launchers) with one command centre and multiple radar units is deployed by a battalion of personnel ? One regiment may have 2 or 3 battalions ? - Rod57 (talk) 23:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conclusion - Battalion ? 

message: --Rqasd (talk) 15:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  help fix links 

message: it just looks like a blog, it's - the information system. contains only articles, and does not contain personal the views. BLOG is only visual form of the title sections (chapters).
--Rqasd (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-598.html 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsrussia-to-induct-three-s-400-battalions-in-2012/
*:Triggered by \bairforce-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: http://rostec.ru/news/3744
На вооружение российской армии поступили системы пассивной радиолокации «Москва-1» (10 штук), способные видеть в 2,5 раза дальше, чем аналоги предыдущего поколения. 
Время развертывания занимает 45 минут.
Система сканирует воздушное пространство и, обнаружив оснащенную радиоэлементами технику противника, передает полученные данные средствам радиоэлектронной борьбы (РЭБ), ПВО и ВВС для нейтрализации целей.
Летит крылатая ракета, она излучает 5–6 сигналов одновременно: поддерживает радиосвязь со своим пунктом управления, сканирует рельеф местности радиовысотомером, связывается со спутниковыми навигационными системами, например GPS, на конечном участке включает определение цели  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.104.200.21 (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The new complex passive sensor 400 km radius 

message: Before anybody decides to add Algeria as a current operator of the S-400, please bear in mind that the original source that claims this is this website. Just by reading the website, it's an obvious speculation and is therefore not confirmed. Khazar (talk) 20:35, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  S-400 in Algeria 

message: This article is full of horrible sentence structure and grammar. One example is under the Missile category:
"The 40N6 very long range missile is capable of destroying airborne targets at ranges up to 400 km (250 mi). Active radar homing head. (expected in 2012)[35] To engage targets out of sight from the ground (for homing missile can) is designed to find the target."
What the heck does this even mean? Someone really needs to clean up this article, or at least flag it
CheesusChrist117 (talk) 05:04, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horrible grammar 

message: There are many substantial reports on the S-400 deployment to Syria after the Turkish downing of the Russian aircraft . Spechtia (talk) 21:49, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deployment to Syria

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on S-400 missile system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150427014847/http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1273929.html to http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1273929.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified - 2017 - can remove per sourcecheck 

message: The top right template states that fire unit = division yet isn't consistant about it. Is it true ? Should we use fire units or divisions ? cc: ScrapIronIV. Note: I have no preference but as a reader I'am confuse by the current use of one then the other while equality is suggested yet unclear. --Yug (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fire units or divisions 

message: Saudi Arabia has agreed to purchase S-400 from Russia, according to Saudi television station al-Arabiya and saudi press agency. The deal was reportedly reached on the sidelines of the visit by Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud to Moscow.
Saudi Arabia agrees to buy Russian S-400 air defense system: Arabiya TV
Saudi Arabia agrees to buy Russian S-400 air defense system  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qrmoo3 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saudi Arabia has agreed to buy Russian S-400 

message: Someone should update the current article as there has been developments in the India section.
Source: https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/09/28/india-approves-s-400-buy-from-russia-amid-expectations-for-more-bilateral-deals/
: Let's wait for the deal to be signed per WP:NOTNEWS. Adamgerber80 (talk) 18:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  India approves S-400 buy from Russia 

message: The article reads:
"it can also be used against ground objectives"
How about "ground targets"? 85.193.247.94 (talk) 13:23, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "ground objectives"? 

message: "  Despite this, further uses and analyzes on battlefields in later years have questioned the efficiency of the missile system. -- https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/unanswered-israeli-air-strikes-against-syria-raise-s-400-questions " which was added in Feb 2020 into the lede. The story is mostly a hearsay article without any specifics - more investigation needs to be done before putting this material in the BODY of the article with references, and a mention in the lede ... if these units are manned by Russian operators who are not firing on Israeli strikes, then this is some sort of political attack against Syria's Russian Federation ally and nothing to do with actual battlefield results  50.111.51.247 (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed from article - discuss 

message: you've added this ref name, but forgot to fill in the definition. Could you please add the intended source? Thanks! -- Fyrael (talk) 21:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  THEHINDU13April21 ref 

message: In an effort at clearing some ot the issues elucidated in the introductory template, I have been working on punctuation, NPOV of the article, and clarity of expression. I have left a couple of the issues open, as I have no Russian, nor do I obtain to the strict technology of offensive or defensive missile systems particularly. Also, I am relatively new to editing and have no knowledge of "gallery" modification, though I find some redundancy there.  Please review and help....cordially...thx.Makermark (talk) 22:06, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modificications 

message: An unregistered user, operating under multiple IPs, keeps adding a claim not backed up by any reliable source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S-400_missile_system&diff=1100014552&oldid=1100013434
Analysis of six sources:
1. https://mailbd.net/news/russian-s-400s-multiplyed-by-zero-invincible-himars-49483/
The source of this article is the blogger/youtuber Yuriy Podolyaka. Not wikipedia reliable.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVk-cbyJb0MSwxdEP7WsAxw/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMXDT7usMCDOUGB8Bd7UU4w/videos
2. https://lyricsfreak.com.ru/2022/07/kherson-caa-accused-kyiv-of-trying-to-hit-himars-on-the-bridge-across-the-dnieper/
No mention of an S-400 being used. Also seems to be a blog.
3. https://vg-news.ru/n/160117?ysclid=l5yapmu5ig218169373
The article relies on a youtube video made by the aforementioned blogger/youtuber Yuriy Podolyaka as a source. Not wikipedia reliable.
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hugMGhu2rK4
This is simply a youtube link. Not wikipedia reliable.
5. https://srbin.info/en/svet/ruski-pvo-s-400-u-hersonu-dobio-vazan-duel-protiv-americkih-bacaca-himars/
The article provides no source and simply states it as "Source: Facts". Not wikipedia reliable.
6. The original claim was made on TASS (https://tass.com/defense/1482931), however there is again no mention of S-400 being used.
This S-400 claim cannot be verified on known, prominent news outlets. Eddmanx (talk) 12:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistent addition of unreliable sources 

message: If you don't already know what units an S-400 battalion consists of, it's very hard to understand the Structure and Components sections in this article. And then, how does an S-400 battalion communicate with sister units and HQ ? Of the 3+ radar types which are in the typical or basic S-400 deployment ? - Rod57 (talk) 22:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure and Components 

message: Any declaration from one party involved in a conflict must be signalled as such: a claim, an assumption, something alleged etc. Klehus (talk) 15:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This. There are so many fantastical claim from Ukrainian side immediately reported as true despite lacking real evidence (photo, video etc). Dauzlee (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no confirmation of any S-400 systems destroyed by Ukraine