This is How the A-50s Mainstay Was Shot Down
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 фев 2024
- Let's make some hypotheses about how the Russian A-50 Mainstays have been shot down around the Sea of Azov.
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Mille...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the RUclips Partner Program, Community guidelines & RUclips terms of service.
Chaff is probably deployed with flares at the same time
That only works on very old seekers. Very old ones.
@@NeuroScientician=> S-200
@@NeuroScienticianstill useful, just unlikely to be effective without being paired with other defensive maneuvers
@@NeuroScienticiangiven the size of the craft the size of the deployable chaff could’ve helped to at least make the missile track incorrectly instead of going center mass but that assumes that the aircraft also made defensive maneuvers which… realistically. For its size. Not very possible.
if its a radar guided missile, the A50 would have been warned and they would have dumped chaff only. if it was an IR seeker, the only way they would know is if they saw the missile launch. Chaff works against SAMs and semi active radar missiles, but mostly works on a2a missiles for the most part. Ground radars have more power to beat some chaff clouds.
The A50 was defending against something for 80 seconds. They knew something was approaching from far away but they where unable to escape.
Exactly, shooting flares doesnt mean it was heatseeking, they were defending with all they got.
@@acoustic5738exactly. Flares are visible, but the A-50 could very easily have been simultaneously deploying chaff also (which would be invisible to a ground observer).
@@arberg5760It was soviet practice to fire missiles with different seekers at a target, so one would dispense chaff and flares
It might have been not far away but several missiles.
Cool story bro!
You’re looking great. Those trips to the gym are working and you’ve really shed some kilos compared to earlier videos. Well done! 👍
The problem with FRIENDLY FIRE
is that its actually not too friendly at all 🙄🙄
Good observation...
@@Millennium7HistoryTech here's another.
Over the sea, descending, low, heatseaker ... connect the dots.
It's a drone alright, but i don't think it's flying.
@@Millennium7HistoryTechwait so Russia actually downed their own aircraft I thought this was more RUclips crap
@@wilsonsantiago3095twice within a month? Aircraft that are so deeply imbedded in the AD C2 loop? Once is unlikely to the point of being unrealistic. Twice is near impossible. This is something else. I wouldn't put it past Ukraine to cook up something extremely expensive and in short supply that did this and they are keeping it under wraps because it has an obvious counter once you know what it is. Fratricide is so unlikely that you can discount it until other avenues are proven wrong.
@@Millennium7HistoryTechwhat about manpads? The path of the plane was predictable. A bit further away than the other one.
The problem with the friendly fire argument lies in the fact that the A-50 would be coordinating all air defense in the region by nature of its wide field of view. How could the ground units not know the A-50 was not only friendly, but the origin of their overall air picture? In order for that to work, you have to invoke hostile intent from within Russian air defense. Or extreme incompetence. The length of time we see the A-50 defending itself implies a long time of flight for the incoming. S-200 has a lot of fingers pointing at it.
Exactly, I find it hard to believe anyone that knows enough about how to operate a system capable of shooting down an A-50 wouldn't know how to instantly recognize it as friendly. As to the S-200, wouldn't russian air defenses see and intercept that missile? It has the potential range to hit an A-50 but seems like a very obvious threat especially for the second time. (also S-200 isn't Heatseeking so explosion of flares don't really make sense)
@@einehrenmann6156 Maybe they were trying to shoot down the s200 and accidentally shot at a50?
At Mach 4, a missile would travel 68 miles in 80 seconds that the A-50 was defending for. Most air defense missiles travel at around mach 4. So the A-50 picked up the missile at likely the furthest away it possibly could and still couldn't evade.
@@TJackson736 With the only caveat that he was 256 kilometers from the front line, and 68 miles is 110 kilometers
@StandingHereI Just because the A-50 detected it 110 km away doesn't mean it was fired at 110 km away.
Interesting you did not even cover the Ukrainian claim of using S-200. When the first A-50 and Il-22 were hit, my first thought was S-200. S-200 is already two stage, and has a large structure ready to take new systems. The Poles were rumored to have modified theirs to a great extent in the inter war decades.
A comment elsewhere wondered how an s200 could have a target radar-illuminate. Reminded that a week two ago there was a claim of hitting Ukrainian jets on the ground including Mald drones. Maybe such a system could shepherd in a strike like that
ma be a new seeker like an anti radiation one
The hitting of the flare suggests something else. There were never modifications to the SA5 with IR anywhere. Plus the explosion seems light for an SA5.
Maybe it was hit by some FrankenSAM.
Almost certainly a Polish C upgrade on older Ukranian S200's. It's worth noting that Ukraine had deactived their S200's before the invasion of Crimea, but have just recently returned them to service. Given Poland's expertise with the S200 system, their close ties to Ukraine, and the recent re-activation of a SAM system that even the Ukranian military considered obsolete, I would say that a Ukranian version of S200C is almost certainly responsible.
I was fully expecting Otis to be driving your vehicle, whilst you were giving another legendary presentation. I’m slightly disappointed that my prediction didn’t come true however, I’m not disappointed in your content. As always, it’s informative and non-biased.
Cheers, Gus.
The story I heard from the Russian side, is that Ukrainians fired old modified S200 missiles to the general vicinity of the A50, and the Russian air defense while trying to shoot them down, hit the A50. There was a case a few years ago of Israeli jets spoofing a Syrian air defense system into shooting down a Russian IL 22, in a similar way. Either way, Russian resources are claiming friendly fire on this one, however reliable/unreliable the info they give may be
Russians always claim friendly fire, makes me wonder if they even have IFF at this point.
The video simply misses the most probable way. In the last 2 years likely they made a new off the self mobil radar which can use the missile of the S-200D Dubna SAM and makes unnecessary the rest of the system. Likely only a single launcher was deployed with minimal EQ then they wait for the A-50.
In the first A-50 case the range of the PATRIOT is 100% fine, the second, the launch from 300 km make very likely the S-200D Dubna based "FrankenSAM".
The part what states the AGM-88 is usable without any change is simply false. It never was designed to have power supply for a 300 km flight even it would something loft so far.
The case of the downed Il-22 is a topic for another day. Contrary to the Russian claims THEIR released track data showed that the Il-22 and the IAF plane were not in the beam of the fire control radar, which is very narrow (1.4 or 0.7 deg.) They were close and the operators of the S-200 simply started to track a wrong target only with some degrees from the indented one.
A gym with a "power assisted" door. ;)
Oh and thanks from Germany for reporting, appreciate it - as usual!
There are people with reduced mobility and they can still go to the gym
He seems to be pretty knocked out.
You need this guy to post in DPA chat more. Wyatt has cultivated a rather toxic low IQ anti western social circle there. The technical knowledge, huge bias void of fact and a general low standard of conversation, debate and education that is kind of shocking. Millennium 7 would install some hard truths to a lot of indoctrinated individuals there.
Thanks for the reminder. Time to send a donation to Wyatt for keeping a very open community - sometimes I am even disgusted but that is the price, I am willing to pay for open minds being able to be open minded. And of course, you will find idiots and questionable stuff - but you can engage with it! And that is important! Willy would back me up, I'd guess. :) See you! @@randyalthetime2116
@@randyalthetime2116 ... if they can read and comprehend there.
The lengths we go to postpone doing our workouts eh ;)
Great vid!
Hey man I doubt that you will watch my comment or remember me but I have been watching your video from back when you had only a few thousand views and I am so glad to see you come so far. Your videos are really some of the most informative videos I have found on the internet. Keep up the good work and good to see you back in health
The A-50 would have been releasing both flares and chaff. You just don't see the chaff but it would explain the first missile detonating early.
One more viable explanation is that special forces or partizans fired shoulder mounted or short-range AA ground based adopted missile, from within Russian territory. Aircraft low, flaring, flair distracts missiles. This also happened before with targeting large civilian aircrafts on airfields approach.
The problem with this argument is that an AWACS like the A-50 would be operating well out of the altitude limits of a MANPADS and even most SHORAD.
I'm convinced now it was a MANPADS grade missile fired from a stealthy drone. The fact that it was seduced by either a flare or a radar decoy with a flare a flare indicates a reasonably advanced but no late model missile.
-During the second world war the Germans used radar absorbing materials on the masts of their u-boats. One was a Jaumann absorber coded name schornsteinfehger (chimney sweep) that absorbed 96% of radar and was about 3/4 of a wavelength thick and the other was a ferrite filled rubber absorber called Wesch only 1.5mm thick that absorbed 80%. How to make them is fully available on line in BIOS documents.
-It wouldn't be hard to produced a stealthy shaped drone and coat it in stealthy materials to achieved a fairly effective stealthy object especially if it was small.
-Those Ukrainian Sea Drones clearly must be hard to detect.
@@williamzk9083 Actually aircraft was fairly low. It has unusual patterns of flight for this kind of aircraft. I agree that such long defending is not consistent with MANPADS idea, but we don't have much information on that event and maybe multiple launches from ground were detected. Furthermore IL-76 that survived incident has large rocket damage pattern, so MANPADS idea is probably wrong.
Did you ask Ottis about any involvement in this shoot down?
Otis went full tilt and morphed into Skynet.
Always informative thank you. I have often wondered how this was achieved.
No mention of the S-200? The Ukrainians said they used a modified one. Likely with command guidance and last stage illumination.
slave linked to a patriot radar (or AWACS or satellite) ?
I've done the math on this. The closest place where ukraine could have hid an Air Defense system was Vuhledar and the A-50 went down almost exactly 50 miles directly southwest of Rostov on Don. It's approximately 115 miles from the crash location to Vuhledar. It looks like the A-50 began evasive action about 105 miles from Vuhledar. The thing is there is no air defense weapon system save new Russian ones that could have shot the A-50 down from those distances with that much time for the A-50 to react. The A-50 traveled about 10 miles during the evasion and they dumped a ton of altitude and at the end they probably weren't much more than 15,000 feet high if that. The Ukrainians claim it was the s-200 but even though it has a nominal 150 miles range that max range is for a cooperative target that is not evading and stays up at 36,000 where the air is thin and the missile can travel far. The S-200 simply couldn't have hit a A-50 from that range once the A-50 began to maneuver.
It was most likely a Russian BUK system, the one we saw fire in the video. And because systems like the BUK paint their target with a high power radar beam that the missile which is reflected and which the missile homes in on itself the BUK actually was targeting the A-50 intentionally. That system is called semi-active radar homing. A specific targeting radar with a tight beam must paint the target aircraft for the AD missile to hit. There isn't a way for a 'malfunction' caused this.
I do believe that the Urkainians did fire an s-200 at the A-50 but that it had no chance of hitting. This did contribute to the accident thought I think. I think the A-50 crew was dumping flares out of desperation. I think the BUK crew was excited and was incompetent.
I've heard that the Russian VVS and Russian army AD systems don't cooperate well with the IFF VVS IFF system.
That makes sense to me.
Impossible. Buk crews do not fire on their own, so we suppose to believe Ru AD has no communication with command? nor they can identify their own plane, very important one, flying at the same area every day? S-200 story is ridiculous. Same as Patriot (256km away from the frontline)
What about a longer ranged S-200D? The ones with ramjets and even greater range?
@@georgethompson1460 yeah that's the one I thought we were talking about. the 7000kg missile with the ramjet intakes on the sides that were the design inspiration for other russian weaponry like the kh-31 and the moskit and things like that. I don't think it can hit a-50 at 100+ miles if it flees.
BUK? No, it has laughably short range missile to the goal.
The video simply misses the most probable way. In the last 2 years likely they made a new off the self mobil radar which can use the missile of the S-200D Dubna SAM and makes unnecessary the rest of the system. Likely only a single launcher was deployed with minimal EQ then they wait for the A-50.
In the first A-50 case the range of the PATRIOT is 100% fine, the second, the launch from 300 km make very likely the S-200D Dubna based "FrankenSAM".
As far as the missile appearing to go for a flare: This could be misleading, because it is likely that the A-50 was releasing both chaff and flares simultaneously. Obviously we cannot see the chaff even under good visibility conditions, much less at night. A radar-guided missile which flies into a dense enough chaff cloud to think it found a target wouldn't be visibly distinguishable from a heater doing the same thing to a flare in that video.
In addition to that, the flare had gone out when the missile hit that area but any chaff would still be there.
Do missiles actually detonate on flares though? They just point at them and don't they need a radar proximity fuse to detonate at least?
@@dimman77 I'm not aware of any which are designed to fuze just on proximity to a flare.
That said, a decoy flare like that isn't just a piece of fire in the sky, there IS a metal canister. As long as these flares were burning, they may even have been parachute flares. It's not inconceivable for the prox fuze to pick up the metal components of the flare.
The missile could also be equipped with a self-destruct which triggers if the tracked object exceeds the gimbal limits of the seeker.
@@ShuRugal Thanks. My only "experience" is with the old game "Flanker" which I believe was Ukrainian devs. The manual had some alleged firing doctrine of ripple firing R-27s, one radar guided and one IR, and correspondingly the SU-27 countermeasures were always chaff and flares combined. The only way you would get notification of an IR missile inbound would be if you weren't radar locked but got the "nyck" (pusk or Launch) warning that was supposed to be an IR sensor that warned of heat spikes from a rocket motor launch. So it would just make sense to pair chaff and flares as a single activation, because it's tough to know what you're being shot with.
And sub question to the radar proximity fuse, would a chaff cloud activate the fuse?
But again this was just a game that seemed pretty realistic to someone with absolutely zero real experience.
@@dimman77 re chaff cloud activating a fuze: maybe? That's going to depend on whether there's enough chaff density to reflect the prox fuze.
If the missile has a safety to donate after it loses lock, though, then that would also apply.
Great video as always!
My hypothesis is a modified s200 missile guided by patriot radar using track via missile. So A50 only gets illuminated at the terminal phase.
Poland actually has a modernized S200 system in service that could potentially operate this way.
I don't think the s200 has the PK to hit a defending A50 at long range. If Ukrainians fired the s200, it was likely as a distraction while something else made the kill.
@@guitarazn90210 A fighter yes but A50 is not very maneuverable though
@@JerryZhangzif it just turns around, runs, and dives that's enough. And that's what it did
Yes, the video simply misses the most probable way. In the last 2 years likely they made a new off the self mobil radar which can use the missile of the S-200D Dubna SAM and makes unnecessary the rest of the system. Likely only a single launcher was deployed with minimal EQ then they wait for the A-50.
In the first A-50 case the range of the PATRIOT is 100% fine, the second, the launch from 300 km make very likely the S-200D Dubna based "FrankenSAM".
The Ukrainians said they shot it down with a modified/updated S200? is that possible?
Yes, it is absolutely possible even in its stock configuration. Ukrainians have also proved very adept at modifying old Soviet weapons so they could have modified it for additional range also.
Definitely possible. If you test the S-200 with SamSim, the range of the missile is insane. Goes further than the radar can target.
Makes me wonder if they stuck a patriot seeker in there and used the patriot radar.
@@arberg5760Also Poland *has* modernized S200's, it's not a stretch to think they helped Ukraine modernize their own S200 batteries.
@@arberg5760 Yeah, they tweaked some ancient Soviet cr43p in a garage and now it's the superweapon! Or maybe the US gave them a prototype of something...
If chaff is released with the flares, it could make it look like the missile chased the flare. I wouldn’t rule out S-200.
Can a S-200 be modified with newer electronics?
@@Curling12341 It wouldn’t really need to, but I assume that it could. I don’t know how reliable it be, however.
they've already had their range extended, and Ukraine has ground launched nato air to air missiles near the border region with aamrams so it would be the next logical step a minor upgrade@@Curling12341
Hope all is well with you and your family m7 enjoy this coming weekend
Gus in gym! I feel betrayed.
Why do people think the first missile exploded on flares? I don’t see a flare where it detonates. A miss and self destruct of a radar guided missile is just as likely IMO.
I still think it was a modified S-200. Ukraine was adapting them with GPS for ground attack roll, it’s not unthinkable they have put an active seeker on it now and launched with initial guidance from a Patriot or S-300 radar or even NATO AWCS assets. The flares could have just been part of a countermeasure program with both flare and chaff.
This ticks all the boxes. Plausable Ukrainian capability, explains the targets track, turning cold and trying to fly away when it either is illuminated by the active seeker or sees the inbound missile. The Russian air defense launching to take it down.
how about some kind of mobile sam site sitting on a boat that they sail out underneath the flight path of the A-50, considering both have been shot down over/near the sea and that it would fix the issue of range/stealth?
Ukraine has no access to the sea of Azov, that's a Russian lake for the moment.
@@JohnHughesChampigny you must mean for a long, long while😅
@@deanboy2416 Keep coping.
@@JohnHughesChampigny I could say the same to you xD
got any real arguments to the contrary?
@@deanboy2416 Why should I bother. You already spouted your unsupported bullshit, "deanboyrandomnumbers".
If the A-50 had a malfunctioning IFF, it could easily be a buk launcher or an IGLA, but my best guess is a portable Manpad, and the person aiming didn't know the IFF frequencies
You don't choose friendly fire. Friendly fire chooses you. On the other hand, this war is a perfect proving ground for testing new tech against a same peer adversary.
could it be an S-200?
poland had some upgraded ones in service before the war and ukraine probably had a bunch of them in storage.
its a long shot both figuratively and literally but who knows
maybe an s200 launched from an airplane using usa satellite targeting
Nice, i was needing going to the gym since some time 👍😂
You briefly mention in an on-screen note (4:43) the Raytheon SkyCeptor. Defense News has an article from 2022 that the company was "offering SkyCeptor missiles to Warsaw." Perhaps the Poles gifted one or more of them to Ukraine for this attack. The headline is "Raytheon offers SkyCeptor, Polish industry cooperation for air defense deal." According to the WIkipedia article on the David's Sling version, it has a range of 250 KM or 160 miles. The article mentions that it has "a radar and _an electro-optical sensor."_ Hence the flares?
It is a possibility I thought of. it is also compatible with the Patriot infrastructure.
Poland never ordered this missile.
256km from the frontline. add 50km. No it was not Patriot, or at least any known version... maybe some special modification/prototype.
Among all your options, the option for "something new" is what I like. Ukraine has been getting creative with all sorts of technologies. For example, they developed the longest range sniper rifle in existence. They also improved a prior Soviet tank design to deploy in this war. Even before the war, Ukraine was developing a lot of the Russian (previously Soviet) technologies, so it would make sense for it to have developed something new that could attack an A-50 from a long distance. Calling something new a NATO technology is crossing a line of national interest that seems unlikely to me. It pre-supposes that Ukraine cannot develop a new thing themselves, and it also presumes that some European or American company would sell something new to Ukraine without government approval.
250km from the frontline (add 50km more, it certainly wasn't directly on the line), 300km absolutely impossible it was Patriot. At least any known type, maybe some modification/prototype deployed by US for this occasion. The most logical conclusion.
M7 goat never disappoints
It's UNLIKELY, but still the MOST LIKELY. Logic here is next level, guys, you just can't grasp it.
Did I miss the "This is how" part of the video? Because I just saw a bunch of speculation.
5:00 ~ The story I've heard, the Ukrainians have old Soviet era S200 or S300 (?) batteries, but those are not all that capable and they're old, so they modernised / upgraded them. Same casing, same nose-cone, but the guidance is all new and the motor is all new.
The clever part, was the solid fuel rocket. It gives slightly more thrust on launch and for 10 ~ 15 seconds, but then it gives about half the thrust but burns less than half as quickly. The result is lower 'cruise speed' but dramatically more range. It's not 'powered' for 30 seconds and then gliding, it's powered for well over a minute.
Theory goes the Russians saw it launch, and decided it was outside that weapon's range, so no major effort was made to avoid it, but by the time they realised the missile wasn't running out of speed / energy, it was a bit too close to do anything much about it. The new upgraded guidance wasn't going to be distracted or misled by flares, or chaff ... It's newer and smarter.
You can't tell the difference between the old Russian missile on radar, and you really can't tell just looking at it, you'd have to open up the casing and inspect it.
Sorry, I can't give you the source. I didn't write it down or save it.
Look in the car tuner enthusiast channels about a 'resto-mod'. Take a car from the '70s or '80s and give it a modern engine and turbo... That's what the Ukrainians have done to the old Soviet missiles. A Resto-mod. The external casings and fins and everything are the same, but the internals are new and modern, and much better than the old Russian stuff.
I'm guessing, but I think the guidance includes an element of HARM. It can see any radar source like an AWACS and track it. Unless that target shuts down all transmission, (which is not going to hide them in any other way) the missile is not going to lose them or be distracted. If they start sending out something else, like a GPS jamming signal, that's just something else for the missile to track.
If you google search 'Soviet SAMs' then pay attention to anything that mentions the S-300, look for updates and changes and improvements. Evolution & development. For one, I find stories about the Ukrainians using old Soviet SAMs as ground target attack missiles. Who says it has to hit aircraft? It's a bomb on a rocket ~ we can hit anything we want with it.
Some pilots set the counter measure system to release chaff and flare at the same time, so it shouldn’t be a surprise.
Ukraine apparently claim they used the S-200. An unmodified version of the S-200 doesn't seem very likely so maybe a franken-SAM combining the long-range missile with a heat seeker from the IRIS-T or something similar.
They can claim they used Zelensky's diIdo, but S-200 is not a superweapon that can hit a plane 300km away...
The S-200 does claim to have missile with a brochure-range of 300km, however it does seem unlikely that the original missile would be capable of hitting a strategic target at anything like that range. This is why I propose a version modified with compnents from a modern western missile.@@bdleo300
How can you tell it was not deploying chaffs as well as flares? Only one of those would be visible in the footage.
Is the range of Patriot in this case limited by the missile's range, or rather by the Patriot ground station's radar's targeting range? I think I read something hinting that a stealthy drone with radar was used to illuminate the target for the missile. The same scenario would work for the S-200 or S-300.
It would be useful if it were mentioned that the A-50's were *allegedly* shot down given that not a single piece of evidence has ever surfaced. Given how large the planes are and that both alleged crash sites are easily surveillable, one would expect at least something.
All members of the Crew have been reported KIA in Russian media. Also both are aircraft is missing on Satellite images from Russian Airbases. There is a video of the Second aircraft Deploying Flares and chaff, getting hit and crashing. The First one Crashed in the Sea so there are no Photos of the Wreckage but photos from an IL 22M (or P) that was Accompanying it with its tail shredded by splinters from a SAM. There is Plenty of evidence
it has to be S-200, i don’t know what else could have shot it down at that range and the S-200 was designed to shoot down aircraft like this
Does that hugest-tail bock the A-50’s radar beam, creating a vulnerable blind spot?
Nice job at the gym!
Modified S-200, including a LPI radar seeker or a Meteor, launched from a modified fighter (Link 16?) Or ground launcher. Anyway, a very significant Western expertise and industrial capacity was needed
I favour the 'unexamined' use of Special Forces carrying MANPADS such as top-end Stinger. This A-50 was a target worthy of an SF operation, and a team of 4x4 could carry and employ >4 modern missiles. The A-50 area of operation, climbout and transit routes are known. It wouldn't be easy to insert such a team, but this is what SF do. Once in place, a diversionary op using, say, S-200s could force the A-50 to descend... into the secondary but main attack from MANPADS' 'No Escape Zone'.
Given my background, I'm mildly intrigued why Gus didn't even mention this Likely Tactic. I tend to look for what has not been mentioned....
Hello! Could it be a portable anti air fires by behind the line task force?
"Escalatory"? NATO has a lot of catching-up to do before it reaches Russia's level of 'escalation'.
Thats a nice meet.
I watched this video in gym too hahaha
the angle of the line between the right hand explosion @ 3:12 and AWACS before hit is exactly same as the angle of the line of smoke going through the AWACS @ 3:25 when hit. Surely this indicates the right hand explosion was a russian SAM trying to intercept an incoming missile along this line? Which would imply incoming was 3-5km away when SAM detonated?
Hitting the gym like a SAM on an A50 😁💪
Meteor HAS two stages. It has a solid booster in the ramjet combustion chamber. It flies far and fast, and even if the Russians could detect it, events like the Moskva sinking indicate that Russians and their hardware are far less capable than we'd expect.
The Russians state it was friendly fire just like previous shoot down. The current theory is that the Poles/US/UK helped Ukraine jury rig an Polish S-200C "Vega"s (which has the range and can travel at above MACH 4, plus the Poles created the upgraded S-200C in the 2000's) and had it guided by Patriot radar to target.
There is an option not mentionned : a S-200 guided by an occidental radar with a fairly large engagement mode radius like the AN/MPQ-65A of Raytheon or the GF 300 of Thales. The Ukrainians said they used S-200 missiles and it took them 2 weeks to set up the ambush.
Wasn’t it already said to be an S-300 launch? I am not buying both are friendly fire or some secret stealth weapon.
The last I heard about the F-16s is that it’ll be in May. Ukrainian pilots are currently flying solo training missions, but not deployed yet.
Keep it up with the workouts - you look so healthy!
Hail the algorithm!
What about a sea drone or manned vessel with aa capability but relaying on external sensors?
At wat height was A50 shot down, does anyone know, thx.
It wasn't an answer, merely a guessing, a bad one, even for that. I'm suprised the most likely scenario wasn't even mentioned, the modified S-200 system, what had option to aim the ECM source. I don't know why the A-50 dropped flares, probably that was with chaff, or they had a suspicion, there are some missile what use IR guidance at the terminal phase. Or could be only accidental a radar guided missile hit a flare because that was in the way. Just like a lottery.
Could it have been launching chaff alongside flares and that's why one of the missiles went awry?
Was my thought too, it'd be pretty invisible on the video (even if it was daytime) so could have been dropping both. Though from all I've heard in recent years is that chaff has been rendered very ineffective vs. almost anything reasonably modern.
S-200 modified to resist ECM. Poland modified some 20 years ago.....
In summary - you have no better idea than the rest of us 😀
Could it habe been some sort of SAM smuggeld on russian ground in combination with insider information about where to look when in order to avoid needing a big radar and so on?
simple flying wing with small off the shelf jet engine intended to ram aircraft or explode close by. 500km range easily. build in garage - doable. lots of garages out there.
Looks like the first missile hit a chaff instead of a flare. The flares are already burnt out where the first missile detonated. The chaffs are likely fired automatically with the flares as a bundle. It's also possible that the missiles were fired without guidance at first, with guidance turned on at the last minute to give as little warning as possible to the A-50. Missiles that haven't gone pitbull are very hard to detect. If the A-50 knew a missile was coming from 200 km away, it would've had plenty of time to defend.
HARM will follow radar emissions. Not chaff or flares.
Flares are visible but it could be that the first missile goes for the chaff that is not visible. I think this is very unlikely since the target is very big to be fooled in the radar spectrum. But is not the same for heat seeking. Engines are cooler than a fighters and flares are very hot.
Going back to infrared.
Friendly fire + IFF failure. ok but why was this aircraft flying so low.
Was some thing firing before this 2 misiles that we see in the video?
Chaff reflects radar emissions. Bouncing energy off chaff clouds is a known defensive maneuver.
Haven't you seen the other video? Which shows the launch of the friendly missile at the A-50
Could be also a infiltrator team deep inside RU territory with mobile-ish anti aircraft missile.
An Anti-aircraft HARM would probably be misidentified by the A-50 as a regular anti aircraft missile and might have deployed the wrong counter measures. Deploying flares thinking it was an IR missile, deploying chaff and other EW measures trying to fool an active radar, not realizing that it was radar seeking.
From what I've seen, there are no more chaff payloads like in WWII during the landing in Normandy, but one singe package. It's possible that flares today may have an electromagnetic spectrum of their own. After all, heat does generate EM radiation.
Ukraine has been using haarm missiles as sensors on some of their aircraft, it makes perfect seance to me that they could put one on one of the old soviet drones they have been using on targets in Crimea, and simply have the drone take the location that the haarm has given it as destination and launch the haarm whenever it gets close.
The A-50 is a prized possession in any country’s airforce. I cant believe how the Russians just carelessly send them like sitting ducks. Also, can they not detect those missiles flying towards them??
They clearly detected the missiles, hence the counter-measures. What's more interesting is the rather lackluster reaction beyond that. A plane trying to escape a missile at long range would drop altitude and execute turns, even in something as bulky as this.
In may 23 agm88 G sholud have completed testing and is said to have 300 km range and significantly higher speed. Is it possibile that some samples has been supplied to ukraine?
hell yeah bro cardio rocks
Have you considered a SAM launched USV platform?
Ukraine might have flown ghost drones, EW trick, made the Russians shoot at a ghost plane, next to the a50
Interesting speculation. For me personally, the idea of something approaching with stealth makes the mos sense. Unless, the A50’s abilities to detect small, fast moving objects have been vastly overstated, discrimination problems in the software?
I would exclude that, missiles are relatively easy targets.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech what about Manpads? If you have a pattern of operations, predictable flights paths….. sneaking in small teams with Manpads becomes more viable? We know the Ukranians operated Manpads from their small attack boats…..
@@phelansa23 That was my first suspension.
realtivly slow speed, fairly low. Sounds like a manpad to me. Something say similar to what happen to 2003 Baghdad DHL attempted shootdown incident.
@@matsv201man pads dont reach that altitude
@@anuvisraa5786 the plane was not at full altitude when shor down. It should have been in range of a manpad.
Worth saying that have happened before like with a A300 in 2003 in iraq
What if the first missile explosion was caused by a cloud of chaffs? If the crew at the A-50 detected an incoming object not by its active radar emission but by its radar crosssection I think they would try to do anything to evade... that means chaff + flare + electronic countermeasures...
If this is a new kind of Surface Air Missile being used by Ukraine maybe its radar signature is not known by the A-50's RWR ?
Even if the mainstay could react to a harm or amraam, could it actually evade?
Given that the A50 crew believed the attacking weapon was thermally guided, one possibility would be a Stormshadow cruise missile, programmed to fly at the same altitude, and home on the thermal image of the A50. That would have the stealth to approach the A50, yet reveal itself to the radar when the nose cone is jetisoned to expose the infrared camera.
stormshadow isn't it air to ground? It isn't designed at all for this role even if it was air to air
Yes it is a large, long range, turbofan powered, subsonic bunker busting cruise missile. It is also very stealthy, redirectable in flight, and homes on its target using a high resolution thermal camera and computer vision.
It could have been Modernized S-200 missile, or even a Meteor launched from Su-27 or MiG 29.
But the second option is not very likely for the same reason it was probably not F-16 with AMRAAM. Both have huge radar cross sections and would be almost certainly spotted/shot down long before getting to firing position.
If Ukraine possess a stealth drone, it's likely the TAI Anka-3 or some derivative. IIRC the current prototype uses an Ivchenko-Progress engine so Ukraine has some leverage. The Anka-3 was hinted to carry "Simsek" drones possibly for SEAD missions, and it's capable of both air-to-surface and air-to-air.
HARM on a rocket booster, similar to the GLSBD concept?
IR guidance for the missile suggests that it is probably a short range type. The A50 AEW aircraft doesn’t have full AWACS command and control features but it can still easily detect and identify any aircraft or missile from at least medium range and probably much further.
Therefore to me it looks like a MANPADS is the most likely weapon used. Possibly an Igla or two fired by partisans inside Russian territory as the A-50 passed near enough. The orbits and altitudes should be fairly predictable and might allow an ambush within the range and altitude limits of a MANPADS placed in a favorable location.
So many flaws to this analysis.
S200 has the range, but perhaps not the radar, so the best analysts are suggesting a hybrid S200 launcher guided by a more-modern guidance radar which using Occam's razor be the most likely answer.
It is well documented that the A50 had to defend for a lengthy period before the missiles hit, eliminating the suggestion that any near-missile could be the culprit.
While it appears the missile hits a flare this could be (very likely) dispensed with chaff at the same time, which we would not see. A missile detonating in chaff would appear to be striking the flare.
what about a modified S-200? Or a few of those, perhaps fitted with active radar?
Ukranian shoot down a passager plane over the Black Sea in early 200s. S200 missed target drone and somehow managed to hit an airliner 250km from the launch site. This in inexplicable, but it happened.
1. what if there were multiple AA missiles shot in a pack
2. on radar it would look like a single missile
3. on some video a "local" AA missile was seen launched, which hit a target
3. but if the other(s) made it to the A-50, game over
4. there are long range AA missiles with > 300km range ... the big question is, does UA have them ... ?! R-33/37, KS-172, Meteor, S-200,S-300 ...
But after all ... why is there no multi layer air defense by the Russians ?
Are you sure they're not using magic?
I can't remember where exactly it was said (or written) but I remember someone estimating that it might have been an old fashioned SA-2, which suposedly has much greater range than Patriot. I'm not certain if Ukraine still have these in its inventory and if so, it does not explain why in the alleged video footage the supposed missile went for the flares, I admit. On the other hand, is it conceivable that A-50s eject flares and chaff at the same time?
Just a few thoughts...
Keep that healthy lifestyle going man, we need people like you.. you are the foil for a lot of sensationalism, and don't think that isn't appreciated.
Why did it take 5 days to upload the video ?
I do have a life outside RUclips you know.
@@riccccccardo who is this?
One theory, courtesy of Cap from the Grim Reapers DCS group and channel. Ukraine could have used ECM systems to cover limited airstrikes on the Russian side of the FLOT. The jamming meaning the A50 had to move closer to direct counter air. Bringing it within range of an old S200 battery. Possibly using guidance from a Patriot radar system...thoughts?
S200 is a big old missile. They'd certainly see it coming, for at least the 80 seconds the commenter below mentioned.
A couple comments:
The A-50 may have been dropping RF decoys or chaff in addition to flares, but we wouldn't be able to see those. The fact that the first missile seemed to hit a flare doesn't necessarily mean it was IR guided or fused.
The fact that it was hit at low altitude opens the possibility of a MANPADS attack by special forces or collaborators on the ground. That would be consistent with both IR guidance and Ukraine's claim that their intelligence forces were responsible. Prior to this conflict I would have dismissed such a possibility, but we've seen a previous attack against an A-50 that was unquestionably mounted by commandos (the short-range drone attack at Machulishchy in 2023).
I tend to agree that Patriot isn't likely. I'm skeptical that an S200 was used, the circumstances around the downing of Siberian Airlines 1812 suggest that it has the range provided that illumination is available.
The F-16 hypothesis is indeed ridiculous. The A-50s are the most valuable assets in the Russian arsenal and the F-16s would be very detectable.
You say the A-50 would have time to react to NRAM, but the A-50 was reacting by descending and releasing flares. What else could it do to avoid a missile?
I heard someone say that Ukraine said it was an upgraded s-200 missile but I can’t confirm this. The suggestion was that the s-200 might work with the patriot radar.
Sounds like (possibly) BAe systems “suter system 3”. Not much is known about system 3 but it is a further development of suter 1 and 2. The Suter system is from around 2000 with version 3 around 2010. Suter 3 can take over enemy defensive systems and to some degree “manipulate” control over the system. Could Suter latest iterations target and launch a surface to air missile asset?
wonder if theres a home-on emissions mode, like a HARM or something?
My bet: They put IRIST on a unmanned surface vessel, one if their famous drone boats, sneaked up on AWACS and shot at close range from below. Would explain how a heatseeker got so damm close to an AWACS without anyone noticing the missile or launsh platform.
This or Ukrainian SOF doing something unexpected, like sneak a ground launcher for a small SAM on a tiny boat, or improvised sub. Getting something like that into the region shouldn't be out of the question. It could even be standard Nato SOF gear that they got via rail.
Yes, I think so too .. but I wonder why I don't see this version so often. What we know for sure, is that the A-50 was releasing flares (they must have known the missile was heat-seeking) and one of the missiles wen't for a flare. Besides manpads, which I had rules out, assuming that an AWACS-style plane would fly too high, we're left with IRIS-T in the ground lauched heat-seeking department. Right?
In sales videos all IRIS-T SLM vehicles/components are driving neatly side-by-side which they wouldn't once deployed. Then - the missile is container launched. Not that I would know, but I assume that given the price of a single missile the cost of extra hardware to wire up an IRIS-T missile container to the rest of the system via an off-the-shelf digital radio connection .. must be really cheap.
So far, I had thought of a really dirty old truck with nice Z markings driving around in the occupied territory around Berdjansk, but I like the sea drone version even more.
you mean the pink rubber boat where they put HiMARS on to threaten the Kerch bridge last year? 🤣
I was going to say the same either that or maybe a long range stealth missile like the Taurus but fitted with a heatseeker or other radar, or maybe a drone boat with a long range data link to a ground radar station. Either via satellite or another way but idk.
Knowing the russian navy you could sail an entire Carrier Strike force into the Azov sea and go undetected.