Drones redefine the battlefield, outsmarting Russia's S‑300W4
Drones have become an integral part of the battlefield in Ukraine. In recent months, particularly useful models controlled via fibre optics have been used, among other things, to hunt so-called valuable targets. This category definitely includes the S-300W4 anti-aircraft battery. We present the behind-the-scenes of the attack and the performance of this system.
The Ukrainians showcased an attack likely by a drone referred to as the "Vampire" or "Baba Jaga" equipped with a thermal imaging camera. According to the Ukrainians' post, the drone bombed a launcher of the medium-range S-300W4 anti-aircraft system somewhere in the Zaporizhia region, causing a fire. The drone then landed a short distance away to record the aftermath.
In the recording below, a fire and panicked Russians running can be seen, but unfortunately, the fire would not have caused an explosion of the missiles in the launcher tubes if they had been there (possibly it would have happened later).
Drone vs. anti-aircraft system worth hundreds of millions of dollars - the confrontation behind the scenes
Medium-range anti-aircraft systems, which can shoot down aircraft over a distance of more than 100 kilometres (62 miles), or ballistic missiles, are costly. For example, in 2014, Egypt ordered four batteries of this system's export version (Antey-2500) from Russia for $1 billion.
This does not mean, however, that the S-300 system and its competitors in its class are suitable for countering everything. Their weakness is slow targets moving just above the ground. Here, short-range systems optimized for countering drones or cruise missiles should supplement them. Apparently, in the case of this battery, they were not present, the crew's training failed, or the system's network was too sparse.
S-300W4 system - one of Russia's best systems
The S-300W4 system, shown in 2014, evolved from the S-300W version. Despite their visual similarities, they differ significantly from the more numerous S-300P sets. Both systems were developed in the 1970s at the Almaz-Antey plants, although the S-300W only entered service in the 1980s.
This variant was created explicitly for Soviet ground forces, which needed a mobile solution against NATO forces' ballistic and cruise missiles. For this reason, the S-300W demonstrates better capabilities in eliminating such threats than the S-300P, which was designed for use by aviation and the navy.
The S-300W system's initial assumptions were that it could destroy aircraft at a distance of up to 100 kilometres (62 miles) and counterballistic missiles at shorter distances (according to Russian data, up to 40 kilometres (25 miles)). More advanced two-stage missiles, 9M82M, were created as technology developed, achieving twice the range. The latest versions allow for eliminating aerial threats at distances of up to 400 kilometres (249 miles).
This system's missiles are characterized by high speed, reaching up to 6,115 km/h (3,800 mph). However, the guidance and target destruction methods differ from those used in advanced missiles, such as the PAC-3 MSE.
The Russian system still uses traditional, semi-active radar guidance, which requires the launcher's fire-control radar to continuously track the target until it is hit. A fragmentation warhead weighing about 150 kilograms (331 pounds) destroys the target.
Read also:
