Since it’s January and you are mentioning Pajero, how about this one:

So what is your point? Have they tested it against the Growler or terrain-following cruise missiles? The only thing that shows is that S-300 works in a moderate ECM environment.

While it is true that first of the Yasen boats (Severodvinsk) has been under construction for 20 years, your presumption is completely wrong. Yasen has caused quite a stir in the US Navy, much like the Akula class did in the late 80s. Right now, they are in production, the work had restarted on them some 10 years ago,…

I meant that Russia would be very hurt (in every way) if they were to do something to the Baltic states like they did to Ukraine.

I’ve already read it and it’s a good article. But the point that I’m trying to make is that, in this case, S-400 is only a psychological weapon, another example of what they call “maskirovka”. Something to get our attention.

Brimstone, baby!

Spot on, and good elaboration!

Again, why would anyone want to engage Russia in open war? Our economy certainly can’t take a full scale war. In fact, no one today is ready for such a thing, except maybe China.

But what systems? There is no IADS in Syria; at least not an effective one, not anymore. Does this neat formation look like IADS to you:

That BBC map in this article shows you that coalition is not targeting anything in the western Syria, and certainly not anything that would require them to fly directly over the coastal Syria.

Where? So far, I’ve only seen reports of RAF aircraft taking long way round through Turkey or Lebanon and Jordan en route to their targets.

I don’t get what you are trying to say (the last paragraph). Could you please, elaborate?

The only point I am trying to make is this: since the F-15C is going to stay in service for quite some time, why not give them a full upgrade so that it can match the competing (and newer) 4th gen fighters on equal terms in every aspect, and to have a degree of capability against any potential stealth threats.

I haven’t questioned the quality of their kit, I have questioned their ability to buy and operate it.

But why would coalition aircraft fly combat missions over western Syria? ISIL is in the north, east and central Syria, and coalition aircraft may only need to overfly it, even though they actually avoid the area entirely (see flightpaths of RAF strikes in Iraq).

Exactly, but with a note that the range is function of altitude, as well. It may theoretically be able to engage something at 300km at 30k feet, but no one has ever shot down a combat aircraft at a long range. It’s only good for disturbing them, or shooting down bombers.

You gotta do some serious research on them - their military is in the state of peril. They keep showing off plans for new aircraft (PAK-FA), ships (Gorshkov class frigates, Leader lass destroyers) and subs (Yasen class), but they got no money to pay them. Their navy consists mostly of corvettes and submarines and…

Putin is crazy and reckless, but I don’t think he is crazy enough to engage in the full Soviet-style brinkmanship, as his country is almost broke and its armed forces too weak for any larger war. He wants us to think that, and I would call it a typical example of the good old maskirovka.

But that’s the point; there is no IADS. S-400, some Pantirs and that’s it. Syrian IADS is quite a mess (a conclusion drawn from the fact that IAF is operating over Syria with impunity). What about search radars?

The only thing I have to object here is the continuous glorification of the S-400, and not just here, but in most of the mainstream media. Any SAM system can be taken out, especially a single S-400 battery, and Russians are not that dumb to start shooting at coalition aircraft without a very good reason.