Why is turkey buying the S400?

>happy putin lets you do stuff in Syria

putin did nothing when the Turks shot down their shit, and vaunted s-300 didn't stop the roaches from doing anything

It's the classic Russian sales pitch that with their Super S X00 IADS you will be able to defy America with impunity and get Russian Friendship Coins you can redeem for fun prizes.

Stupid people in the middle east fall for this a lot.

>Why is turkey buying the S400?
THEY SAY IT IS LIKE IT IS LIKE AIRDEFENSE
BUT IT IS NOT

have food

t. burger golem slave of zog

This. The amount of americope on this board in the last days basically quadrupled.

It can defeat stealth. And guess who their natural enemy in the region is.
It has a massive 400KM range which means it can cover most of the area that Turks are adamant to protect.
It can target objects high in the atmosphere.
They get technology transfer which is huge.

The vatniks and amerimutts in this thread are equally pathetic.

Attached: 1555096355482.jpg (1280x720, 250K)

There is no technical benefits, as Moscow system failed to protect Syria from Jewish airstrikes and multiple NATO missile barrages. On top of all supposed S-400 enormous range is diminished due to Turkish geographical features, so most likely what said, also indirect biribe to Putin.

>Moscow system failed to protect Syria from Jewish airstrikes and multiple NATO missile barrages
It didn't fail, it wasn't used. I swear the butthurt from burgers ever since the agreement to deliver them to Turkey was finalized is unreal.

It can shoot down F-35s.

Because it's probably the best option on the market. The US has nearly guaranteed air supremacy against any nation on the earth so it's not really a priority to develop advanced AAA. Turkey doesn't have our operational capabilities in the air or a way to support them if they did, so AAA is relevant.

A wet fart could shoot down an F-35. S-400 can, however, shoot down F-22s, and pretty much anything else in the sky.
The fact it's an absolute masterpiece doesn't take anything away for the pathetic state of the rest of the Russian military.

The possibility to BTFO itself from the F35 that they have financed, from the whole American tech transfert that was helping them to form an actual defense industry...also in this way they will have more sanctions, which is a good thing because also EU is gonna sanction them.

For real, those mongoloids were in the ideal position yet they are able to sabotage themselves with outstanding 4d chess moves.

Maybe they hope that the next US president will not keep the sanctions, I don't know...but if they keep doing like this they are gonna turn in the next IRAN within 5 years.

>if they keep doing like this they are gonna see a sharp increase of their influence and power all throughout the Middle East within 5 years
Sounds like a good deal desu

>trade the opportunity to get the best modern fighter for some fucking SAMs
Turks are fucking brainlets

They need something *not western* to deny airspace over Cyprus incase shit ever goes down
>lots of oil around Cyprus

>trade the opportunity to get some plane for something that shoots down any plane
For a nation that doesn't need any power projection over particularly long distances and is in dire need of self-defense, it's actually pretty smart.

I highly doubt the ability of Russian SAMs to shoot down anything that isn't an airliner.
And Turks can fuck right outta Cyprus. Fucking roaches want to get their hands on something that's not theirs

What you "highly doubt" is of no consequence. It's been obvious for years now that the US military is terrified of S-400s, and any look at the abilities of this weapon system mkes it pretty clear they are right to be.
Fully agreed about Cyprus though.

>I highly doubt the ability of Russian SAMs to shoot down anything that isn't an airliner
Better than the Patriot missile system

Attached: 1555652120242.jpg (1280x720, 104K)

>It didn't fail, it wasn't used.
Endless excuses. Where is the promised A2/AD over Syria?
Also
Have food.

Attached: 1563200887267.jpg (452x313, 48K)

The way US and international F-35 pilots have talked about defeating simulated high threat missile systems at Red Flag I actually find the opposite true.

How many missiles have been intercepted by S-400 in the field? How many by Patriot, since the Gulf War?

There is no need for actual A2/AD when the mere threat of the use of S-400s makes mutts shit themselves enough for them to stop fucking with Syria altogether. Or do you consider two pathetic missile strikes blowing up empty warehouses to be meaningful ?
As for Israel, as usual they're too autistic to even care about the threat, and way too inconsequential to be worth carrying it out.

>How many by Patriot, since the Gulf War?
Not him, but the Patriot has a terrible record of shooting down missiles. There's a reason THAAD was developed.

S-400s have never been used in the field so far, and yet everyone is terrified of them.
Patriot has seen quite a bit of use, and yet no one really perceives it as a threat.
Odd, isn't it ? It's almost as if S-400s are just that good and Patriot is a shitty weapon system.

>Where is the promised A2/AD over Syria?
In place. They promised specifically to shoot down anything that endangers the lives of their servicemen.

>the untested, unproven weapon system is better because the manufacturers say so.

>the opinions of every single expert in this field in the entire world who isn't on the US military's payroll are all invalid
Sure thing lad.

The most hilarious part is that this is exactly what ameriboos actually believe.

But how do you know if it’s that good, when it’s never been used? The real answer is that all SAMs are shit and can be easily beaten through EW trickery and standoff munitions as demonstrated by Israel. It’s funny how nobody is scared of any of the SAMs that have actually been used in combat e.g. Patriot, S-300 etc but everybody is scared of the S-400 that hasn’t been. It’s almost like the only reason the S-400 is seen as a threat, is because it hasn’t had an opportunity to embarrass itself yet unlike the others...

>who isn't on the US military's payroll
And even some who are, actually. That's how good it is.

Oh sure, it's a factor indeed. But have you ever seen NATO throw such a hissy fit over any other weapon system in the past ?

Good on paper and good in the field are two very different things. Russian designs have, in the past, tended to be the former. Relying mainly on ADS to deny airspace is a flawed doctrine when facing a military with capable SEAD/DEAD assets. All recent history and weapons advancements point to this.

The S-400 is a good system but it is not magical. The same is true of the F-35.

Why wouldn’t they? They have nothing to lose by trying to convince Russia to remove capable assets claiming that they’re “escalating”. That doesn’t mean that those systems are undeadable

>The S-400 is a good system but it is not magical. The same is true of the F-35.
And yet Turkey chose the former over the latter, even knowing it means very harsh economic and geopolitical consequences for them. Why do you think they did this ?

Yeah. Better at shooting down airliners

Attached: 1387230976994.jpg (500x500, 40K)

NATO wanting Russia to remove certain assets from certain parts of the world is one thing. NATO doing everything they possibly can to prevent the sale of a particular Russian weapon system and its dissemination in states that aren't even allies of Russia is a whole other matter, and it's unheard of. Granted, the US has a habit of trying (and, increasingly, failing) to prevent the sale of any weapons that aren't manufactured by US companies, but never in such an open, nervous fashion.

To get closer to Russia and get their tech know-how because they're dumb roaches who can't develop anything on their own

Russian SAM's have historically proven themselves, while America has placed very little importance or development in the category. It's just dumb to dismiss one of the few things that the Russians are actually good at.

The S-400 hasn't been tested yet.

How can you say that with a straight face over the sounds of...
>an S-200 landing in Cyprus
>Israelis striking buildings within 20km of an S-300 battery
>multiple Pantsirs being destroyed by drones
?

These things have all happened in the last year.

So basically they are trying to be Chinese.

I'm not the S-400 user. I'm not going to comment on the S-400 until it actually gets used in combat.
>an S-200 landing in Cyprus
Ancient tech at this point, more fair to judge it for its service during the Cold War era
>Israelis striking buildings within 20km of an S-300 battery
No one really knows what happened, supposedly the battery decided to hold fire
>multiple Pantsirs being destroyed by drones
Weren't crewed when destroyed, so doesn't really display the capabilities the platform may or may not have

Kinda, yeah. Turkey wants to become a much larger player in the global arms market than they currently are, but they lack a lot of the engineering expertise to make their products competitive with other modern offerings. On top of that, they seem to be entering a somewhat uncertain period when it comes to alliances, and having a domestic weapons industry can soften the blow if they’re suddenly cut off from imports from either Russia or NATO.

*refused to protect Syria from Jewish airstrikes, and IIRC the range will still cover Cyprus from the Turkish mainland and will be complemented by AEW and maybe even a fixed site in the future.

The US didn't want Russian hackers using a backdoor to secretly paint Turkish F-35s then beam the data back to Moscow for analysis

I don't care. As long as the West hates turkshits then turkshits will not be allowed in the EU.
If they get booted from NATO, even better.

Do Russian air defences even work? Every grotty little hellhole that has ever deployed them against western forces has been roundly bombed to bits with impunity. There is even a video of that yank pilot successfully fooling multiple soviet SAMs during the gulf war.

vatnik anti-air systems lack the precision and disciplined engineering of western systems, but they appeal to third world nations as they are accessibly priced. People living in those shitholes would rather spend money on something that has 90% of the performance of a western system at only 30% of the price.

They likely work better than most countries' ground based air defenses, but SAMs as a platform have some inherent limitations when it comes to mobility and survivability. SAMs are good for deterring or delaying enemy forces from controlling the skies over a region, but they can't achieve air superiority on their own. Given the US and Israel's decades of experience flying SEAD missions, ground based defenses can only do so much.

How extensive an IADS would one need to achieve some measure of total security(i.e at the very least, complete protection against airspace penetration by manned vehicles)? I remember a prior thread in which an user got mocked for insisting that one could eliminate the problem of radar horizon by erecting ultra long-range radar antennae all along the national perimeter... yet this seemed logical to me but i'll admit that I don't know much about airspace monitoring.

Turkey tries to have a mutt-independent defense industry.

Attached: yuksel7_tfx.jpg (1200x668, 59K)

>Given the US and Israel's decades of experience flying SEAD missions

Against foes with minimal if any modern ADS....they are even afraid to breach iranian airspace after their drone got buttraped by some iranian mid range clone SAM.

>Do Russian air defences even work
not really. There is a reason why developed countries don't buy them. Keep in mind that you're talking about a country whose ""5th gen" plane was so terrible that literal Indians rejected it.

More than likely US approved so we can get one and reverse engineer and figure back doors and counter measures. But yeah, believe the MSM

I see they already cought up to the Russian fake CGI design phase. Vely implessive

Not really, that's why the only people who are buying them can't afford a sizable air force of their own or doesn't have the connections to buy decent aircraft. Its something that could be useful in a fight between two countries with a lot of older gear, but the newest equipment makes these more cumbersome systems a liability. On a battlefield where flying RF decoys, long range low observable cruise missiles, and even directed microwave weapons are present, mobility is becoming much more important.

>Do Russian air defences even work? Every grotty little hellhole that has ever deployed them against western forces has been roundly bombed to bits with impunity
Why does everybody forget about the Vietnam War?

In a theoretical peer engagement maybe, but in the real world IADS vs superior forces has always resulted in IADS being dismantled, generally pretty fast, and failing to prevent the opposing force from establishing control of the air.

Even in Iran/Iraq IADS wasn't very useful in a peer engagement.