The 'BUK' Anti-Aircraft Missile System | EQUIPMENT OVERVIEW
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 гру 2023
- The Buk (beech) air defense missile system was developed to replace the previous Kub. Its industrial designation is 9K37. Its reporting name in the West is SA-11 or Gadfly. Development of this system commenced in 1972. It was a successor to the Kub-M3. It entered service with the Soviet Army in 1980. The Buk has been exported to a number of countries. After collapse of the Soviet Union a number of air defense systems were passed on to successor states. Currently Russia operates around 350 of these systems. Other operators are Azerbaijan, Belarus, Cyprus, Egypt, Finland, Georgia, India, North Korea, Ukraine, Syria, Vietnam and Venezuela.
This air defense system can defeat maneuvering aircraft and helicopters flying at low or high altitude when enemy uses electronic countermeasures. Newer versions of the Buk can also engage ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles, smart bombs and unmanned aerial vehicles.
The Buk fires 9M38 missiles. It is a single-stage and solid-fuel missile. It resembles a US Tartar and Standard naval air defense missiles. The missile has semi-active radar guidance. It can engage targets at a range of 3.4-20.5 km at altitudes over 3 km. The range is reduced to 5-15.4 km, when the target flies 30 m above the ground. Maximum engagement altitude is 25 km. The 9M38 missile has a hit probability of 70-93%. The Buk can also fire older 9M9M3 missiles of the Kub-M3 air defense missile system.
A Buk TELAR vehicle is fitted with radar, digital computer, missile erector and launcher, friend or foe identification system. It is operated by a crew of four and carries four missiles.
Radar of the Buk TELAR vehicle searches for targets, tracks them and guides missiles on them. So if required each TELAR vehicle can operate autonomously. The radar detects aircraft flying at altitude over 3 km at a range of 65-77 km. Detection range is reduced to 32-41 km when aircraft fly at 30-100 m above the ground. Low-flying aircraft are detected at a range of 21-35 km.
When TELAR operates autonomously it takes about 24-27 seconds from target detection to missile launch. It can stop and launch its missiles in about 5 minutes from traveling. It also takes about 5 minutes to leave the firing position.
A TELAR vehicle is based on GM-569 special tracked chassis. It is powered by a multi-fuel diesel engine, developing 710 hp. Later models are fitted with a more powerful engine, developing 840 hp. Maximum road speed is limited to 65 km/h. Vehicle is also fitted with auxiliary power unit, a small gas turbine, which generates electricity and powers all systems when the main engine is turned off.
Armor provides protection for the crew against small arms fire and artillery shell splinters. Vehicle is also fitted with NBC protection system.
A battery of Buk includes six TELAR vehicles, six reloading vehicles, that can also launch missiles, battery command post vehicle, acquisition radar with detection range up to 120 km, repair and technical service vehicles, transporter vehicle, mobile crane.
A reloading vehicle is fitted with a crane and carries 8 missiles. Essentially it is a combination of the TEL and reloading vehicle. A unique capability of this vehicle that it can launch missiles itself. It acquires firing data from the TELAR vehicle. A total of 4 missiles are ready to fire, while another 4 are carried as reloads. This reloading vehicle reloads the TELAR within 12 minutes.
Hope you enjoy!!
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: # attire_for_effect
💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page! www.patreon.com/user?u=3081754
💰PayPal: paypal.me/Matsimus?locale.x=e...
👕 Check out my Merch: teespring.com/stores/matsimus...
📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: 210A - 12A Street N Suite No. 135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J
📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch: / matsimus_9033
👋DISCORD: / discord
📘 Facebook: profile.php?...
🐦Twitter: / matsimusgaming
The 'BUK' Anti-Aircraft Missile System | EQUIPMENT OVERVIEW - Наука та технологія
What do you think is the most deadly anti-aircraft system out there today? Let me know!
I don't know much about anti-air systems (not a military servicemember or researcher) but I'd go with the S400 for land based and the Millenium 27mm CIWS for naval based.
MBDA CAMM
pilots
S-400, at least with integration with modern radars, layered defense, and AWACs.
Alone with older radars and just being alone, it is almost a sitting duck.
Depends on what you want to shoot down. Short range and targetting drones, any of the gun based systems and possibly lasers or ECM. Helicopters or planes on short range, stingers and other manpads if already dug in and if you are on the move the best should be combination of gun based systems and vehicle mounted short range missiles like AIM-9 etc.. Possibly Pancir even though it hasn't performed that well so far but that could be due to poor training. Medium range, IRIS-T should be best at the moment with all the thrust vectoring etc. that it has going for it. Long range against ballistic missiles your best guess might be Patriot while long range against planes S-400.
AA is never about one system as it is usually combination of multiple systems working together. You can always counter a single system but it gets more and more difficult when there are multiple types complimenting each other.
(edit: typo corrections)
Fun facts:
Every Motor Rifle (mechanised infantry) brigade and division has a battalion of Buk. Most Army groups have an air defence brigade with 3 Buk battalions. One battalion can cover anything from 5,000 to 30,000 km² area. Russia has roughly 450 Buk battalions in total of various versions, including those that are part of the Aerospace forces, not Army.
It's predecessor the 2k12 Kub (SA-6), a Hungarian can be seen at 8:30 😁 could deploy from march to launching missiles in about 3-4 minutes if necessary.
look at the number of factual errors he made, this is western education ... omg. Are they drinking all the time or what are they doing in free time ?
it's not called "battalion". It's "zênitnyj rakêtnyj DIVIZION". And don't confuse that word with DIVIZIÂ. Different words with two different patterns of declensions.
@@worldoftancraft It's a battalion sized unit, hence my use of battalion, simple as that. When I served in an air defence battalion we called it that, too (Hungary). And no, I do not mistake it for something like the 51st air defence division, out of Rostov.
@@imrekalman9044 peace to heirs of cumans : )
@@imrekalman9044az a szò hogy van magyarul hogy battalion? Hogy hìvtak titeket?
Lègvèdelmi.......?
wow so rare to see a western YT not jumping on the bandwagon and calling every bit of russian equipment garbage.
Either they praise it into the skies, or shit on it. The only type I rely one is the one that does neither.
@@INSANESUICIDE There are so many propaganda clichés about Russians in this video that it's hard to consider this content neutral or objective.
@@DartXLanything against your believe is propaganda
@@vandasaragosa Ha ha, classic. Lying and telling Russians what propagandists they are, and then being surprised that your lies don't work. You really are adherents of the empire of lies, slaves of the western media and their propaganda.
I really don't know what channels you watch. But as a general rule Russian SAM system are considered very good in the west. This is a reality that was widely accepted during the cold war, but unlike other russian military equipment they kept that prestige even after the fall of URSS.
Thanks for all the cool videos Matsimus!
As a german, I can only dream of a multi-layer ground-based AA-network. Sure, we have the IRIS-T, which is a beast on short range, as well ye good ol´ reliable Gepard - still prooved to be effective against helicopters and drones in Ukraine. But we have like two or three IRIS-T Systems and maybe around 40 Gepards left? So yeah, having something like the BUK for mid-range/high altitude interception is nothing but a wet dream. We should really get our asses up and invest in those systems. Maybe even just buy some from Murica. The tragic war in Ukraine shamelessly showed us, the people, how weak the german military was and is. We always kinda knew it, but not in that extent. To cite a friend of mine, who is a technical officer at the Bundeswehr: "Wir haben Mun für 2-3 Stunden Abwehrfeuer, dann is Schicht im Schacht." Roughly: We have Ammo for 2-3 hours defensive fire, then it´s all over. Yeah, let´s see what our recent Minister of Defense can do. First time I have acutally a little trust in a politician in that function.
The only Western alternative that I know of is the Norwegian NASAMS, using a version of the very expensive AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. Production of these systems is as slow as the production of pretty much everything else in the West.
@@imrekalman9044 I wouldn't be so quick to say everything else in the west is produced slowly
The F35, one of the most advanced aircraft in the world has had over 900 produced to date (according to Lockheed martin) with the yearly production figure that I can find being 156 a year (from just googling). [Edit: We may compare to Russian systems in reference to the counterpart being 'the East' and it's production rate. The SU57, the most advanced Russian fighter so far is said to be produced at about 15 a year]
If we look at production rate of the m1 Abrams we can also see from public sources they produce around 75 a month. Compare it to russian tank production [i know this is vague but i believe its vague because they use multiple types like the t80, t90 and t72], from what I've been able to find from searching they make about 20-30 a month (Edit: I believe after posting this that this is also because they are mainly converting a lot of older vehicles up to modern standard instead of producing whole new vehicles which can explain the low number, though the main topic is still production rate)
We Americans are in much the same boat, we have static stuff like Patriot and its upgrades, but nothing more mobile.
@@imrekalman9044 i think BUK outranges NASAMS because when the amraam is launched from the ground rather than air, it expends a lotta energy to gain altitude rather than distance. probably maxes out at 20 miles.
@@peetky8645 Somewhere around there, 20 or 30 miles with newer, extended range missiles. Last I checked an AMRAAM costs a million dollars, the latest ER version for the NASAMS closes on $4 million, while the 9M317 is around $200k a piece. And there are only around 20-30 NASAMS batteries in service, Russia has some 450 Buk battalions.
Nice vid mate! I love your 15-20 mins presentation of different weapon systems, watched almost all of your work! Although the filter overlay in this vid was quite irritating. Still, comment, like, the algorythm we fight :D
The U2 that got shot down over the USSR was most likely by a SA-2.The SA-11 wasn't around for another decade and it's predecessor, the SA-6 didn't have the height.
Yes. U2 of Powers over USSR was shot down by SA-2 (Soviet name: S-75). Same SAM shot down American U-2 over Cuba in 1962.
Mat was talking about Soviet SAM systems in general at that point.
@@imrekalman9044 not really. An error.
Yes it was an SA-2 Guideline, or actually, several of them
@@chemiker494 A total of 16 missiles, taking down the U-2 and the two unfortunate MiG-19 chasers flying directly beneath it at 17,000 m.
Lots of research done thanks Matsimus! 🤙🍻
Hell yeah bro, keep em coming
Pretty sure the Dutch court found that the downing of MH17 was not an accident.
Shocking verdict. Did they bother to present evidence or did they just pronounce Russia guilty?
Malaysians have a very different view of that shoot down.
Ah yes, a dutch court, famous for not being biased against the west’s boogeyman
@@AlphaCrex Its the "International Criminal Court" - its just based in Holland.
@@whya2ndaccount when the victims are almost exclusively dutch nationals, with significant ramifications in regards to the accusation’s in terms of geopolitics; holding a trial in the Netherlands with all 4 judges being dutch raises a suspicion of a conflict of interest. Especially when the Netherlands itself is a member of NATO, a Malaysian like me could infer that any trial in the ICC is nothing more than a performative witch hunt
actualy , you are completely wromg about this.... ICC never dealt wwith MH17 crash. Only Dutch court did. And somehow they manage to complete a story based on... something, not evidences, that Russian BUK was to blame. FAct that Ukraine had more than 300 launchers, and that some of those were very much active in that region was completely forgoten by Dutch court. Btw, interesting fact - BUK missile has very distinctive square metal pieces in ewar head, none of those were found in jets leftovers, and holes in jets body do not coply with that kind of warhead filling. But, who cares, lets blame it on someone , just like NORDSTREAM bomnbinh, it has to EVIL RUSSIANS...@@whya2ndaccount
Super nice Video.
I Love the "Bug" xD
Great video man. GG
BUK is successor for KUB (SA-6) and designer admitted, that naming was result of reversing the letters :D
Yea.. but u have 4 major versions of KUB and all have one big minus, engagement altitude 8000m, only M4 have 14000m, way below BUK's 22-35 km
@@SoulArtSound decades span their introduction too. Kub isnt Buk-M3 or S-75.
Great video mate but the quality was a bit dodgy if this is a visual effect it's bloody annoying
Great upload, thank you. Any chance of cutting back on the visual noise?
I just wish the photos matched what you were talking about 😭
Im experimenting with a third party editor.....safe to say they didnt pass the vibe check..... sorry about that
@@_Matsimus_ Better luck next time! 😊
@@_Matsimus_ ah ok
Dummy that I am;can’t absorb everything. They seem to be formidable systems.
Thank you!
In the US Army we own a BUK radar simulator designed to replicate the distinct lock on for training pilots in air defense drills, it looks exactly the same in dimensions and appearnce but is a fiberglass mockup on a wheeled trailer.
Awesome thanks
i really like this channel
Nice video, BUK seems like a good weapon especially in combination with other longer/shorter range systems. The missile is indeed very big and the warhead carried huge. The fragmentation of such a warhead at the thin atmospere 15-20km high will probably have a massive killzone against bomber aircraft.
small mistake at 15:19, 70km isnt equal to 71.5miles, idk which of the two is the right one so I cannot provide a correction here (most likely 70km 43.5miles is the right one)
Can you do a video about 9K330 Tor (SA-15)? They seems to be deployed together from my limited reading
The Tor is far less numerous (around 180 Tor vs 450 Buk), having shorter range. The Buk is the main medium range system in Russia. The Tor is mainly used by tank units (brigades and divisions), as it can fire on the move, unlike the Buk, which has to stop and deploy (takes a few minutes).
Love how compct yhe system is
forgot to add that this system fired most of the missiles in Ukraine.running out of missiles for him.Thanks to Polish engineers, Western missiles can be combined with this system and continue to be used in combat.
great video as always, however you don't need the old timey filter. it makes no sense lol.
Mig 33 ? Know something we don't ? Keep up the good work !!
if the guy even knew DCS he would have a rough idea.
Versatile
This is BUK
What does it do ?
It BUKS up planes.
Wow 😳
They REALLY go BOOM when those FPV Drones hit them!
It has kept the Ukrainian pilots away from the frontline and is a sought-after target of the artillery units.
If Ukraine actually had an airforce..
@@Happypillzthey used to
@bd2970 they still do
@@poes1314 in flaming craters?
@Happypillz so the harm missiles and storm shadows are launching themselves, moron stop believing everything that comes from the Russian mod
Attire for Effect is a great name.
What you forgot to mention ( or you are not aware about...) is the BUK integration in the AA defense network controlled by AWACS planes, who now have the ability to fire, from the air, after detecting targets at over 400km.
So, in practice, the AWACS, even it has no weapons, can attack and destroy air targets at ranges of over 400km using land batteries of S300/400/500 and BUKs, in a huge network of integrated sensor. The russians are the first in the world to operate such a huge network, and in only one week they knocked some 9 Ukr fighters/helicopters using this strategy ( AWACS detected targets from very long distance, then fired SAM batteries with long range missiles).
Buk is a nice system, but the highscore is still held by an S-300V4 system, which shot down a UAF Su27 and Su24 from 217 km
Ur comparing assault rifle with sniper...
@@SoulArtSounda PDW with an artillery installation
Buk M2 and later can map the ground with their radar and target the ground targets.
I'm glad to see Kermit the frog still has a job.
11:24
I recognize the National Museum of the USAF when I see it!
I miss your old intro soundtrack.
Ah yes. The BUK
this is why 5th gen platforms are needed if you intend to operate in contested air space.
😎👍
A sacrifice to the algorithm god of YT this comment be!
Take care Matty!
Ah, good to know that max altitude of the missile is 114,829 feet, and not, say, 114,828 ft or 115 thousand feet. Those Russians are precise in their engineering. Hats off to them.
Hats off to the legendary system of measurement units invented by your former colony owner, the UK, the empire. The empire which inverted the Imperial system.
US-of-A - we are truly independent!
It happens to be 35,000 metres.
The Russkies aren't peculiar about inches and feet. They use the metric system
Looks like a mobile version of the SAMs from Top Gun Maverick.
check S-125
I liked watching the video, but it's a bit jumpy sometimes. Why go back to Korolev and the origins of Soviet rocket development, and not back to Tsiolkovsky and the rocket equation, itself an application of Newton's law that action equals reaction? The sootdown of Gary Power's U2 has nothing to do with the development of the Buk.
The original SA-1 "Guild" (S-25) was an impressive system, but so complex that it was only built around Moscow. And to it's credit, no air attack was successful against Moscow during it's deployment, so it performed it's duty, all controversies aside. The SA-2 "Guideline" (S-75) was developped as a more mobile and versatile system, but in practice it was still deployed in fixed installations. The SA-6 "Gainful" (Kub) implemented the deployment of all it's component on tracked vehicles, and was able to be rapidly relocated. The probem with it was that only one vehicle per battery was equipped with radar, and if it was knocked out, the other mobile launching ramps that consisted the rest of the battery were simply useless. But with the SA-11 "Gadfly" (Buk), every vehicle had its own radar (TELAR), although it relied on a separate vehicle , and a command post, for reliable long-range target acquisition and identification (which may have played a role in the downing of MH17). As you mentioned, the Buk is a contemporary of the American "Standard" SAM, and resembles it in appearance and some of the technologies used, and that also has a downed airliner to it's credit, with similar loss of life :-(
What I missed was an analysis of the different variants and upgrades, sometimes there are tracked vehicles, somtimes wheeled ones, sometimes there are 4 exposed missiles, sometimes 6 in a container?
But thank you very much, and happy new year
in my story "the hardest: desert scarab." I first read of the story in a novel from 1986 RED STORM RISING.
I think I might have read that book. Is it about the Soviet invasion of Europe seen trough the eyes of several characters? One of them was a tank commander, the other was a junior lieutenant, who's father was a polit buro member, and who was having dysentery at the worst time of the war? They fought their way across Europe, and when they arrived in France, they were out of ammo and diesel, when they noticed that the Americans arrived with shiny new tanks.....is it that book?
@@tiborpurzsas2136 You're right about the Europe portion at least.
So enamoured reading a library one I owned it later.
In regards to Scarab, its on my channel and reading sites.
@@TheKeithvidz we are not talking about the same book. I checked out. Yours was written by Tom Clancy. Mine was written by someone unknown. I don't remember the title of mine, I wish I was.
@@tiborpurzsas2136 i could tell. Feed clues to google to fish the name.
🇺🇦 started to re-equip buk to be armed with Amrams. That is an interesting twist? Maybe with iris-t as well infuture???
Wow this missile system has always been one of my absolute favorite and iconic systems seen on many movies and it is still knocking fighter planes out the sky today and Ukraine front line is full of them and is a really formidable weapon system
They are really good against passenger planes too! 100% hit ratio!
@@geronim00 Not exactly. It is still a mid-small range complex and you have to be very clever to get a passenger plane to fly near it. For example, to have a avia dispatcher to guide it on the right trajectory so that it is sure to be shot down.
argon gas? or is that the name of the processor?
processor
BUK M3 is state of the art.
I have a question, what kind of guidence system does the Sa-3 missile rely on and what are the countermeasures jets have to it? Such as would flares work on the Sa-3 like shown in Maverick?
flares don´t work when the missile is radar guided
@@jetfighter200 Chaff do, but not if BUK crew fire missile in target area and only then turn on targeting radar :D
The SA-3 Goa / S-125 Neva uses radio command guidance, just telling the missile how to turn its control surfaces. For short range systems it's still the most cost effective. The target is normally tracked by radar, or under the right circumstances via a very impressive telescope mounted by the tracking radar. Back in the day when I was in air defence (late 90's) using the telescope we could make a guess on what company airliners coming and going at our int'l airport 80 km away belonged to based on their colours. (I was on S-75, but the telescope was the same for both.)
That's a very detailed description of SA-2, here:
ua-cam.com/video/_zWK5KaaOlo/v-deo.htmlsi=-6UWH5w3aQvYGn69
I think they're basically the same except range
@@juavi6987 Yes, the S-75 and S-125 are similar enough that an operator can be cross trained in a short time, weeks even.
It is a very good video.
They just dont have an update for Drones.
BUK is amazing
SAM Missile System? .. Surface to Air Missile Missile System ?
yes the sam sam sam sam surface sam surface sam missile sam system 🙂
Another pie in the sky.. Russians had an incredible opportunity to show of their SAM systems in real combat scenario during the last 2 years... The results are, shall we say, less than advertised..
On the other hand the Western made SAMs, which were always touted as inferior to the Russian, turned out to be incredible with Patriot taking down supposedly invincible "hypersonic" Kinzhal missiles...
I dont know why Finland scrapped its BUKs in 2010s. They were best BUKs in the world because western electronics and even soviet/russian ones seems to still work.
Thanks!
thank you!
Theres one thing i like about the soviet / russia anti air systems. Its the fact the soviets realized that they couldnt match American/NATO Air superiority. So to compensate for this shortfall, resultedb in them developing a comprehensive air defense system covering short, medium ,intermediate and long range system.
Could not match? Ukriane is proof that NATO failed in that regard. Cope harder dude. You NAfo bots lost in Ukraine in all aspects of warfare. Go try with Russian airforce and anti air. Good luck
"Its the fact the soviets realized that they couldnt match American/NATO Air superiority"
Not it's not a fact. You people just make stuff up.
@@f1aziz please share your expertise then
@liuyifei1989 Why would I?
@@f1aziz lmao so you don't know either
wonder why bow-tie fragments
You probably meant the MiG-31, not 33- there's no such aircraft.
Really?… you’re not even gonna mention adaptation to fire Sea Sparrow?
needs more film grain
at least double of what dark footage adds
If I can still make out the image there's not enough film grain
Probably the best overall sam system. Period.
On paper, as pretty much everything Russian. Then it gets one shot by whatever missile is lying around.
@@NeuroScientician I'm no Russia lover, but it is delusion to believe that Russia doesn't have the best sam systems on Earth. Final.
@@poseidon5003 That belief is exclusively based on propaganda. I used to believe that too, then I watched a bunch of AA systems being murdered by himars, these fly fairly high on a ballistic trajectory, these things are by the definition the easiest thing to shoot down. You can see systems with active radars, still missiles on them. So, no saturation excuse.
The Buk stops here! right here. .
Not a fan of the glitchy overlay of the video.
You should have mentioned the ongoing effort to adopt RIM-7 missiles for Ukrainian Buks
This video is 70% a guy reading off all the missile NATO names and types he could find on wiki. What actual useful info exists here?
It bothers me how you could slap a tini misile or guided bulet and make all these misile absolete instantaliouesli. I bet Darpa has some just keeps it to not have a drednought moment to earli.
Russia/USSR: *develops missiles and radar to counter the USAF* The USAF:*Kills radars and missiles with planes*
👍😎🍺🍩🚀🚀
Unintentional? Really ?
I want to see the Ukrainian Buk’s they got firing Sea sparrows, the frankensam
HARM food :)
I myself prefer to call it the "Buk(e)" which rhymes with puke.
What I would love to hear some analysis on, is what we can expect from Ukrainian BUK systems using the sea sparrow missile.
Seasparrow?😅😅😅😅😅😅
Seeing what's going on in Ukraine, possibly it might be a good time for US/NATO to build similar SAM systems, especially in the event we don't win air superiority
Great content as always 👍
We don't want BUK equivalent. We have Patriot 3 and SM-6. Who wants a Yugo when you already have a garage full of Masserati, Rolls-Royce and Shelbys?
Might be a good idea as NATO really doesn’t have comparable systems. They either have the big SAMs (Like Patriot or MEADs) or short range SAMs (Like Avenger or SPYDER).
@@elliott4299 Patriot is not a "Big" system. BUK is just a miserably inadequate one.
Patriot hits from 1km to 300km. BUK hits from 10km to 30k.
@@slartybarfastb3648Buk is a mid range system, the S-400 is for longer range engagements, the west doesn't do ground based air defence well, so the Patriot had to do most of it
@@rflats771"We" expect to be fighting over someone else's territory. From the air.
You cant look at Russian AA systems only as isoosted thingy..if you put them all in one system then you see beauty of integrated defence..from strela buk pantsir s300 s400 ect..when they are all set then ...weball see ukraine did pass isolated elements of AA until it was set ..even in armenia we seen how isolated elements are weaker...it is like irondome thing..isolated would be shiet..but difference is Russian system cant be swarmed cause it is not centralised in that sense..when trump did rocket strike mini swarm vs syria we saw that..and other time in mass attack by usa ..about 70-80 percent went down so it is big number but still few went trough
Some oddities in this video
Is this the standard western military knows about military gear ? I mean no offense, but the amount of errors based on ignorance in this video is just great within 3 minutes many misconceptions. BM-13 was a very effective weapon.
Why did the ukros allow a civilian airliner to fly into a combat zone without any warning or demands to change course?
And this just weeks after several ukro transport aircraft had been shot down in the same area...
The Buk. Every one of these sent to Ukraine by Russia got grenade dropped by a drone, or so it would seem from the amount of footage.
It's weird as hell and pretty stupid of Stalin to think he had to use "sticks" to get scientists to do science and engineering work ... instead of carrots and their innate curiosity and desire to create things that work well.
How many of them ate HARM MISSLES?😅
Probably far less than you hope. Note: Ukraine had a large number of Buk systems as well. I stopped hearing about them a long time ago.
according to ukranian sources... 110% of total build units... including all the ones exported and allready destroyed by US and Israeli attacks (and all of the ukranian that survived EVERY russian attempt to destroy em)
l'd be suspect of those distances provided by the USSR. kind of like the SU-25; it's easy for weapons to have formidable statistics if nobody else can test the system.
Ukraine uses both the Su-25 and the Buk. Or at least they did a year ago, haven't heard much of them recently.
the Buk was used to shoot down US stealth bomber over Yugoslavia.
The Buk more than any other systems, makes complete air superiority impossible.
ARAD.
@@lamwen03 [laughs in competence]
Seriously, people forget that even having IADS with _semi-competence_ can tell air forces where to stuff it, no matter the age of the IADS (hell, Serbia proved that pretty hard _with Vietnam-era_ IADS!).
Not true. Both Serbia and Iraq had many of those, and yet the U.S. had full air superiority in those wars.
@@BandytaCzasu iraq didn't lol, and neither did serbia. Do your research
@@BandytaCzasu Iraq couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag without someone holding their hand but proved that 'low and slow' is a literal death sentence. _SERBIA_ on the other hand proved that NATO SEAD/DEAD doctrine was absolutely trash and made it incredibly hard for any NATO flights to operate.
This Misseles is For Drill Not Real Wars
The Soviet and now Russian doctrine calls for theatre ballistic (or cruise ) missile attacks on air bases and multi layered air defense to counter NATO air superiority and also to provide "deep" strikes - actually faster, that fixed wing aircraft. This is enhanced by ground based EWAR capabilities. Its not unlike the multi-layered air defense bubble around USN AEGIS task groups - but land based and (at least semi-)mobile, with Strela, Pancir, Tor, Buk and S-300, S-5350, S-400 systems.
As of now - late 2023 , it looks like NATO system cannot protect airfields (if nothing else, they can be saturated) - one of the reasons for it, that the US produces 300 PAC-3 missiles a YEAR and every incoming threat must be countered launching pairs.
Divide that 300 with, how many exports? It's a joke number, look just how many missiles where spent in only one case, in Kyev vs Kinzhals...and again something went down on PATRIOT.
@@SoulArtSoundthey have shot down just about every Kinzhal, one or two got through a destroyed a single launcher that was replaced quick time
@@roryr8 What with? The West simply doesn't have anything like the capability, and won't have for a considerable time. Just because Ukraine / US propaganda says something, it doesn't mean it happened.
Buk shot doow f-117 nighthawk also. And best preforming system in Ukraine from Russian side has been Thor with biggest shoot/kill ratio variety of targets.
S-125 shot down the Nighthawk
@@samulivainionpaa9338 either S-125 or kub.
@@cdgncgn Yeah, S-125
Even the newest adaptation of the buk platform is far from the best mobile air defense systems operated by 🇷🇺 military
So which one is the best then? They have the Tor, the Pantsir, the Buk, what else they got? Besides S-300-500?
Sorry, I'm not buying it that the most recent upgrade to the BUK & it's 9K317M missiles were able to go from 31 miles & 80k ft ceiling @ Mach 4 to 71 miles & 115k ft ceiling @ Mach 8.8.. C'mon man. Upgrades & modernizations don't improve a system or weapon THAT much. That's a stretch, even for Russians
Someone commented that the Russians tend to keep a system name even when, over the years, every component of it has been replaced with totally different components. For instance, the MIG.
Well, if you change the radar, the electronics (guidance, planning, etc) and the missiles obviously you got a completely different system.
Does it perform like taht or not? I don't know, but it could.
It's not fucking hard look at all the missles the Russians use numb nuts
TBH Osa system had similiar capability leap in same frame missile. AN Buk M3 has totally new missile. Longer and thinner, so less drag.
LMAO maybe it got that much better when they added American sea sparrow missiles 🤣
Russians tend to upgrade and modernize existing defense systems than making a new one completely such as the Growler, Flanker, Fulcrum etc which makes the defense systems more capable than the previous generation.
Growler is the US F-18E.
Thanks for the recognition. It's a big reason Russia can't hit anything of importance within 500 miles of NATOs borders. Thank you for recognizing our contributions to Russia's failure. Most don't know we're there. Every day and all night long.
@@slartybarfastb3648 If Russia is failing, why is the mainstream media now saying that Russia is winning the war? Also, the NATO name for S-400 is SA-21 Growler
come on America build something similar i need better SPAA for War Thunder
keyboard warrior, get out of your basement, and run around the block
Some of these units have been destroyed in Ukraine. Ukrainian recon drones spotted there camouflage and called in artillery or directly used drones to take them out.
It is entirely obvious to me that these units have been sent into
a combat situation with out any
form of protection.
"Some of these units have been destroyed in Ukraine." Just reminding you, that the Buk is in service with the AFU, supposedly adapted to fire Sea Sparrow, its Italian upgrade, the Aspide and maybe even ESSM missiles.
So, some of the footage you seen might have been UA equipment. War is democratic, each side can vote.
AFU? Please define. As for the sparrow
missile system it is a home grown missile
system that was developed by The United States. While this system is deadly it
is outdated. Under Putin the Russian
military has been sacrificed due to
uncontrolled corruption.
Putin a former member of the
K.G.B considers him self a top
military commander. If I remember correctly Hitler thought the same
way. Every one knows the old Soviet
Empire learned missile technology
thru spying and buying technology
from certain Americans who chose
to sell secrets for money.
Just to drive my point home. Russia
hasn’t come up with a fifth generation
fighter plane let alone a new M.B.T.
The so called new M.B.T that Putin
is showing off is nothing but an untested
piece of cannon fodder.
O by the way I just heard Putin is
up for reelection. Another 6 years.
If my math is correct that means
He will hold power longer then even
Stalin.
Putin took full power in 1999. What
really makes me laugh is that Putin is
sending old out dated tanks from the
70’s and expects total victory.
Gone are the days of the old Soviet
empire. Gone are the days of waves
of Russian soldiers sacrificing there
lives for the mother land.
In the end Putin will keep power but
every Russian citizen will suffer for it.
Countless lives will be sacrificed
For his dream of a rebirth of an
old dream.
@@karlvongazenberg8398no, all the footage seen of destroyed BUKs has been russia as far as I know. Recently three went pop in the Kherson region
@@roryr8 As per Oryx, I presume? If so, last time I checked, UA captured more RU tanks than they lost in destroyed, captured and damaged combined.
@@karlvongazenberg8398 That is what I said, russia has lost most of the BUKs in the war
When you talk about murican losses to SAM in Vietnam, conveniently you lost a zero on your numbers, dude ! US lost OVER 10 000 aircraft in Vietnam, and you come with a BS number of 100 lost to SAM ? 1 % ? Do your homework better, mate, you can do it !
Here, with the hope you upload a better version of this:
"The following is a list of 205 U.S. aircraft lost to surface-to-air missiles during the Vietnam War (confirmed by the U.S.) Vietnam War: Summary of U.S. fixed-wing aircraft (excluding allied aircraft) Lost to SAMs by year, 1965-1973."
Google this and you will get to the source - is public domain. And those are ONLY in Vietnam. Adding other conflicts over the world, in decades, the number easily surpass 1000 !
И бук и торушка. Защита нас.
The problem with russian, team communication is bad. Most of their anti air system can be spotted by surveillance drone. Then they could just target it. Just like most anti air system, its effective when its scanning area that is flying past them not toward it. It takes time to narrow its beam to track a smaller target. This js why there's system for passive and tracking.
You are Never going to see F-16 in Ukraine.The US could not stand the optics of 1 being shot down,which they mostly certainly will be.😮
CCCP-RUSIA 🇷🇺💪🇷🇺👍🇷🇺👏🇷🇺🐻✊♥️💯🇷🇺💯 VIVA VLADIMIR Putin ♥️💯🇷🇺💯
It’s a good system although I think the patriot batteries are better! Keep Going Matt! Respect Your Service! 🇺🇸💪🏻🇬🇧🇨🇦
Those 2 sys have nothing in common, it's like comparing JEEP and PASSAT....
This isn’t Russia’s corollary to the Patriot PAC 3.
You don't compare the Patriot with the Buk. You compare the Patriot, with the S-400. They are in similar category. Except the S-400 is somewhat more capable, and costs less money
@@tiborpurzsas2136 "Somewhat" more capable is quite an understatement.
@@phils4634 haha