The Russian Electronic Warfare Troops celebrate a holiday. 113 years ago, during the Russo-Japanese War, the first operation in world history was undertaken to suppress the enemy’s communication channels with the help of radio interference.
Our REW troops can detect and neutralize any target from a ship's system and a radar, to a satellite. Alexander Minakov saw the troops' work, which don't need ammunition for victory. This usual suitcase is one of the latest developments of specialists in electronic warfare. A small jamming device with a poetic name Lesochek suppresses radio control channels with explosive devices.


Now, this is the most effective complex for protection against radio-controlled landmines. Military conflicts of recent decades in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, and Syria very clearly showed what happens to countries that don’t have an effective electronic warfare system. Russia has such a system. Its main task is to cover command posts, anti-aircraft defenses, troops, as well as important industrial, administrative and political facilities. For this, complexes have been developed that suppress spy satellites, ground-based radars, and AWACS-type aircraft systems.


Russian specialists managed to make an incredible breakthrough. This became clear after the episode that occurred in the Black Sea exactly three years ago. Back then, the Russian front-line bomber Sukhoi Su-24 flew several times around the American destroyer Donald Cook, equipped with the most modern air defense system Aegis. This is how one of the crew members of the destroyer described these events in social networks. We watched the Russian on our locator until he reached the kill zone, to then "shoot him down." But when he entered the damned zone, mysticism began. Our locators were the first to go out, and then the whole Aegis went out. The pride of our fleet became our shame! The US military didn’t know that the Russian aircraft was equipped with the latest electronic warfare complex Khibiny.

**SideBar: I love that name Khibiny. In Yoruba, it sounds like 'Ki Binu' i.e 'it doesn't get mad' - For real, it does't get mad, super highly defensive and offensive weapon. Defensive, in the sense that it will block the ability of an enemy vehicle/weapon/radar to see or calculate the location of the Lord's fire. Offensive, it allows the Lord's carrier(SU-34) of this beautiful Khibiny complex to fire and destroy the threat coming from the enemy vehicle.


As soon as the pilot realized that he had been spotted, he switched on the equipment, and powerful radio-electronic waves deactivated the whole ship's systems. This is the Murmansk complex, which controls the space in the short-wave range within a 5,000 kilometer radius. It’s at these frequencies that communication is conducted between the NATO headquarters in Europe. Electronic warfare is in non-stop mode.
Now, a reconnaissance plane has approached the Russian border and is conducting radar reconnaissance of our territory. The operator, seeing this source, conducts an analysis of it from his work station. After this, Sergey Kureshov, the battalion commander, gives the order to send the data to the command post. A signal is received from the control point, and we are able to influence it from here. Russian specialists have already developed complexes that allow them to create, for example, a dome of radio electronic jamming over the area of air defense facilities. This is a kind of an invisibility cap from the enemy’s radar. And now, the Pentagon beats the alarm. Russian electronic weapons completely paralyze the functioning of American electronic equipment installed on missiles, aircraft, and ships.


The development and testing of the newest models of complexes takes place at the Center for Training and Combat Use of REW Troops. Here, there is a unique simulator, which simulates the work of all the complexes. With the help of open sources and other available means, we study the military regulations of a probable enemy and on the basis of this data we model the situation that is relevant at the moment. Experts are sure that in modern wars, electronic warfare is a key element. You don’t need to have expensive weapons to win, powerful radio-electronic jamming is enough.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI4uS307ydk

That 2014 incident is a funny Russian propaganda. It's just discipline and rules of engagement that prevent US Warships from turning these provocative attitude into a full-scale war.

No aircraft can carry deploy an ECM capable of neutralising an battleship without a collateral damage to its own systems as claimed by the Russians.

RT and Fox at their best, good post BTW.

Cc: Tdayof

unclezuma:
That 2014 incident is a funny Russian propaganda. It's just discipline and rules of engagement that prevent US Warships from turning these provocative attitude into a full-scale war.

No aircraft can carry deploy an ECM capable of neutralising an battleship with collateral damage to its own systems.

RT and Fox at their best, good post BTW.

I disagree with that part you said 'collateral damage to its own systems.'.. Well, it all depends on the design pretty much possible to have more powerful countermeasure so as not to have 'collateral damage to its own systems'...

Did you say provocative attitude ? Who is the Provocateur here ? U.S invading black sea ? In all the countries in the Black sea U.S is not among any one of them. Do you know where the black sea is ?

scully95:


I disagree with that part you said 'collateral damage to its own systems.'.. Well, it all depends on the design pretty much possible to have more powerful countermeasure so as not to have 'collateral damage to its own systems'...

Did you say provocative attitude ? Who is the Provocateur here ? U.S invading black sea ? In all the countries in the Black sea U.S is not among any one of them. Do you know where the black sea is ?

Asking where the black sea shows you actually don't understand what buzzing means.

Invade is actually a strong word.
You only buzz what you intend to attack or deter; please refrain from insulting my intelligence with your reference to a geopolitical matter; the only individual I'd accept a professional opinion from with reference to electronic warfare and countermeasures is Tdayof.

It only takes a crazy and irrational mind to do what they do, that's their MO and I'll not be dragged into a geopolitical argument.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-incidents-involving-russian-military-and-nato-since-march-2014-9851309.html%3Famp

Please read the above and be enlightened.

unclezuma:


Asking where the black sea shows you actually don't understand what buzzing means.

Invade is actually a strong word.
You only buzz what you intend to attack or deter; please refrain from insulting my intelligence with your reference to a geopolitical matter; the only individual I'd accept a professional opinion from with reference to electronic warfare and countermeasures is Tdayof.

It only takes a crazy and irrational mind to do what they do, that's their MO and I'll not be dragged into a geopolitical argument.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-incidents-involving-russian-military-and-nato-since-march-2014-9851309.html%3Famp

Please read the above and be enlightened.

The su24 was said to have carried onboard just the khibiny pod. That's the standard pod on Russian su33 and such pod is used to perform SEAD(Supprrssion of enemy air defense ) Jamming radar signals and other related blablabla.

There's nothing this pod can do in its standard form that the US AN-ALQ 99 cannot do which means the US Navy could have destroyed the USS Donald Cook if it performs such attack on it's ship with the EA-18 growler.

In my own knowledge on electronic warfare, I'm not sure if khibiny is enough to disable the USS Donald Cook. The Russians have powerful Electronic warfare systems no doubt.

The Russians claimed their Krasuka 4 can fry an aircraft avionics and to me, this means they're adding some EMP capability to their EW platforms.

Conclusion based on my first hand knowledge on electronic warfare:

If the AN/AlQ 99 is capable of jamming air defense radars, the khibiny is capable of jamming the Aegis radar but the possibility of neutralizing the USS Donald Cook completely according to online sources is what I am not sure of.

However, if true then In my opinion, the Russians aircraft that buzzed the US Navy carried a specially made electronic attack module inside the Khibiny's pod.
I mean something like carrying a new different item with a known pod to avoid it being observed.

tdayof:


The su24 was said to have carried onboard just the khibiny pod. That's the standard pod on Russian su33 and such pod is used to perform SEAD(Supprrssion of enemy air defense ) Jamming radar signals and other related blablabla.

There's nothing this pod can do in its standard form that the US AN-ALQ 99 cannot do which means the US Navy could have destroyed the USS Donald Cook if it performs such attack on it's ship with the EA-18 growler.

In my own knowledge on electronic warfare, I'm not sure if khibiny is enough to disable the USS Donald Cook. The Russians have powerful Electronic warfare systems no doubt.

The Russians claimed their Krasuka 4 can fry an aircraft avionics and to me, this means they're adding some EMP capability to their EW platforms.

Conclusion based on my first hand knowledge on electronic warfare:

If the AN/AlQ 99 is capable of jamming air defense radars, the khibiny is capable of jamming the Aegis radar but the possibility of neutralizing the USS Donald Cook completely according to online sources is what I am not sure of.

However, if true then In my opinion, the Russians aircraft that buzzed the US Navy carried a specially made electronic attack module inside the Khibiny's pod.
I mean something like carrying a new different item with a known pod to avoid it being observed.

Thanks Tdayof for the clarification.

Then to the Op;
The Black Sea if ownership crops up is more of a NATO affair than a Russian and if Russia hasn't swallowed Crimea up their presence on that sea will just be in part a reference to the Montreux Agreement of 1936.

unclezuma:


Asking where the black sea shows you actually don't understand what buzzing means.

Invade is actually a strong word.
You only buzz what you intend to attack or deter; please refrain from insulting my intelligence with your reference to a geopolitical matter; the only individual I'd accept a professional opinion from with reference to electronic warfare and countermeasures is Tdayof.

It only takes a crazy and irrational mind to do what they do, that's their MO and I'll not be dragged into a geopolitical argument.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-incidents-involving-russian-military-and-nato-since-march-2014-9851309.html%3Famp

Please read the above and be enlightened.

You used the word 'Provocative' here which is more tied to geopolitics. There is one thing i like each time i analyse anything. I always love someone saying the truth without being biased. A warship harmed with tomahawk cruise missile and Aegis traveled thousands of miles to the shorelines of Russian Crimean peninsular just at the time the Crimeans voted to reunite with their Parent country and the Russians decided to defend the crimeans fate. What could be more provocative than what the U.S did as at the time, was it coincidence ?

Was it trying to flex its muscles ? Oh no the truth is, U.S was more provocative here and I like how tdayof even explained it above.
Invading is wrong word abi, but Russian provocative action/Buzzing is the right word/?

Please i don't like to deal with hypocrites! You travel thousand of miles to another country's backyard with armed to the teeth warship.. That is invading. Now invading here now depends on how you use it. The warship was not given any chance to even fire a missile so this kind of invading is without much Ado. And im very right with Invading another foreign country's territory. Same thing happened in Iranian water when it arrested American invaders and one of them turns out to be crying. You would surely call what Iran did Provocative too but American going to other ppl's waters is surely not provocative ?? Right

scully95:


You used the word 'Provocative' here which is more tied to geopolitics. There is one thing i like each time i analyse anything. I always love someone saying the truth without being biased. A warship harmed with tomahawk cruise missile and Aegis traveled thousands of miles to the shorelines of Russian Crimean peninsular just at the time the Crimeans voted to reunite with their Parent country and the Russians decided to defend the crimeans fate. What could be more provocative than what the U.S did as at the time, was it coincidence ?

Was it trying to flex its muscles ? Oh no the truth is, U.S was more provocative here and I like how tdayof even explained it above.

Count how many US Allies and NATO members are sharing the Black Sea with Russia and how many has had "incidents" with Russia.
This is not even an exhaustive list.

Please let's end this back and forth I'm off to work.

unclezuma:


Count how many US Allies and NATO members are sharing the Black Sea with Russia and how many has had "incidents" with Russia.
This is not even an exhaustive list.

Please let's end this back and forth I'm off to work.

lol.. You said U.S Allies. Again i like to be very straight. I call them U.S permanent puppets, check my signature to understand wella. Yes, U.S permanent puppets but not U.S..

There is huge difference between U.S.A and its puppets.. Ok.

The fact remains U.S traveled thousands of miles from its own territory to another big power's territory and Russia did not bow to any of such provocative act. The Iranians too would not bow.

I think there is even a treaty limiting countries that are not in the black-sea to over stay in the black sea but that is not even the issue here. The issue is the timing of the provocative act perpetrated by the U.S

scully95:


lol.. You said U.S Allies. Again i like to be very straight. I call them U.S permanent puppets, check my signature to understand wella. Yes, U.S permanent puppets but not U.S..

There is huge difference between U.S.A and its puppets.. Ok.

The fact remains U.S traveled thousands of miles from its own territory to another big power's territory and Russia did not bow to any of such provocative act. The Iranians too would not bow.

I think there is even a treaty limiting countries that are not in the black-sea to over stay in the black sea but that is not even the issue here. The issue is the timing of the provocative act perpetrated by the U.S

Facts man...Hit me with facts , just stop already I get your point or lack of it.

frumentius you move around too? I know your post will be anti Russian.

tdayof:
frumentius you move around too? I know your post will be anti Russian.

unclezuma:
That 2014 incident is a funny Russian propaganda. It's just discipline and rules of engagement that prevent US Warships from turning these provocative attitude into a full-scale war.

No aircraft can carry deploy an ECM capable of neutralising an battleship without a collateral damage to its own systems as claimed by the Russians.

RT and Fox at their best, good post BTW.

Cc: Tdayof

Arguing with scully95? You seem to have a lot of time reserved. I notice something nowadays on this section. A lot of people troll on internet to uplift whatever the junk/propaganda they see and they will immediately come here to create a topic vent the junk.
I knew right form time that 2014 incident was an undiluted fallacy coming from the eastern quater. It got more funny when I later read that all the crews on board tendered their resignation letter.
Later i saw the russian made rickety toy, packaged in a Candy-chocolate briefcase, labelled with a poetic name called LESPOTECH - which Russia claimed to have used to shut down a destroyer ship from moving and blind it radar.
I deliberately opened a thread (DON't BUY RUSSIAN REPORT ABOUT USIND SCARY EW WEAPON TO WIPE AMERICAN SHIP) to enlighten people like scully95 and the likes of Appleyard but I was lambasted, thinking that I was paid-typed from Pentagon yet none of them have been able to answer my question how Ew could shut down a ship, suddenly, all I could see was a conglomeration of unparalled junks put together by Appleyard to counter my simple question on the thread(how could Ew shut a radar), listing all the past military flaws in American military Lolzz. Argument should be based on fact and not fallacy but when fact is not reachable, just go ahead and put up unrelated craps then you have your way.
I am busy with office work here so I have no time to reply him let alone digging up unending Russian military flaws just because I want to counter question thrown at me. My brother, leave the boy, it is rainy season. Cheers

Mazeltovscotty:
Arguing with scully95? You seem to have a lot of time reserved. I notice something nowadays on this section. A lot of people troll on internet to uplift whatever the junk/propaganda they see and they will immediately come here to create a topic vent the junk.
I knew right form time that 2014 incident was an undiluted fallacy coming from the eastern quater. It got more funny when I later read that all the crews on board tendered their resignation letter.
Later i saw the russian made rickety toy, packaged in a Candy-chocolate briefcase, labelled with a poetic name called LESPOTECH - which Russia claimed to have used to shut down a destroyer ship from moving and blind it radar.
I deliberately opened a thread (DON't BUY RUSSIAN REPORT ABOUT USIND SCARY EW WEAPON TO WIPE AMERICAN SHIP) to enlighten people like scully95 and the likes of Appleyard but I was lambasted, thinking that I was paid-typed from Pentagon yet none of them have been able to answer my question how Ew could shut down a ship, suddenly, all I could see was a conglomeration of unparalled junks put together by Appleyard to counter my simple question on the thread(how could Ew shut a radar), listing all the past military flaws in American military Lolzz. Argument should be based on fact and not fallacy but when fact is not reachable, just go ahead and put up unrelated craps then you have your way.
I am busy with office work here so I have no time to reply him let alone digging up unending Russian military flaws just because I want to counter question thrown at me. My brother, leave the boy, it is rainy season. Cheers

You and Tdayof just made my day I almost thought he was nuts, just spewing unending "alternative facts" up and down I almost thought I was talking to a Cold War era Soviet Fan Boy... Abeg leave dirty for LAWMA and thank you for the clarification.

unclezuma:


You and Tdayof just made my day I almost thought he was nuts, just spewing unending "alternative facts" up and down I almost thought I was talking to a Cold War era Soviet Fan Boy... Abeg leave dirty for LAWMA and thank you for the clarification.

lolzz, look at the Russian made laundry Suitecase Russia hung on the jet to shut down a destroyer. It even have a poetic name called "lespotech"

And they should kukuma say it's powered by Warp drives.

Update from the Empire itself, of what recently happened in Syria and one of many of what Russia is capable of doing with its powerful jammer(s), continue reading bellow. Beware of Propaganda from the western news media (Always telling half truth baked with lies and deceit)

Russians forcing RAF to abort missions in Syria by ‘hacking into’ their systems


RUSSIAN electronic units are forcing RAF bomber crews to abort missions over Syria by hacking into their systems, sources revealed last night.
It is thought the attacks may be aimed at causing aircrews to hit wrong targets, leading to collateral damage in a bid to undermine Britain’s mission.

The news emerges as Russian premier Vladimir Putin stands accused of using increasingly sophisticated technology to launch cyber attacks in the US.

At least three sorties, two involving RAF Tornadoes, the other a Typhoon, were hacked over the last few weeks.
In two cases, the attacks were successfully intercepted by RAF weapons aircrew. However, both missions had to be aborted to void the possibility of bombs landing on incorrect targets.

In another case, a bomber was hit 30 seconds after it had already accurately dropped its payload, rendering the attack useless.

The incidents were witnessed by the crews of nearby Awacs surveillance aircraft.

Russia doesn’t care about collateral damage in Syria.
Air Commodore Dai Whittingham

Last night experts suggested that the attacks were disrupting the way RAF bombers were receiving GPS coordinates for targets on the ground, a “known vulnerability” which Russia is capitalizing on with what US Gen Ben Hodges recently described as an “eye watering” array of electronic jamming and disruption equipment.

These include the 1RL257 Krasukha-4 ground-based electronic warfare system,, photographed at Syria’s Hmeymim airbase last year.

Though ostensibly designed to provide Russian troops and bases with a shield against electronic warfare attacks, the mobile unit has the ability to launch long-range attacks of its own.

Russia is using Syria as a real-time testbed to trial sophisticated electronic warfare equipment capable of hacking into Nato systems.


“It is entirely feasible that Russia has targeted Tornadoes and Typhoons in this way,” said air defence expert Justin Bronk, of the Royal United Services Institute think-tank.

“The Russians are well aware that they simply cannot match Western precision-guided munition technology, and they cannot match us one-to-one.

“But Russia also knows that Britain’s ability to deliver guided munitions depends on access to GPS in the target area and good communications, so they have developed equipment to jam and interrupt both. They are very, very good at this.”

The RAF uses two type of targeting system, laser and GPS. While Laser is more difficult to jam, GPS is often preferred.



“GPS coordinates come from Combined Air and Space Operation Centre in Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, where they are checked off against a list of known red flag targets such as schools, and hospitals. It’s much easier to do this if GPS is being used to guide munitions, rather than laser,” he added.

When pilots are given new targets mid-flight, the GPS coordinates are transmitted by Awacs or River Joint reconnaissance aircraft. It is these signals that are being disrupted.

Moscow has already shown it is willing to use this technology in the Ukraine, where troops found phones and radios jammed for hours at a time. It has also targetted at least three UAV surveillance drones belonging to the Organization for Security and Cooperation, which were rendered blind and forced to return to base, as well as US drones.


“It entirely plausible that RAF aircraft have been targeted in this way, possibly because they wanted to see what they could do, or possibly to cause collateral damage,” said Air Commodore Dai Whittigham, who formerly commanded E-3D AWACS squadron.


Russia is clearly unconcerned about causing collateral damage by using this jamming tactic

“The problem with GPS is that the signal is very weak –it comes from a satellite in space – so it is considerably easier to hack or jam.

“If you interfere with the aiming system of an aircraft you have to be comfortable with the knowledge that it may cause unintended damage. We have seen that Russia doesn’t care about collateral damage in Syria.

“Crews are all trained to deal with electronic interference, as these cases have shown, though, of course, the missions were still aborted. In one way, then, they were successful.

“But fundamentally it shows that the UK is being responsible in taking no chances that ordnance is going to be dropped in the wrong place.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/754236/russia-raf-bombers-syria-hacking-missions-military-army

Smh scully you get time!.

giving people information they won't understand is one hell of a job i try to avoid everyday of my life

romme2u:
giving people information they won't understand is one hell of a job i try to avoid everyday of my life

what could have been used to describe crap if not what the boy posted. The kid is well known for posting craps. Scuuly95 really needs to learn how to summarize jargons

crappy Russian weapons

Jokul:
Smh scully you get time!.

I get time once in a while @Jokul . It's good to school some very uninformed mofos. Just once in a while. The nonentities above have not added any value to this post or anything educative or informative except acting like the crook they always do. I really dont have time answering less Educated mofos and mostly kids on Foreign Affairs category.

Ppl/mofos that needs their brains to be removed and repackaged !

scully95:


I get time once in a while @Jokul . It's good to school some very uninformed mofos. Just once in a while. The nonentities above have not added any value to this post or anything educative or informative except acting like the crook they always do. I really dont have time answering less Educated mofos and mostly kids on Foreign Affairs category.

Ppl/mofos that needs their brains to be removed and repackaged !

I am in concurrence with the emboldened - 100% .

scully95:


lol.. You said U.S Allies. Again i like to be very straight. I call them U.S permanent puppets, check my signature to understand wella. Yes, U.S permanent puppets but not U.S..

There is huge difference between U.S.A and its puppets.. Ok.

The fact remains U.S traveled thousands of miles from its own territory to another big power's territory and Russia did not bow to any of such provocative act. The Iranians too would not bow.

I think there is even a treaty limiting countries that are not in the black-sea to over stay in the black sea but that is not even the issue here. The issue is the timing of the provocative act perpetrated by the U.S

that is NATO security Project (it allows the u.s to be in europe and around the world) and Africa is the biggest western puppet.