Greece Tests Russian-made S-300 Air Defense System



    s300_GreeceGreek armed forces test-fired a Russian-made S-300 air defense system on Friday, Dec 13, for the first time since it was bought 14 years ago.
    Greece is the only NATO member that has an S-300 in service. The system was initially purchased by Cyprus in the mid-1990s, and was later transferred to the Greek island of Crete following objections from Turkey.
    The launch was carried out as part of the White Eagle 2013 military exercise and was described as “successful.”
    “It may sound paradoxical, but this successful S-300 launch is a message of peace and stability in Southeastern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean,” Greek Defense Minister Dimitris Avramopoulos said in a statement.
    “The S-300, one of the most modern defense systems that ensure the efficiency of our country’s air defense, was test-fired after 14 years in service,” he said. “The launch saw immense success.”
    (source: RIA Novosti)


    21 COMMENTS

    1. Only one launch? You should fire 6-10 missiles to make sure of any technical problems. The Israeli Air Force trains against the same system based on Crete. Wondering if they and HAF already know how to evade it.

    2. Matches and fuses for 6 – 10 launches cost money. No way for the public to really know areal evasion tactics work until there are live firing scenarios. The system in all likelihood has been repeatedly tested and evaluated. Israel never wants to experience the +30% losses experienced in the 1973 Yom Kippur War from SAM systems. They do their homework.

    3. I’m glad Greece is buying Russian made weapons (US can no longer be trusted as ally they betrayed us to the Skopians) but this is largely 30 year old missile technology. This is useless against stealth aircraft with with advanced air defense capabilities as well as cruise missile technology.

      I support our military spending but our approach is based more on the illusion of defense capability rather than substance. We just buy second rate technology of leading nations which sell the same weapons to many others nations, (including nations hostile to us which negates any alleged advantage).

      We need to stop simply mimicking other militaries and think about defense in a purely strategic forward thinking way. Our ultimate goal should be a military that is strong enough to discourage any nation from attacking us (including nations with nuclear weapons). This would require the ability to level any city in the world, protection against conventional forces, and protection against WMDs.

      Unfortunately the full spectrum of defense is is very difficult for a large nation to achieve much less a small nation as it requires the nation have advanced technology other nation’s do not have.

      At the moment we are seriously lacking technology of our own so in the short term (if we were thinking in terms of achievable defense), we would be revamping our military to support guerrilla warfare tactics rather than direct conflict.

      Were it up to me, I would convert our forces to an army of long range sharpshooters, IED, shoulder fired missiles, cryptography and electrical engineering experts. Caches of concealed weapons would be distributed all across Greece.

      It would be small independent units rather than centralized command structure (thus if one unit is caught they can’t compromise another). Communication between unit members would be through encrypted wireless mutli-frequency stenography technology.(why electrical engineers and cryptography experts would be a must in every independent unit as the technology cannot be based on a single protocal/frequency else every unit would be compromised)

      The purpose of such an army would not be to prevent invasion but to make any occupiers life so extremely painful they would eventually leave. (which is how Iraqis and Afghans ended up kicking out far superior US forces)

    4. I like the way you think and I think if there were ever was a Serious threat that the Greek Military would quickly bring a plan like this into Action.

      These forces would use Assymetrical Warfare to the Maximum Degree including such things as Ambush Tactics, IED’s, Remote Controlled Armored Vehicle Bombs to take out Checkpoints/Barriers and break defenses, RPG/ATGM Expert in every Cell/Unit is a Must and Communitcation between units can also be done using Couriers carrying Destructable USB stick or something like that

    5. Preparations just before or after being invaded would be of limited effectiveness or deterrence. If we were in a state of perpetual preparedness we would have the time to thoughtfully develop the best approach over an extended period of time.

      IMO we should get rid of our Navy entirely and instead use the vast amounts of money on improving our coast guard (to combat illegal migration). Get rid of our expensive air force entirely in favour of mobile ground based anti-aircraft defense systems. Our Army should also be completely replaced with independent guerilla warfare units (as per above)

      We could also develop a new military wing that focuses on honing always evolving military strategy and producing advanced military technology (somewhat akin to Darpa in US but also strategy oriented). Rather than having physical forces its “soldiers” would be scientists that oversee both short term asymmetric warfare objectives as well as work towards a long term goal of stealth global delivery of WMDs (e.g. nukes) and production of effective defense systems against such technology.(e.g. EMP/laser weapons, radiological detection systems, black and false flag ops, political strategies, etc.)

      Unfortunately at the moment too much of our military is about simply emulating foreign militaries. The weapons the majority of our spending is on may look cool but in terms of effective defense it’s rather useless.

    6. Air-Force and Navy are critical to defeat any Foreign Threat

      Air-Force capabilities to perform surgical strikes is absolutely critical to any fight and Navy is also critical although I would say that out of all Navy units, the submarine is by far the most effective and useful

      AS far as technology to focus on, we need to put all our efforts into creating a Predator Drone Copy and secondly creating a Tank Anti-ATGM defense Trophy System like the Israelis and thirdly create a Massive Force of Remote-Controlled BMP’s to be filled with explosives for surprise attacks

      We cannot be removing things like Air-Force, Navy, REgular army etc What we need to do is create a Frame-Work so if War begins we can quickly train and disperse Gurellia Cells that will work alongside the REgular Army using Assymetrical Tactics to destroy the Enemy’s Moral.

    7. “Air-Force and Navy are critical to defeat any Foreign Threat”

      There are 20-30 nations in the world that could defeat our forces (including Turkey) so they are effectively not a defense.

      All the money we spend on airforce, navy, and army could be used to build a guerilla tactics defense approach that would be effective (including against superpower like US). All it takes is the political initiative.

    8. We can indeed get rid of our airforce, navy and army.

      We have to break out of the box of thinking that these things are necessary because thinking in this manner is precisely what makes our forces so easy to defeat. (as defense is then reduced to commoditized numbers game) Countries like US, Russia, China, India, )and many others) could easily take out the majority of our current defense systems in a few days. We have no real defense.

      There is only x numbers of dollars to spent on defense. This number is especially small number for tiny country like Greece. We can spend in manner where we pretend we are a superpower but that only insures we stay second rate for the sake of show.

      What is more rational, is to focus our energies in areas where we can mount a real defense of country (including from large threats like US)

    9. One doesn’t need an airforce and navy because from a military standpoint everything they theoretically do can be achieved with stealth ballistic and hypersonic missiles (with optional nuclear capabilities) and UAVs. An army can even theoretically be replaced with robots.

    10. One day the Russians will betray us…The Russians are interested to expand their military might in Europe and the best choice to do that is from Greece because of same religious believes…Russia’s support and help to Greece is limited…Greece should divert it’s road to France, Italy and Israel to increase it’s defence ability and capabilities from any invasion by our neighbour but corruption again directed our corrupt politicians to a corrupt country Russia for equipments from 1979…Russia doesn’t give unless it takes back something in return…

    11. #1 Greece didn’t buy this missile system, Cyprus did a decade or two ago, but chickened out on installing it in Cyprus when Turkey caught wind of the purchase, so they passed it along to Greece.

      #2 Greece has a much better system PAC3 Patriots, for years now, which the US allowed Greece to assemble themselves for cost savings.

      #3 It’s Russia to be exact who betrays Greece to the Skopjians, they have documents from the 1800’s which fully discredit the Skopjians claims to a Macedonian identity and ancestry, they won’t release them to solve this problem once and for all.

      #4 You have to be insane to think the Iraqis and Afghanis kicked out US forces.

    12. #1 Cyprus Greece. Both are Greeks

      #2 The majority of current weapon systems are useless in straight war. The same or similar weapons are sold to other countries (some of which are hostile towards us) which have far more of them.

      #3 Oh I know Russia also doesn’t give a damn about Greece but they are not officially our allies like Nato was supposed to be. If Russia continues to pretend not to notice, at minimum seeking closer military ties with it would allow us to play nuclear powers against one another. If the US government wants to play both sides we can hardly be faulted for subsequently doing the same.

      #4 You would have to be “insane” to think it wasn’t the grinding down by Afghan guerrilla attacks that didn’t cause the US to leave. (much like Russia left Afghanstan back in the 80s). One or two terrorists achieve nothing. Years of attacks by thousands of people will wear down the resolve of occupying forces (as happened to the US in Vietnam as well).

      The alternative of ethnic cleansing would have worked in the past. However, in the modern era of digital cameras and instant global communication it is politically untenable. Nukes and all the weapons in the world are worthless if they can’t be used.

      This is why guerrilla tactics is the way to approach 21st century warfare. It is precisely why the US has expanded the NSA so greatly.

    13. You are fooling yourself if you think the s300 would successfully defend our country in an all out war except the weakest of enemies.

      Saddam confused his hubris and chauvinism with the stark reality his forces could not defend Iraq . US forces didn’t leave Iraq because of conventional forces of Saddam. They obliterated his forces in a few days. The US left Iraq because of the asymmetrical warfare of thousands of Iraqs that didn’t want the US forces permanently setting up shop in their country.

      If one wants to successful defend a country, a focus on asymmetric warfare is the way to do it. Buying weapons from other nations that use the exact or similar same weapons and same strategies is a way to lose wars.

    14. #1 No, two separate countries, one split in half with Turkish occupying forces in the north.

      #2 No, they aren’t, keeps a balance of power in the area.

      #3 Cyprus tried playing the Soviets and the Americans against each other and paid the price, ask Markarios how it worked out for him. Greece isn’t stupid enough to do the same.

      #4 The US pulled out of Iraq in 2011, ended combat operations in 2010, then handed power over to the Iraqis, which was the plan all along. They did not wear down the US. In 2010 only 46 terror attacks occured, 478 in 2005. Most of the casualties, the clear majority, were against Iraqi civilians by terrorists the whole time the US was there and after. They’re still killing more civilians with the US hand over than even Iraq security forces.

      The point is not to get invaded in the first place, guerrilla tactics basically mean you lost.

    15. The terror attacks in Iraq were killing way more Iraqi civilians than US troops or Iraqi Security Forces, they still are to this day. Those forces are terror groups killing civilians at a much higher rate than any troops.

    16. By that as it may, they still ended up kicking out US troops despite the fact the US heavily outgunned them.

      Aristotle said observe. There is a warfare lesson to be learned there.

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.