I never brought up the issue of SAM vs SEAD. You started it first, and then you focused on it which such a myopic obsession as to move the goal post and include things like magical unlimited ARM missiles and unfair biased scenarios against it.You seem fixated on SAM vs SEAD and missing my point that being about initiative, offensive vs defence positions-weapons, and the value of confidential information between these. So I've made my point as well as I could be bothered and readers can decide for themselves but reality doesn't care for feelings and personal suppositions. Any military that looks at SAMs the way you do will have the same end as Saddam's and Assad's. No politics at all just facts. Israel and US fighters have striked Syrian targets pretty easily in the last year. They seem to do as they please even without involving F-35s. Iraq had multi layered "impenetrable" air defence SAM networks... for about a few days before getting wiped... without shooting down a single fighter. Bragged to be "the world's third most well defended airspace" after Russia and China but with even higher concentration of SAMs than either Russia or China.
Yes Tor and Pantsir are there for point defence. I'm aware S-400 has multiple missile types and the S-400 battalion is itself defended by other shorter ranged SAMs designed for this purpose. S-400 is more suited for aircraft, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and invading alien motherships.
My original post had never change and it is still such : That the S-400 is currently the premier SAM system Russia can field and which if compromised will badly damage Russian air defense system. That the F-35 might also have its system compromise in return is a valid contention but one which the US can circumvent by withholding certain tech to Turkey. And seeing that the F-35 is cleared for export and not the F-22, the US most certainly had given thought to such a scenario.
Using Syria as an example is absurd, Syria's equipment are at least two generations behind what Israel and the US uses at the moment. Yes they have alot of missiles but the way they used them is terrible.
"“Syrian SAM operators also invited disaster upon themselves. Their Soviet equipment was generally regarded as quite good; Syrian handling of it was appalling.
As noted by Lt Gen Leonard Perroots, director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency, “The Syrians used mobile missiles in a fixed configuration; they put the radars in the valley instead of the hills because they didn't want to dig latrines -- seriously."
" The Syrian practice of stationing mobile missiles in one place for several months allowed Israeli reconnaissance to determine the exact location of the missiles and their radars, giving the IAF a definite tactical advantage on the eve of battle. Even so, the Syrians might have been able to avoid the complete destruction of their SAM complex had they effectively camouflaged their sites; instead, they used smoke to “hide” them, which actually made them easier to spot from the air. It is ironic that the Syrians, who have been criticized for their strict adherence to Soviet doctrine, chose to ignore the viable doctrine that emphasizes the utility of maneuver and camouflage. "
If you have an army who deploys weapons based on how convenient it is for them to take a s*** you know you have a debacle on your hands.
the same repeated itself in Iraq
"The 1982 Bekaa Valley debacle was repeated on a much larger scale in January, 1991, when US led Coalition air forces annihilated Saddam’s SAM defences, the decisive blows inflicted in the first few hours. While that campaign is well documented in detail elsewhere, like the 1982 campaign, large scale use was made of anti-radiation missiles, support jamming, and precision weapons. The deployment pattern of Saddam’s forces also differed little, with few batteries attempting to exploit any inherent mobility in their systems, and often undisciplined emissions permitting easy location, targeting and attack. The composition of Saddam’s SAM force comprised much the same SA-2, SA-3, SA-6, SA-8 and SA-9 SAM systems, supplemented by some modern French supplied Thales Roland SAMs and Tiger series radars."