It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Odium
Although, if they did take the tech and could advance on it/help them, they'd of used it. I just think, with a 7 year head start and previous systems to work off of they'd of invested their spies in better places.
Good find though.
Originally posted by Odium
I find it odd, that Russia would take American tech and add it to their own design when they had a 7year head start on America.The MIM-104 Patriot of course, beginning in 1976 as an Anti-Aircraft weapon.Where as the S-300 started in 1969.
as posted by Odium
I find it odd, that Russia would take American tech and add it to their own design when they had a 7year head start on America.
Originally posted by intelgurl
This question was bound to come up sooner or later so I thought I would ask it first...
If the Patriot is such a lame system as some have proclaimed here on ATS, and the S-300 has the same technology, what then does that mean for the S-300 system?
To clarify: If the 2 systems share the same technology would that not make them either equally good or equally lame?
Originally posted by intelgurl
This question was bound to come up sooner or later so I thought I would ask it first...
If the Patriot is such a lame system as some have proclaimed here on ATS, and the S-300 has the same technology, what then does that mean for the S-300 system?
To clarify: If the 2 systems share the same technology would that not make them either equally good or equally lame?
Originally posted by jetsetter
You and I know that the Patriot is not a lame system. The problems that occured were programing issues and I believe have been resolved now. They introduced it a little too early.