Comments by "Antony Wooster" (@antonywooster6783) on "Russian transfers S-300 + S-400 systems from St. Peterburg to Ukraine front. Signs of depletion." video.

  1. The reason why the Russians get so much more "bang for their buck" is this: The Russian MIC is largely state owned, its remit is to make robust, effective, long-lasting , tough weapons which are easy to use and service in the field, as cheaply as possible. The USA's MIC by contrast, is (nearly?) all privately owned and its remit is to sell to Congress and the USG, weapons which will look wonderful and make a lot of money for the board and the shareholders, many of them congress-critters. Whether they work and are effective or whether they can be easily serviced, are other, not very important, questions. "Long-lasting" is a distinctly bad idea. A "fire and forget" weapon is a much better prospect. The long-range (100km) gun, that cannot be fired as its shells are too expensive (!) and the marvelous fighter, the F-22, that cannot be flown because it costs $68,000 an hour to fly are cases in point. There are many other examples.
    1
  2. I thick you have got this story slightly wrong. The S-300 is an older system, the Russians probably thought : "lets use these up on the UAF, they are relatively easy targets, anyway we have S-500s coming soon so we need the space. The S-400s will do for now."
    1