Hi; sorry but s400 has no defense vs cruise missiles travelling at high speed 10 meters above ground and with low rcs ,such as scalp or even more powerful and longed ranged taurus-kepd; it is fisically impossible. Russian know this very well and indeed even sputnik news reported that french rafale used some scalp missiles last year in syria (more a tech test )

Only western large ships equipped with phalanx high speed and caliber machine gun can protect ships from incoming cruise missiles,(they can intercept them with hundreds of projectiles during last kilometer )they cna and this cannot be done on solid ground because of ntaural earth curvature: s400 is totally defenseless vs cruise missiles: furthermore this missile travel with terrain recognition; so you are totallay wrong in this aspect; an s400 becomes visible when has is radar turned on; taurus kepd is effective even vs semis static targets; a new version is avilable with reduced detonation power, as probably standard version is an overkill for not heavy armoured targets since taurus-kepd was born to destroy themoelecrtic centrals, 10 meters reinforced concrete bunkers and bridges. If stan off missile does not flies 10 meters above ground but follow a ballistic trajectory,then it would be interceptable.

R” ut that is true for any AA system out there, so I don’t see how that specificaly applies to S400 more that to Patriot or MEADS for example. The “no escape zone” depends on a number of factors, for example: the speed of the airplane, the speed of the missile, the time of detection of the launch or of the missile itself. BTW, though the missile technically flies 250km. the responcibility zone of an S400 complex is 100km,” that soudns reasonable

spear3 range is 120km (launche from f35) scalp range is sensibly more then 250km and 500km (2 versions) taurus kepd around 750km