Military Review

The elimination of holes in the missile defense of Russia is coming to an end

42
The elimination of holes in the missile defense of Russia is coming to an endThe collapse of the USSR led, among other things, to the fact that Russia was left without a full-fledged rocket cover - the radar stations remaining on the lands of the former Soviet republics were aging and became a cause for blackmail. In recent years, conversations in the Western media that the Russian Federation no longer has a full-fledged “shield” have become dangerously frequent. But now this problem is almost solved.


The defense holding OJSC RTI is commissioned by the military in the north-west of Russia to create a powerful radar station that will cover the main missile-dangerous direction. State tests of the high-potential Voronezh-DM radar in the Murmansk region should be completed in a few years, Sergei Boev, head of the holding’s board of directors, general designer of the missile warning system (SPRN), told Interfax. In early October, in the Department of Information and Mass Communications, the Ministry of Defense already reported that the Voronezh network of high-readiness radar stations will be deployed in Russia for the 2018 year.

It is about restoring a previously operating system of early radar detection and warning. It must track all ballistic missile launches from a foreign territory, instantly determine the missile parameters and its trajectory, and transmit this data to the anti-ballistic center. The warning system of a surprise nuclear missile attack is the basis of the country's defense. Considering the size of our state, it requires the work of at least ten super-power radar complexes, which are serviced by whole mono-cities. According to the simple laws of geometry, individual radars cover only a certain angle, ideally, the entire complex should keep under control the perimeter of the country's borders without any “holes”, including the Arctic operational theater of operations - in terms of a rocket attack, it is most dangerous.

In the USSR, the global early warning system was never completed to the end, and the collapse of the country was almost destroyed - the fragments went to Ukraine, Latvia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. The fate of the Latvian radar station in the small town of Skrunda was simpler - it stopped its work in the middle of the 90s, and the personnel (the whole city) went to Russia. The Skrunda-1 military town, twice the size of Skrunda itself, founded by the Teutonic knights, turned into a ghost town, and the radar itself — a monstrous building — was blown up by the Latvian authorities. This process was broadcast live and presented as one of the key acts on the path to de-Sovietization and liberation from the Russian occupation. After that, the entire settlement (dilapidated buildings, land, communications) was put up for public sale and sold in 1999 by a certain company for 170 thousand lats (then about 300 thousand dollars, quite cheap). Behind this company, according to rumors, there are some private individuals from Russia, who were simply upset over the years.

The radar station in Azerbaijan in the area of ​​the settlement of Gabala even managed to make some war - she was responsible for the country's southern defense, that is, first of all, for the Middle East. In January, 1991 of the year (that is, during Desert Storm), this station tracked all 302 launches of Tomahawks from American ships and submarines, as well as 15 fails - missile absences on the trajectory and 30 cases of the defeat of American cruise missiles by forces Iraqi Air Defense. This is surprising, but it is a fact - the antediluvian Saddam's air defense really hit down the 10% "Tomahawks", which was a revelation for the Pentagon, who religiously believed then in this miracleweapon. And we know about it thanks to the data obtained from the Gabala radar station.

Until 2002, this station was used without any legal registration. She was served by two thousand Russian troops and about the same number of contracted Azerbaijanis. Its equipment was gradually becoming obsolete, just as gradually Baku was raising a fee for its very existence. At some point, the price reached 300 million a year instead of the initial 15, and Russia suggested that the United States share Gabala as an object of missile defense against Iran, since Washington is so concerned about this. The Americans at first were glad that they would get to a top-secret facility of global significance free of charge, and then they said something like "equipment does not meet the standards already existing (!) In Russia." Finally, in 2013, the object was dismantled, the garrison was removed, and the equipment that can be added to more modern systems was transferred to a new station already on the territory of the Russian Federation. In Azerbaijan, for a while, they simply looked at half a million hectares of vacant land, and then removed them from the balance of the Ministry of Defense. At the same time, some politicians are trying to present Russia with bills for “environmental problems” that were akin to stories from the series "The X-Files" - spontaneous combustion of trees, emission of freon (!) and all that.

The Transcarpathian radar station in the Mukachevo region cost Russia 1,5 a million dollars a year right up to 2006. At the same time, all the personnel were Russian, and the data received in Ukraine did not linger, being immediately transmitted to the missile defense control center in Kaliningrad Solnechnogorsk. In 2005, then-President Viktor Yushchenko suddenly demanded an increase in the rent for the Mukachevo radar station at times, at the same time proposing that it be leased to the USA. Russia refused and disbanded military units listed for the radar station in Mukachevo and for a similar facility in Sevastopol to prevent the appearance of American specialists on them. In 2009, both radars - in Mukachevo and Sevastopol - stopped transmitting information to the Russian Federation and began to work in the interests of Ukraine, but since they did not have such interests, as there was no funding, they were dismantled for scrap.

The history of ultra-precise radar in the region of Kazakhstan's Balkhash is also tragic. It began to be built during the Soviets, and in 1991 – 1992 the construction was frozen. The Kazakh government took over this cargo, but did not overload it and tried to privatize the facility. As a result of a private reconstruction in 2010, the building collapsed, but continues to be listed under the authority of the Russian Aerospace Forces on a rental basis and it seems to even work, although the equipment is outdated.

Thus, in the 90s and a significant part of the “zero” Russia lived without a full-fledged antimissile cover. Fly in, good people. If you look closely at the globe, then all the western and southern directions were completely defenseless. Moreover, the most strategic - the northern - direction remained “empty”, since the operating radars in Pechora - Vorgashor (Komi) and in Olenegorsk (Murmansk) long ago became outdated. Actually, they are being discussed now.

Strictly speaking, this is not the construction of new radars from scratch, but rather modernization - the outdated systems “Daryal” and “Dnepr” worked there. In 1974, at the time of construction, the Olenegorsky complex was considered to be advanced, since it could track a new type of weapon for those times - split warheads. Since then, the equipment has gone ahead, and the complex has not been updated, meanwhile, the closest trajectory of the approach to the Russian Federation of ballistic missiles from the US is through the North Pole. Consequently, the most advanced means of early warning should cover this area.

In the south - in Armavir of the Krasnodar Territory - a new radar has already been built and has started operating on the basis of the Voronezh project; this is the most up-to-date system that has gradually replaced the outdated Soviet-designed complexes. She replaced the deceased Gabala radar station, and the secret “seismic station” in the Abkhaz Eschers, which even avoided the Georgian-Abkhaz war, was avoided in contact with her - he was right on the front line, but he was defended by a Russian marine corps. This system is now responsible for all the southern direction, including the Persian Gulf and the Eastern Mediterranean (on the issue of Syria and Iraq).

Two radars were built on the direct west direction instead of Skrunda-1. The main one is that in the Kaliningrad region in the region of the resort Solnechnogorsk, it oversees the central direction, focusing on the far warning and the area of ​​the British Isles. It can capture the launch at a distance of 6 thousands of kilometers and, in fact, eliminates the possibility of a rocket attack across the Atlantic. It is duplicated by a similar, but weaker radar station in Belarus in the area of ​​Gantsevichi town in the Baranavichy region. It requires modernization, and Minsk is trying to bargain for the cost of its operation. These negotiations are not critical, but annoying. The completion of the Volga object in Belarus itself was directly related to the dismantling of the radar station in Skrunda, Latvia. At the same time, Ukrainian contractors (outside, we recall 90-e) refused to supply some electronic modules, requesting six times more expensive than the original price. It was the first experience of import substitution in the defense sector - the Ukrainians were simply sent, and the electronics were made in Moscow and Rybinsk. So Russia got rid of Ukrainian contractors in the strategic sphere at a time when no one could think about the war. Volga has an overview of 120 degrees, that is, it not only controls (duplicates) Western Europe, but also partially holds the area of ​​the Norwegian Sea, which is considered promising for an attack from American submarines.

The most powerful radar was built in the Leningrad region in the village Lekhtusi. In theory, it also had to compensate for the loss of Skrunda, but eventually turned into a more complex complex, which is able to control the space from Spitsbergen in the north to Morocco in the south. After modernization, this radar will cover the territory up to the east coast of the United States. Thus, a complex of three stations will cover the western and north-western missile-hazard direction.

In the Asian sector, similar radars are already working in Yeniseisk and Barnaul (as long as they are on expert watch, but their transfer to working condition is a matter of days). But these are supernovae stations. Slightly more “old” (that is, commissioned in 2014 year) is located in Usolye-Sibirskiy in the Trans-Baikal Territory - the so-called “Michelevka” object. Now it is she who oversees the airspace from the west coast of the United States to India. Its antenna field is two times larger than that of a similar radar in the Leningrad region, it controls 240 degrees in azimuth and has 6 sections against 3 in Lehtusi.

Now similar super-large facilities in the Murmansk region and Komi are being commissioned. The Daugava complex (apparently, the developers scoffed at Latvians over Skrunda) in Olenegorsk according to the plan of the Ministry of Defense should be commissioned in 2017, the object in Vorgashor (Komi) - in 2018. It will become the basis of the defense on the north direction, its capabilities exceed even those declared in Michelevka with the same early detection range in 6000 kilometers.

By the way, about two years ago, American sources close to strategic planning began actively promoting the idea that Russia is in principle incapable of withstanding a sudden nuclear missile strike from the United States. This perspective was actively replicated in the Russian liberal media as an argument of the “uselessness” of all attempts to restore the state sovereignty of the Russian Federation in the military sphere. In short, it boils down to the fact that the main attack on the territory of Russia will be inflicted not by mine-based missiles from New Mexico and Arizona across the Atlantic, but from submarines, which must massively move into the Arctic Ocean and the Indian Ocean in the Diego Garcia region, Russia does not have an early warning system in these areas, while the approach time from the Arctic is critically low.

The plan suffered from two flaws that the “military experts” from the liberal deck did not quite understand. Firstly, the American submarines (with all due respect to them) have no experience of ice work, as well as successful confirmed launches. Their attempts to conduct similar tests by Alaska in the last two years were blocked by the Russian fleet, and from Canada they didn’t even try to conduct tests. Secondly, the early detection system is now operational, so that a single missile from the northern direction is useless even at a critical range. Moreover, powerful missile counteraction complexes have already been created there, as well as unique Arctic military bases, which no country in the world has analogues. Then the Western countries were surprised to learn that they did not have an icebreaker fleet. That is, nothing at all, even from Canada and Norway.

Nevertheless, the modernization of the radar complexes in Olenegorsk and Pechora will not complete the construction of the Russian early warning system. In the USSR, it was planned to build 8 stations, most of which were never put into operation. Now it is planned to create a system of 10 stations, of which the majority are already in service or undergoing planned tests. In addition, the satellites are working - the so-called satellite echelon of the missile attack warning system (EWS). It is also constantly updated, but the grouping in geostationary orbit remains unchanged, complementing ground-based radars of both over-horizon and over-the-horizon types.

Do not be afraid. These are defensive systems, although the logic of strategic confrontation also elevates them to the rank of offensive, after which the logical chain of arguments is lost.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru/society/2016/11/15/843684.html
42 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 20 November 2016 13: 09
    +8
    Radar stations of the new generation "Voronezh" are on alert in the Leningrad, Irkutsk, Kaliningrad regions and in the Krasnodar Territory. State tests of the new Voronezh VZG radar in the Krasnoyarsk Territory and in the Orenburg Region are nearing completion, and state tests of the radar station in the Altai Territory have begun. Construction of a new radar station is underway in the Arctic "
    1. RASKAT
      RASKAT 20 November 2016 14: 11
      +24
      Photo into the load so far without a radar in Murmansk

      Developers well done. Keep it up. good
      1. 501Legion
        501Legion 20 November 2016 16: 33
        +1
        and one circular in the center)
      2. Titsen
        Titsen 20 November 2016 23: 45
        +1
        Quote: RASKAT
        Photo to load


        Thank you for the photo!

        Now you can see the sectors of the overview of our radar
    2. olegfbi
      olegfbi 26 February 2017 17: 52
      +1
      п
      moreover, the secret “seismic station” in the Abkhaz Escher, which even bypassed the Georgian-Abkhaz war, was working in contact with her - he was right on the front line, but he was defended by a special detachment of the Russian Marines.

      What kind of nonsense, due to the work of the seismic station in contact with the radar?
      Yes, the truth exists in Escher, but its tasks, in comparison with the radar, are completely different!
      This very item is included in the CCK of the RF Ministry of Defense, that's it.
      Who does not understand, look in Yandex about SSK.
  2. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 20 November 2016 13: 50
    +4
    Forewarned is forearmed ...
    In our troubled World, SPRNs are an important link in building strategic forces ... getting information ... on the basis of it, organizing opposition or anticipating the enemy ... it is practically winning a fight with minimal damage for the Country ...
    1. 210ox
      210ox 20 November 2016 15: 29
      +4
      Wonderful! We’ve determined what to shoot down? As far as I understand, only the metropolitan region is covered. It’s clear that the whole territory cannot be covered, it’s huge, and it’s full of sparsely populated areas. But still .. Moscow is not all Russia ..
      Quote: silberwolf88
      Forewarned is forearmed ...
      In our troubled World, SPRNs are an important link in building strategic forces ... getting information ... on the basis of it, organizing opposition or anticipating the enemy ... it is practically winning a fight with minimal damage for the Country ...
      1. parkello
        parkello 20 November 2016 16: 31
        +3
        Well, the metropolitan region is simply better covered than the rest, but especially important industrial facilities in other regions are also not weakly covered. and in which case it’s impossible to shoot down all the missiles anyway, some part will still break through, and even into the Moscow region. but in the states, for example, it will fly as much, or even denser. and not just to the states I think. Each NATO base, I think, will receive its gift with a quick delivery. and there, under the guise, the Koreans will muddle the Chinese. I’m not sure about the Chinese. But S. Korea is always ready to give the Americans a nock. They’ll definitely not miss the opportunity
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 20 November 2016 23: 39
          +5
          After starting from the American continent, the Chinese will harness for sure - there will be no time to figure out what and where to fly. And after the return start from Russia - and even more so. Moreover, it will fly not only to America, so missiles or something.
      2. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 20 November 2016 23: 33
        +3
        Even if there was something to bring down, this would not cool the head of a possible aggressor. But a mass launch of a retaliatory strike is possible. There is a chance that the one who expects to sit out in the cave still does not want to die like a worm.
        Yes, and run to the cave may not work ...
        1. parkello
          parkello 21 November 2016 01: 51
          +1
          here ... as required :)
      3. silberwolf88
        silberwolf88 21 November 2016 20: 34
        0
        A NEXUS colleague has already answered on the means of destruction ... and I’ve spoken differently ... the enemy knows that there will be no unexpected ... preemptive strike ...
  3. Neputin
    Neputin 20 November 2016 13: 50
    +4
    It seems that in the means of defense, electronic warfare and air defense, we are gradually restoring priority positions. And this is good. If we are technologically ahead of all our "potential friends" in these areas, they will have to change the whole concept of a "global lightning strike", and it is very difficult to come up with it, taking into account our space and geographic location, climate and other factors. They will never go on a ground operation (Europe is weak, and for the United States, the logistics costs are monstrous). Another would be to pull up the aviation (rather the T-50) and the fleet with normal strike weapons and you can breathe out a little. But when will it be?
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 20 November 2016 14: 26
      +11
      Quote: rudolff
      In the foreseeable future, there is no question of a full-fledged missile defense of the entire territory of the country.

      Rudolph, welcome!
      There was no full-fledged missile defense covering the entire territory even during the USSR. At the same time, the United States did not have such a missile defense, and there is protection of vital centers and directions. And to fully cover the territory, neither we nor the United States have money, it’s very expensive.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 20 November 2016 15: 03
          +6
          Quote: rudolff
          By the way, in the Union, even the air defense did not completely cover the territory.

          Perhaps, with the appearance of the MiG-41 (PAK DP), the situation will improve. But there is very little information on this development of a new long-range interceptor to replace the MiG-31 ... at the same time, our "well-wishers" announced the speed characteristics of our interceptor, Mach 4,5-5, after which our side also admitted that such work is being carried out.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 20 November 2016 15: 29
              +4
              Quote: rudolff
              The rest at best at the stage of research or design projects.

              Rudolph, according to the PAK DP, I repeat, there is very little information ... but the fact that such work is ongoing is a fact today. It is difficult to say at what stage this work is. But the appearance of such a platform is capable of fundamentally changing the quality of our air defense and missile defense.
              1. Vlad.by
                Vlad.by 20 November 2016 23: 53
                +3
                It is believed that the best defense is attack. By the way, minke whales do just that. So, the best air defense is the inevitability of unacceptable damage. And the most important objects are covered by focal, object air defense. Covering the whole territory - even all the wealth of Russia is not enough, that Mig-31, that PAK DP ... and human resources for defense are not enough. It is easier to bring the hammer over the anvil and bring the knife to the holding cord. Let them think how to defend themselves. Moreover, we already have focal defense poorly poorly, and they still have to mock and mock in this direction.
                Although the presence of a hypersonic interceptor with e / magnetic weapons on board is only a plus.
                1. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 21 November 2016 00: 03
                  +5
                  Quote: Vlad.by
                  So, the best air defense is the inevitability of unacceptable damage.

                  It is for this that Sarmat, Boundary, Zircon, X-102, X-555, BZHRK Barguzin are created, they reanimate the production of Swans, etc. ... but all this can and must be strengthened by fleets that will be able to complete the task and will also be able to strike as they said Papanova’s movie hero Neatly, but it hurts.
                  Our doctrine has been rewritten, and now it is not a completely defense doctrine, but, let's say, proactive.
  5. Homo
    Homo 20 November 2016 14: 12
    +1
    And the author is almost openly happy about the problems of Russia. Sometimes he does not even hold back - "They began to build it under the Soviets ...". He relishes the problems, slightly juggles the facts and shouts "the boss is all gone!" sad
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 21 November 2016 07: 16
      +1
      I somehow understood differently. If he talks about the USSR, it seems to me how much has been done. How many have not been saved, not saved. To identify the problem is already the beginning of the solution. Probably, the author rather simply emphasizes that repeated.
  6. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 20 November 2016 14: 37
    +3
    For us, the main direction now is the Arctic, the closest direction from the United States. And here we need to further strengthen security and this is already being done. So the mericans will not die out yet, well, then we’ll see
  7. Old26
    Old26 20 November 2016 15: 16
    +2
    Article .... How to say softer. There are many emotions, but even more mistakes.

    Quote: rudolff
    The title of the article is too loud. We are talking about restoring the early radar detection and warning system, and in fact the missile defense system in our country is covered only by Moscow. In the foreseeable future, there is no question of a full-fledged missile defense of the entire territory of the country.

    That's right. The name does not match the text literally from the first lines.

    Quote: NEXUS
    There was no full-fledged missile defense covering the entire territory even during the USSR. At the same time, the United States did not have such a missile defense, and there is protection of vital centers and directions. And to fully cover the territory, neither we nor the United States have money, it’s very expensive.

    And she can’t just be physically. The missile defense system at all times covered only one or two areas. Moreover, the presence of a missile defense system - stimulates the arms race. Because of which, in principle, in 1972, both parties agreed to conclude a missile defense agreement.
    1. oborzevatel
      oborzevatel 21 November 2016 10: 01
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Article .... How to say softer. There are many emotions, but even more mistakes.

      From myself I will add:
      "instantly transferred to the missile defense control center in Kaliningrad Solnechnogorsk" - probably, after all, in Solnechnogorsk near Moscow?
      And again:
      "The main thing is that in the Kaliningrad region, in the resort area of ​​Solnechnogorsk" - probably, after all - Svetlogorsk?
  8. Old26
    Old26 20 November 2016 16: 38
    +3
    Quote: pizdyk
    that is why the Americans forced the missile defense system ... there "like" anti-missile missiles to replace with tactical missiles at least with a nuclear head and to strike, they want to take not the caliber but the quantity ..... the flight time is short .. therefore they are eager to reach the Baltic states and Ukraine

    Missile defense was a stimulant of the arms race for a completely different reason, not the one you wrote about. The presence of a missile defense system in the country led to the fact that the enemy, in order to "break through" this system, increased the number of warheads (both on a separate missile and the number of missiles). A country that has a missile defense system, in order to fend off this threat (building up the enemy's BG), increased the number of interceptors. And so in a circle. For an increased number of interceptor missiles, the enemy increased the number of BB, others again increased the number of interceptors, etc. Moreover, it was not a country that did not have missile defense in the best position. since the probability of hitting a target with an anti-missile is sometimes 0,8-0,9. What is it I think you understand.

    As for what you wrote.
    Replace anti-missiles in the Mk-41 launchers with "tactical"
    What for? First, the Americans simply do not have ballistic "tactical" missiles (it would be more correct to write tactical purposes).
    2, they NOT FORBIDDEN.and can be found on their own launchers.
    As for medium-range missiles, the Americans have the following situation with them. They have several target missiles with a flight range of 1500-2500 km, which in fact can be medium-range missiles. But which they created is absolutely legal in
    framework of the INF Treaty. But they will not fit into these launchers both in length and in diameter.

    The Americans can place Tomahawks in their launchers, but two questions arise at once.
    1. Where can they get Tomahawks with nuclear warheads? They now have only conventional ones, with conventional charges. testing new nuclear ones will take quite a long time.
    2. The existing range is not enough to hit something in Russia. Especially from Romania.
    1. opus
      opus 20 November 2016 21: 26
      +3
      Quote: Old26
      What for? First, the Americans simply do not have ballistic "tactical" missiles (it would be more correct to write tactical purposes).

      Well, actually there is: MGM-140, MGM-164 and MGM-168. Variations MGM-140E ATACMS Block 1A Unitary (QRU) / MGM-168A ATACMS Block 4A

      and their number is legion (TR OTRK "Iskander" is just resting):
      by wiki, current in the US 830 PU as of 2010 year, about 4430 missiles in arsenals and the delivery of another 1200 Block 2 missiles is expected
      Mk41 containers (length 6.7m, -size foundations 0.635X0.635m) actually designed for shooting: winged, anti-aircraft and anti-submarine.
      MGM-52 would not fit there, MGM-31C Pershing II even more so.
      HOWEVER (returning to MGM) MGM-140 NTACMS is precisely with Mk41.
      + to 2027 a full LONG-RANGE PRECISION FIRES will be ready, Rayeton bashfully writes 499 kilometers



      And they promise almost for nothing: thanks to new approaches, the cost of 1 Tr is almost 100-120000 $ (launch of 9М723, either 108 million rubles, or 180 million rubles)

      Quote: Old26
      1. Where can they get Tomahawks with nuclear warheads? They have them now only conventional, with conventional charges

      approximately 300 nuclear warheads (NSC) for Tomahawk sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs), including 100 Nuclear Warheads W80-2 "Operational storage" and 200 BABLE W80-0 "long-term storage" (all contained in the United States);
      Instead of any WDU-36 / B or WDU-7 / B, W80-0 (2), W-84 will happily enter


      And the KR will be easier (150 / 175 kg versus 300 / 450) and it will immediately become a CRBD
      in the end, the consent of W80 / 84 is not B53

      and from jcnfnrjd W80-1 (the ALCMs will be decommissioned in the middle of the 2020's) they are already in a hurry (to 2027) prepare W80-4 for new LRSOs

      We all know about the B61 bomb, but few know that the B61 warhead was used as the basis for B61-4, B61-4, B61-7, B61-10, B61-11 and .. for W85 Warhead Pershing II .After Pershing II was liquidated by the INF Treaty, W85 was again converted to B61-10
      Quote: Old26
      2. The existing range is not enough to hit something in Russia. Especially from Romania.

      Old people say that the RGM / UGM-109A TLAM-N and BGM-109G GLCM were fired at 2500km.
      RGM / UGM-109E Tactical Tomahawk with WDU-36 / B warhead in 340 kg pulls on 2400km.
      And with W80-4 in 150 kg of fat content by how much?
      I would bet on 3000 km
      Deveselu - Moscow,by road 1 953,6 km
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 20 November 2016 21: 34
      +3
      Quote: Old26
      Replace anti-missiles in the Mk-41 launchers with "tactical"
      What for? First, the Americans simply do not have ballistic "tactical" missiles (it would be more correct to write tactical purposes).
      Volodya, hello! The fact is that they were going to stick GBI in the silos, which can cover 2500 km in ballistics ... (The estimated range of the missile varies depending on the height of the trajectory and ranges from 2000 to 5500 km.) Lavrov, if you remember, stated in plain text.
      Yours faithfully, hi
      1. opus
        opus 20 November 2016 22: 49
        +3
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        that they were going to stick GBI in the silos,

        what
        in which "mines"?
        In Romania and Poland ...
        Silo (silos) for GBI are silos of LGM-30 Minuteman or LGM-118 Peacekeeper.
        Almost complete analogue (In LGM-30 Minuteman silos they are located in California, instead of those removed from the database)
        And in Alaska, Delta Junction is their complete counterpart


        It is understandable.
        1 scary GBIs are pieces of LGM-30 Minuteman, today's GBIs are pieces of Minotaur IV (known as Peacekeeper SLV) and Minotaur V are LGM-118 Peacekeeper.
        Those. Silk GBI essence of modifications B11
        Where have you seen this in Europe?





        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        which on ballistics can block 2500 km ...

        In terms of ballistics, GBI will throw its payload weight of 64 kg even on Kura, and if it is easier (up to 50 kg), it will calmly display it on LOO.
        You confuse the interception duality and launch range in the BR variant
        And in order for them to "work" it is necessary to place PAVE PAWS in Ukraine and Belarus

        because Alaskan is useless in this particular case will be, in Tula, by the way, the same.
  9. Old26
    Old26 20 November 2016 22: 14
    +2
    Quote: opus
    Quote: Old26
    What for? First, the Americans simply do not have ballistic "tactical" missiles (it would be more correct to write tactical purposes).

    Well, actually there is: MGM-140, MGM-164 and MGM-168. Variations MGM-140E ATACMS Block 1A Unitary (QRU) / MGM-168A ATACMS Block 4A

    I, Anton, actually did not mean the ATACMS missiles. And if I may say so "ordinary". Still, the ATACMS complex is, frankly, not clear what. Either a missile system, or an MLRS. In addition, EMNIP MGM-140 NTACMS was planned for the fleet, but as far as I remember, it was not deployed. The range, again, allows us to classify this missile as an "operational-tactical"

    Quote: opus
    Mk41 containers (length 6.7m, base size 0.635x0.635m) are generally designed for shooting: winged, anti-aircraft and anti-submarine.

    But many writers believe that there can fit BRDS.

    Quote: opus
    approximately 300 nuclear warheads (NWF) for Tomahawk sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs), including 100 NWF W80-2 "operational storage" and 200 NWF W80-0 "long-term storage" (all contained in the United States);
    Instead of any WDU-36 / B or WDU-7 / B, W80-0 (2), W-84 will happily enter

    And the KR will be easier (150 / 175 kg versus 300 / 450) and it will immediately become a CRBD
    and from W80-1 (the ALCMs will be written off in the mid-2020s) they are already in a hurry (by 2027) preparing W80-4 for new LRSOs

    I know about charges. We are talking about specific "nuclear" "Tomahawks" that were decommissioned. Of course, you can put nuclear on the conventional one. But it takes time. And at least a few test launches are required.


    Quote: opus
    Old people say that the RGM / UGM-109A TLAM-N and BGM-109G GLCM were fired at 2500km.
    RGM / UGM-109E Tactical Tomahawk with WDU-36 / B warhead in 340 kg pulls on 2400km.
    And with W80-4 in 150 kg of fat content by how much?
    I would bet on 3000 km
    Deveselu - Moscow, on the highway 1 953,6 km

    109A and 109G are already decommissioned, although they really had such a range. 109E may have such a range. The question is how many there are and where they are, on which media. Unfortunately, I don’t know. Perhaps this is really a possible option for a promising nuclear KR. Fortunately, she is not here yet.
    As for the distance Deveselu-Moscow - HZ. In a straight line there are 1600 km. But the rocket is unlikely to go exclusively in a straight line. And we don't know where she might have correction areas. So far, all the talk about "violation" of the DRMSD on both sides is only "talk". Both from our side and from the American
    1. opus
      opus 20 November 2016 23: 16
      +4
      Quote: Old26
      . Nevertheless, the ATACMS complex is honestly unclear what

      Old we confuse the M270 launcher of the MLRS multiple launch rocket system and the ATACMS operational-tactical missile system (Army Tactical missile System)

      I think everyone would not mind that 9M723 could start not only with the SPU 9P78-1 but also with BM 9P140 for example ...
      BUT:

      Quote: Old26
      EMNIP MGM-140 NTACMS planned for the fleet

      The most successful tests of missile weapons of the US Navy, typ, blooper, all successfully. And it was with MK41. They didn’t put into service, because the range is small and they needed maneuvering targets.

      Quote: Old26
      But many writers believe that there can fit BRDS.

      what?
      Pershing and Lance are wider. And the MK41 shock absorber will not stand them
      MGM-140 yes
      Quote: Old26
      Tomahawks that were decommissioned

      repeat
      approximately 300 nuclear warheads (NSC) for Tomahawk sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs), including 100 Nuclear Warheads W80-2 "Operational storage" and 200 BABLES W80-0 "Long-term storage" (all contained in the United States);
      100 pieces of 80-2 mb delivered to Europe in 48 hours (and no one will know, by the background, mxx this is the same B12)
      80-1 for 2 weeks

      Quote: Old26
      And at least a few test launches are required.

      What for?
      they suffered so much when they switched nuclear to "normal".
      Initially 109 -nuclear
      dust will be cleaned

      and all wink

      Quote: Old26
      oka all the talk about "violation" of the DRMSD on both sides so far only "talk"

      It was not the Americans that beat the INF too nicely:
      It is forbidden to have experience producing and deploying ground launchers for INF.
      In addition to laboratory (the number of which is limited)

      MK.41 unified ship installation of vertical launch for guided missiles.
      Go find fault.
      They in Devesela I suppose it (for observance of decency) is cooled with salt water.
      Do not get to the bottom.
      But to start the RGM / UGM-109E and issue the Aegis control unit, you do not need nafig.
      30 minutes and laptop to download the route
  10. hiroyashy
    hiroyashy 20 November 2016 22: 20
    +1
    A small clarification is that the satellites are not in the geostationary, but in a highly eleptic orbit.
  11. Old26
    Old26 21 November 2016 12: 50
    0
    Quote: opus
    Old confusing launcher M270 multiple rocket launcher MLRS and operational-tactical missile system "ATACMS" (Army Tactical Missile System)

    It is quite possible, Anton, which I confuse. We need to look at the materials on them.

    Quote: opus
    The most successful tests of missile weapons of the US Navy, typ, blooper, all successfully. And it was with MK41. They didn’t put into service, because the range is small and they needed maneuvering targets.

    Yes, I know that they started up with the Mk-41. And about ship-based. We also had a cruiser project (I don’t remember the project number now, there is somewhere in the archive), where the use of ballistic missiles was also planned, EMNIP Elbrus. But not the one that is 9K72, but solid fuel, which was developed at MIT. The cruiser resembled tankers of the 50-60s, when they had two superstructures. Between them and planned VSHPU

    Quote: opus
    what?
    Pershing and Lance are wider. And the MK41 shock absorber will not stand them
    MGM-140 yes

    You know what they say: "If I knew the purchase, I would live in Sochi." Those who write this on what she does not emphasize. But apparently, in their opinion, these are the very target missiles of the United States (the essence of the MRBM), which the Americans have created, as many believe will violate the INF Treaty. And those are, as far as I remember, two steps from the "Minuteman", 2 steps from the "Trident", and some other options. And many do not care that their length is 11-13 meters and a diameter of 1,5-2 laughing

    Quote: opus
    repeat
    approximately 300 nuclear warheads (NWF) for Tomahawk sea-based cruise missiles (SLCMs), including 100 NWF W80-2 "operational storage" and 200 NWF W80-0 "long-term storage" (all contained in the United States);
    100 pieces of 80-2 mb delivered to Europe in 48 hours (and no one will know, by the background, mxx this is the same B12)
    80-1 for 2 weeks

    I understood that, Anton. I spoke specifically about the 109A and 109G cases that were destroyed ...

    Quote: opus
    What for?
    they suffered so much when they switched nuclear to "normal".
    Initially 109 -nuclear
    dust will be cleaned

    Well I do not know. As far as I remember, some of the modifications with a convection BG is so lightweight, as they wrote, it cannot be fired from torpedo tubes. In any case, the "new" models still differ from the "old nuclear" ones in the production technology and, for sure, in the engine options, etc. I would, nevertheless, for my own reassurance, would conduct a series of test launches ...

    Quote: opus
    It was not the Americans that beat the INF too nicely:
    It is forbidden to have experience producing and deploying ground launchers for INF.
    In addition to laboratory (the number of which is limited)

    MK.41 unified ship installation of vertical launch for guided missiles.
    Go find fault.
    They in Devesela I suppose it (for observance of decency) is cooled with salt water.
    Do not get to the bottom.
    But to start the RGM / UGM-109E and issue the Aegis control unit, you do not need nafig.
    30 minutes and laptop to download the route

    In general, the Americans made the INF treaty "very nice". Unfortunately, then Gorbachev's "comrades-in-arms" ruled and many of the provisions of the treaty as much ...
    The contract is very beautifully spelled out
    First is a list of launchers that are being destroyed.
    Second, target missiles are very nicely spelled out. It is permissible to create such missiles with steps similar, but not interchangeable with the steps of the MRBM. Not a word is said that such a missile can be made using stages of SLBMs or ICBMs. And it would seem that ours should have focused on this in the first place. After all, the same "Pioneer" was created on the basis of two stages of "Tempa-2C".
    B-3, as you correctly wrote, is the Mk-41 launcher. Although it is universal, it is "marine".
    As for compliance with the agreement, as they usually write in fairly serious publications, this is not a violation of the "letter" of the Agreement, but rather of the "spirit". When it seems and .... and it seems not. After all, until the Americans officially placed their missiles in these launchers, there is no violation. As there is no violation in our country, when conversations begin that the Iskander launcher can also launch "hypothetical" missiles with a range of 2000 km
    1. opus
      opus 21 November 2016 23: 24
      +2
      Quote: Old26
      where the use of ballistic missiles was also planned, EMNIP "Elbrus". But not the one that is 9K72,

      The one which, according to the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 959-319 of October 17 1967
      not unlikely.
      "Elbrus" did not have a sea (salty version), OTR RK "Iskander" is still the same.
      It's probably about P-100

      but ce other masses and dimensions
      Quote: Old26
      the same US target missiles (the essence of the MRBM) that the Americans have created, as many believe, will violate the INF Treaty. And those represent, as far as I remember, two steps from the "Minuteman", 2 steps from the "Trident",

      they have different
      Lockheed Martin eMRBM mid-range ballistic missile target


      The Hera target rocket is assembled from the second and third stages of the decommissioned Minuteman-2 intercontinental missiles.

      Israel will help if that

      Quote: Old26
      some of the modifications with a conventional BG is so lightweight that they wrote that it cannot fire from torpedo tubes


      So, for a conventional warhead, 375 kg weighs, and for a nuclear 150 -175 kg.
      Overload on the case: F = m * a
      if m is 2 times smaller, then the overload is half as much.
      The seats there for all under W80- * are sharpened
      Quote: Old26
      As for compliance with the agreement, as they usually write in fairly serious publications, this is not a violation of the "letter" of the Agreement, but rather of the "spirit"


      yuryugam need to interpret the law, not me.
      http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventi
      ons / pdf / treaty.pdf

      In fact, "it is not a means of delivering weapons," but the SUIN is all from pershing-2.
      1. opus
        opus 21 November 2016 23: 42
        +2
        Quote: opus
        In fact, "it is not a means of delivering weapons," but the SUIN is all from pershing-2.

        they are not medium-range missiles and pass under clause 12 of article VII of the treaty governing the creation and use of “accelerating means”, whose range formally falls into the forbidden range.

        MRT (1) = Castor-4B = MGM-29 Sergeant

        LRAT = Platform: C-17 (LGM-30A).

        Quote: opus
        they have different

  12. MaksoMelan
    MaksoMelan 6 January 2017 01: 10
    0
    For those who are interested, I advise Khodorenko at Satanovsky to listen to the topic of air defense. Very instructive and very interesting. It turns out that the first air defense systems (I don’t know if there are any of them now in action) were to use nuclear ammunition against nuclear ballistic warheads to destroy enemy warheads on approach.
  13. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 7 January 2017 19: 04
    +1
    An old publication by the same author, even without taking into account new objects. Glad for our umbrella. There are changes, there are no changes in the monitored field - good.
    An article with outdated information and a claim to novelty - what and for whose residents? We still don’t confess to their spies! Yes, they won’t understand a damn thing (everyone knows a bad example and will ride the greenhouse in the left wing of the White House with impunity for another week).
  14. HZ66
    HZ66 6 March 2017 22: 33
    0
    They tirelessly talk about Russia's foreign policy successes. But why, as a result of these successes, such stations do not appear outside the borders of Russia? Or is the Russian leadership better aware of the real value of these successes?
  15. Operator
    Operator 6 March 2017 23: 41
    0
    All SPRN radars listed in the article belong to the class of over-horizontal and therefore cannot track the launches and flight of cruise missiles at low altitude.

    Therefore, information on tracking the Tomahawks using the Gabala radar in 1991 is fake.
  16. seacap
    seacap 1 August 2017 21: 33
    0
    Really? Well, at least we’ll admire it for 5 minutes, maybe it’s not flying us. And then after 5 minutes? ABOUT us, only 1 city is relatively covered, and there is no more country behind the roundabout? Is this the same as I used to say, when he served in the air defense, that the air defense is like hair on a female organ between the legs, they cover up, but do not protect against anything.
  17. Klava
    Klava April 22 2018 03: 01
    0
    Great quality work. Thank!