Military Review

Even a fly will not fly

Attempts to create anti-aircraft missiles made during the Second World War, but at that time no country has reached the appropriate technological level. Even the war in Korea took place without anti-aircraft missile systems. For the first time they were seriously applied in Vietnam, having had a tremendous impact on the outcome of this war, and since then they are one of the most important classes of military equipment; without their suppression, it is impossible to gain air superiority.


For more than half a century over 20 types of anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM) and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) have real combat successes. Moreover, in most cases, it is very difficult to find out the exact results. It is often objectively difficult to establish exactly how a particular airplane and helicopter were shot down. Sometimes the belligerents purposefully lie for propaganda purposes, and it is not possible to establish objective truth. Because of this, only the most verified and confirmed by all parties results will be shown below. The true effectiveness of almost all air defense missile systems is higher, and in some cases at times.

The first air defense system to achieve combat success, and very loud, was the Soviet C-75. 1 May 1960, he shot down the U-2 American reconnaissance aircraft over the Urals, causing a huge international scandal. Then C-75 brought down five more U-2 - one in October 1962 of the year over Cuba (after which the world was one step away from nuclear war), four - over China from September of 1962-th to January of 1965.

The “finest hour” of the C-75 happened in Vietnam, where from 1965 to 1972 the year was delivered 95 SAMs С-75 and 7658 anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM) to them. The calculations of the air defense system were initially completely Soviet, but gradually the Vietnamese began to replace them. According to Soviet data, they shot down either 1293, or even 1770 of American aircraft. Americans themselves acknowledge the loss of approximately 150 – 200 aircraft from this air defense missile system. At the moment, following confirmation by the American side the loss of aircraft types: 15 strategic bombers B-52, 2-3 tactical bomber F-111, 36 attack aircraft A-4, nine A-6, 18 A-7, three A-3, three A-1, one AC-130, 32 fighter F-4, eight F-105, one F-104, 11 F-8, four reconnaissance RB-66, five RF-101, one O-2, one transport C- 123, as well as one CH-53 helicopter. As mentioned above, the real results of C-75 in Vietnam are obviously much more, but it is impossible to say what they are.

Vietnam itself lost from C-75, more precisely from its Chinese clone HQ-2, one MiG-21 fighter, which in October 1987, accidentally invaded the airspace of the PRC.

The Arab anti-aircraft gunners in terms of combat training have never been in any comparison with either the Soviet or the Vietnamese, so their results were significantly lower.

During the “war of attrition” from March 1969 to September 1971, the Egyptian C-75 shot down at least three Israeli F-4 fighters and one Mister, one A-4 fighter, one transport Piper Cube and one air command post (CPSU) C-97. Actual results may be higher, but not much compared to Vietnam. During the October 1973 war, C-75 had at least two F-4 and A-4 on its account. Finally, in June 1982, the Syrian C-75 shot down an Israeli Kfir-C2 fighter.

Even a fly will not flyIraqi C-75 during the 1980 – 1988 war with Iran shot down at least four Iranian F-4 and one F-5E. Real results could be many times more. During the “Storm in the Desert” in January-February, the X-NUMX of the Iraqi C-1991 had one US Air Force F-75E fighter-bomber (tail number 15-88), one US N-deck F-1692 fighter (14), one English Tornado bomber (ZD161430). Perhaps this number should add two or three aircraft.

Finally, 19 March 1993 of the year during the war in Abkhazia, the Georgian C-75 shot down the Russian fighter Su-27.

In general, C-75 has at least 200 downed airplanes (at the expense of Vietnam, there may actually be at least 500, or even a thousand). According to this indicator, the complex surpasses all other air defense missile systems in the world combined. It is possible that this Soviet air defense system will remain "world champion" forever.


The C-125 anti-aircraft missile system was created a little later than the C-75, so it did not have time to go to Vietnam and made its debut during the “war of attrition”, and with Soviet calculations. In the summer of 1970, they shot down nine Israeli planes. During the October war, they had at least two A-4, one each F-4 and "Mirage-3". Actual results could be significantly higher.

Ethiopian C-125 (possibly with Cuban or Soviet calculations) during the 1977 – 1978 war shot down at least two Somali MiG-21.

The Iraqi C-125 has two Iranian F-4s and one American F-16C (87-0257) in their account. At least they could have shot down at least 20 at least with Iranian planes, but no direct evidence can be found now.

The Cuban-made Angolan C-125 in March 1979 shot down the Canadian Ju-bomber Canberra.

Finally, the Serbian S-125 has all the losses aviation NATO during the aggression against Yugoslavia in March – June 1999. This is the invisible bomber F-117 (82-0806) and the F-16C fighter (88-0550), both belonged to the US Air Force.

Thus, the number of confirmed victories of C-125 does not exceed 20, the real can be more than 2 – 3 times.

The C-200, the most long-range anti-aircraft missile system in the world, does not have any confirmed victories on its account. It is possible that in September 1983, the Syrian C-200 with the Soviet calculation shot down an Israeli DRLO E-2C aircraft. In addition, there are suggestions that during the conflict between the United States and Libya in the spring of 1986, the Libyan C-200 shot down two American A-6 carrier-based attack aircraft and an F-111 bomber. But not even all domestic sources agree with all the above cases. Therefore, it is possible that the only “victory” of the C-200 is the destruction of the Ukrainian ZRS of this type of Russian passenger Tu-154 in the autumn of 2001.

The most modern ZRS of the former Air Defense Forces of the country, and now the Air Force of the Russian Federation, C-300P, has never been used in combat, respectively, its high tactical and technical characteristics (TTX) have not received practical confirmation. The same applies to C-400.

Talk of "sofa experts" about the "failure" of Russian ZRS in April of this year. during the shelling by the American "Tomahawks" of the Syrian air base Shirarat, they testify only to the complete incompetence of the "experts". No one has created and will never create a radar capable of seeing through the earth, because radio waves do not spread in a solid body. The American SLCMs were very far from the positions of the Russian missiles, with a huge value of the exchange rate parameter and, most importantly, under the folds of the terrain. Russian radar simply could not see them, respectively, was not provided guidance on them Zour. A similar “trouble” would have happened with any other SAM, because no one has yet succeeded in abolishing the laws of physics. At the same time, the Shairat base was not covered either formally or in fact, therefore why is it a failure?


Soviet air defense systems were widely used in combat. First of all, we are talking about the Kvadrat air defense system (the export version of the Kub air defense system used in the air defense of the USSR ground forces). It is close to C-75 in firing range, therefore it was more often used abroad for strategic air defense than for air defense of ground forces.

During the October war of 1973, the Egyptian and Syrian "Squares" summarily knocked down at least seven A-4, six F-4, one fighter "Super Mr.". Actual results may be significantly higher. In addition, in the spring of 1974, the Syrian "Squares" may have shot down another six Israeli planes (however, this is one-sided Soviet data).

Iraqi air defense systems "Square" account for at least one Iranian F-4 and F-5 and one American F-16C (87-0228). Most likely, one or two dozens of Iranian aircraft, and possibly 1 – 2 American ones, can be added to this number.

During the war for the independence of Western Sahara from Morocco (this war is not over until now), Algeria acted on the side of the Frente Polisario fighting for this independence, who transferred a significant amount of air defense weapons to the rebels. In particular, at least one Moroccan F-5А (in January 1976) was shot down with the help of the Kvadrat SAM system. In addition, in January, 1985, the “Square”, belonging to Algeria itself, was shot down by a Moroccan Mirage-F1 fighter.

Finally, during the Libyan-Chadian 1970-1980-war, the Chadians captured several Libyan "Squares", one of which in August 1987 of the year shot down the Libyan Tu-22 bomber.

Serbs actively used the Kvadrat air defense system in 1993 – 1995 during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In September, the Croatian MiG-1993 was shot down in 21 of the year, and the British Sea Harrier FRS1994 from the Arc Royal aircraft carrier X-NUMX of the year was shot down (however, according to other sources, this aircraft was shot down by Strela-1 aircraft). Finally, in June 3, the F-1995С USA air force (16-89) became a victim of the Serbian “Kvadrat”.

Thus, in general, in terms of performance among domestic “large” Kvadrat SAMs, apparently, it bypasses C-125 and takes second place after C-75.

Created in the development of "Cuba" ZRK "Buk" and today is considered to be quite modern. On his account there are downed airplanes, although we cannot cause his successes with joy. In January, during the war in Abkhazia, the 1993 of the Russian “Buk” was mistakenly shot down by an Abkhaz attack aircraft L-39. During the five-day war in the Caucasus in August 2008, the Georgian Buk air defense system received from Ukraine shot down Russian Tu-22M and Su-24 bombers and, possibly, up to three Su-25 attack aircraft. Finally remembered история with the death of the Malaysian "Boeing-777" over the Donbass in July 2014, but there is too much unclear and strange.

According to Soviet data, from April 1981 to May 1982, eight Israeli planes were shot down by the Syrian Army's “Osa” air defense missile system - four F-15, three F-16, one F-4. None of these victories, unfortunately, has any objective evidence, apparently, they are all completely invented. The only confirmed success of the Syrian “Wasp” air defense system is the Israeli F-4, shot down in July 1982.

The Frente POLISARIO received air defense weapons not only from Algeria, but also from Libya. It was the Libyan “Osam” that in October 1981 of the year the Moroccan Mirage-F1 and the C-130 transport aircraft were shot down.

The Angola-based (more precisely, Cuban) “Osa” air defense system in September 1987 of the year was shot down by the Yuarovsky AM-3CM (light Italian reconnaissance aircraft). Perhaps, on account of "Wasps" a few more South African aircraft and helicopters.

Perhaps the Iraqi Osa in January 1991 of the year brought down the British Tornado with the tail number ZA403.

Finally, in July – August of the 2014, the Donbass militia allegedly shot down the Su-25 attack aircraft and the An-26 military transport force of the Ukrainian Air Force by a trooped Osa.

In general, the success of the OSA "Osa" are quite modest.

The successes of the Strela-1 air defense missile system and its Strela-10 deep modification are also very limited.

In December, 1983, during the fighting between the Armed Forces of Syria and the NATO countries, the Syrian "Arrow-1" was shot down by the American deck attack aircraft A-6 (tail number 152915).

In November 1985, Yuar special forces trophy "Arrow-1" shot down over the Angola Soviet transport aircraft An-12. In turn, in February 1988 of the year, the Yuarovsky Mirage-F1 was shot down in the south of Angola by either the Arrow-1 or the Arrow-10. Perhaps, on account of these two types of air defense missile systems in Angola there were several other South African airplanes and helicopters.

In December, the American civilian DC-1988 was mistakenly shot down over the Western Sahara "Arrow-3" of the Frente POLISARIO.

Finally, during the Storm in the Desert 15 on February 1991, the Iraqi Streloy-10 was shot down by two A-10 attack aircraft of the US Air Force (78-0722 and 79-0130). Perhaps, on account of the Iraqi air defense systems of these two types were a few more American aircraft.

The most modern Russian troop short-range air defense system Tor and Tunguska and Pantsir anti-aircraft missile systems (ZRPK) did not take part in hostilities, respectively, did not shoot down aircraft and helicopters. Although there are completely unverified and unconfirmed rumors about the successes of the Pantsirey in the Donbass - one Su-24 bomber and one Mi-24 attack helicopter of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.


The successes of Western air defense systems are much more modest than the Soviet ones. This is explained, however, not only and not so much by their performance characteristics, as by the peculiarity of building air defense. The Soviet Union and the countries oriented on it in the fight against enemy aviation traditionally focused on ground-based air defense systems, and Western countries on fighters.

The greatest success was achieved by the American hawk and its deep modification "Advanced Hawk". Almost all the successes occurred in the Israeli air defense system of this type. During the "war of attrition" they shot down one IL-28, four Su-7, four MiG-17, three MiG-21 air forces of Egypt. During the October war, they had four MiG-17, one MiG-21, three Su-7, one "Hunter", one "Mirage-5", two Mi-8 air forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Libya. Finally, in 1982, the Syrian MiG-25 and, possibly, the MiG-23 were shot down over Lebanon.

During the Iran-Iraq war, Iranian hawk-based air defense systems shot down two or three F-14 and one F-5 fighters, as well as Iraqi planes to 40.

In September, the Libyan bomber Tu-1987 was shot down over the French capital Had by the French capital Hock in September 22.

2 August 1990, the Kuwaiti Advanced Hawk SAMs knocked down one Su-22 and one MiG-23BN Iraqi Air Force during the invasion of Iraqi troops in Kuwait. All Kuwaiti air defense systems were captured by Iraqis and then used against the United States and its allies, but without success.

Unlike the C-300P, its American alter ego, the American Patriot long-range missile defense system, was used during both Iraqi wars. Its main targets were obsolete Iraqi ballistic missiles of Soviet-made P-17 (the notorious Scud). The effectiveness of the "Patriots" was very low, in the 1991 year, it was from the missed P-17 that the Americans suffered the most serious losses in humans. During the second Iraq war in the spring of 2003, the Patriot’s first downed aircraft appeared on the Patriot’s account, which, however, did not please the Americans. Both were their own: the British Tornado (ZG710) and the F / A-18 of the US Navy (164974). At the same time, the F-16C of the United States Air Force destroyed the anti-radar missile of the radar of one of the Patriot battalions. Apparently, the American pilot did it not by chance, but intentionally, otherwise he would have become the third victim of his anti-aircraft gunners.

Israeli Patriots also, with dubious success, fired at the same 1991 on Iraqi P-17. In September, the Israeli Patriot hit the 2014 of the year, the first enemy aircraft for this ZRS, the Syrian Su-24, accidentally flown into Israeli airspace. In the 2016 – 2017, the Israeli “Patriots” repeatedly shot at the drones arriving from Syria, in most cases without success (despite the price of all the fired unmanned aerial vehicles taken together was lower than a single Patriot missile).

Finally, Saudi “Patriots” may have shot down one or two P-17s launched by Yemeni Hussites in 2015 – 2017, but much more of this type of missile and more and more modern Tochka missiles successfully hit targets in Saudi territory, inflicting extremely significant damage to the troops of the Arabian coalition.

Thus, on the whole, the effectiveness of the Patriot air defense missile system should be recognized as extremely low.

Western short-range air defense systems have very modest successes, which, as mentioned above, is partly due not to technical shortcomings, but to the characteristics of combat use.

On the account of the American air defense system "Chaparel" there is only one aircraft - the Syrian MiG-17, shot down by the Israeli air defense system of this type in the 1973 of the year.

Also, one aircraft shot down the British Rapira air defense system - an Israeli-made Argentinean fighter Dagger over the Falklands in May 1982.

The French Roland air defense missile system has a little more tangible success. The Argentine "Roland" over the Falklands was shot down by the British "Harrier-FRS1" (ХZ456). Iraqi Rolands have at least two Iranian planes (F-4 and F-5) and, possibly, two British Tornadoes (ZA396, ZA467), as well as one American A-10, but all three are not fully confirmed victories. In any case, it is interesting that all the aircraft shot down by the French air defense system in different theaters - of western production.

A special category of air defense systems are naval SAMs. Combat successes have only British air defense system thanks to the participation of the British Navy in the war for the Falklands. The “Sea Dart” air defense system shot down one Canberra English bomber, four A-4 attack aircraft, one Flight-35 transport aircraft, and one SA330L French helicopter. On account of the C-KAM air defense missile system - two A-4C. With the help of the CI Wolfe air defense system, one Dagger fighter and three A-4В were shot down.


Separately, it is necessary to dwell on portable anti-aircraft missile systems, which have become a special category of air defense systems. Thanks to MANPADS to shoot down planes and even more, helicopters were provided with the opportunity for infantrymen and even partisans and terrorists. Partly because of this, it is even more difficult to establish the exact results of a particular type of MANPADS than for “large” air defense systems.

The Soviet Air Force and Army Aviation in Afghanistan lost their 1984 aircraft and helicopter from MANPADS in 1989 – 72 years. At the same time, the Afghan guerrillas used the Soviet Strela-2 and their Chinese and Egyptian copies of the HN-5 and Ayn al-Sakr, the American Red I and Stinger missiles, as well as the British Bloupip. It was not always possible to determine from which particular MANPADS a given aircraft or helicopter was shot down. A similar situation occurred during the “Storm in the Desert”, the wars in Angola, Chechnya, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, etc. Accordingly, the results given below of all MANPADS, especially Soviet and Russian, should be considered as significantly underestimated.

At the same time, however, there is no doubt that among the MANPADS, the Soviet Strela-2 complex is in the same status as the C-75 among the “large” air defense missile systems - the absolute and, possibly, unreachable champion.

For the first time, "Arrows-2" were used by the Egyptians during the "war of attrition". In the 1969 year, they shot down over the Suez Canal from six (two Mirage, four A-4) to 17 Israeli planes. In the October war, they still have at least four A-4 and a CH-53 helicopter. In March – May, the 1974 was shot down by Syrian Strelami-2 from three (two F-4, one A-4) to eight Israeli aircraft. Then, in the period from 1978 to 1986, this type of Syrian and Palestinian MANPADS shot down four aircraft (one Kfir, one F-4, two A-4) and three helicopters (two AN-1, one UH-1) Israeli Air Force and deck attack aircraft A-7 (tail number 157468) of the US Navy.

Arrows-2 were applied at the final stage of the Vietnam War. From the beginning of 1972 to January 1973, they shot down American 29 planes (one F-4, seven O-1, three O-2, four OV-10, nine A-1, four A-37) and 14 helicopters (one CH-47, four AH-1, nine UH-1). After the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam and until the end of the war in April 1975, these MANPADS were from 51 to 204 airplanes and helicopters of the armed forces of South Vietnam. Then, in 1983 – 1985, the Vietnamese shot down at least two A-2 attack aircraft of the Thai Air Force over Cambodia with the Strelami-37.

In 1973, Guinea-Bissau rebels shot down an 2 Arrow with three Portuguese G-91 attack aircraft and one Do-27 transport aircraft.

In 1978 – 1979, the Frente POLISARIO fighters shot down the Western Sahara from these MANPADS over the French Jaguar attack aircraft and three Moroccan fighters (one F-5A, two Mirage-F1), and in 1985 - the German scientific Do-228 flying to Antarctica.

In Afghanistan, at least one Soviet attack aircraft Su-2 was lost from Strela-25.

The Libyan 2 Arrows in July of the 1977 of the year may have been shot down by the Egyptian MiG-21, in May of the 1978 of the year the French Jaguar. At the same time, the Libyan фей 2 trophy of the Libyan in August 1982, the Chadians shot down the Libyan attack plane Su-22.

In Angola, MANPADS of this type also fired in both directions. Troopers "Arrow-2" Yuarovites shot down the Angolan (Cuban) MiG-23ML fighter. On the other hand, the Cubans shot down at least two Impala attack planes from these MANPADS. In reality, their result was significantly higher.

In October, the American C-1986 transport aircraft was shot down by the Streloy-2 in Nicaragua in Nicaragua with cargo for the contras. In 123 – 1990, the Air Force of El Salvador lost three aircraft (two O-1991, one A-2) and four helicopters (two Hughes-2, two UH-37) from Strel-500, received by local partisans.

During the “Storm in the Desert”, the Iraqi “Arrows-2” shot down one British “Tornado” (ZA392 or ZD791), one “gunship” АС-130 of the USAF (69-6567), one AV-8В US naval aviation (162740) ). During the second Iraqi war in January 2006, Iraqi militants shot down an AN-64D Army Air Force Apache (03-05395) with these MANPADS.

In August 1995 of the year over Bosnia Serbian “Arrow-2” (according to other data - “Needle”) shot down a French bomber “Mirage-2000N” (tail number 346).

Finally, in May-June 1997, the Kurds shot down “Arrows-2” Turkish helicopters AH-1W and AS532UL.

The more modern Soviet MANPADS, the Strele-3, the Needle-1 and the Needle, were unlucky, with almost no victories recorded. On the "Arrow-3" recorded only the British "Harrier" in Bosnia in April 1994 year, which also claims, as mentioned above, the air defense system "Square". MANPADS "Igla" "shares" with the "Arrow-2" the above-mentioned "Mirage-2000N" No. 346. In addition, F-16С (84-1390) of the US Air Force in Iraq in February 1991 of the year, two Georgian military helicopters Mi-24 and one attack aircraft Su-25 in Abkhazia in 1992 – 1993 and, alas, were recorded into the “Needles” account Russian Mi-26 in Chechnya in August 2002 (127 people died). In the summer of an obscure-type MANPADS 2014, allegedly, three Su-25 attack planes, one MiG-29 fighter, one An-30 reconnaissance aircraft, three Mi-24 attack helicopters and two multipurpose Mi-8 Ukrainian helicopters of the Ukraine were shot down over the Donbas.

In reality, all Soviet / Russian MANPADS, including the Arrow-2, at the expense of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Abkhazia, and Nagorno-Karabakh obviously have significantly more victories in their accounts.

Of the Western MANPADS most successful with the American "Stinger". In Afghanistan, they shot down at least one Su-25 attack aircraft of the USSR Air Force, one MiG-21U of the Afghan Air Force, Soviet An-26РТ and An-30 transport aircraft, six Mi-24 combat helicopters and three Mi-8 transport helicopters. The real successes of the Stinger in this war are many times larger (for example, only the Mi-24 could have been shot down to 30), although the overall result of the Arrow-2 is very far to him.

In Angola, the YUAR members shot down at least two MiG-23ML with the Stingers.

The British in the Falklands with these MANPADS destroyed one Argentinean Pukara attack aircraft and one SA330L transport helicopter.

Older American Red Id was used by Israelis against Syrian air forces. With it, seven Syrian Su-7 and MiG-17 were shot down during the October war and one MiG-23BN in Lebanon in 1982. The Nicaraguan Contras shot down Red Ayami four MI-8 helicopters of government forces in the 80s. The same MANPADS shot down several Soviet aircraft and helicopters in Afghanistan (possibly up to three Mi-24), but there is no concrete correspondence between their victories.

The same can be said about the use in Britain of the British Blupipe MANPADS. Therefore, on his account, only two precisely established victories. Both were achieved during the Falkland War, in which this MANPADS was used by both sides. The British shot down their Argentine attack aircraft MV339A, the Argentines - the English fighter "Harrier-GR3".


"Overthrow from the pedestal" C-75 and "Arrow-2" will succeed only if a big war happens in the world. True, if it turns out to be nuclear, there will be no winners in it in any sense. If this is a normal war, then the main contenders for the "championship" will be the Russian air defense system. Not only because of the high performance characteristics, but also because of the characteristics of the application.

It should be noted that high-speed small-sized high-precision ammunition, which is extremely difficult to hit precisely because of its small size and high speed, becomes a new serious air defense problem (it will be especially difficult if hypersonic ammunition appears). In addition, the range of these munitions is constantly growing, removing carriers, that is, aircraft, from the zone of the air defense. This makes the air defense position frankly hopeless, because the fight against ammunition without the possibility of destroying carriers is obviously losing: sooner or later it will lead to depletion of the SAM system’s ammunition, after which both the SAM and the objects they hide will be easily destroyed.

Another no less serious problem is unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). At a minimum, this is a problem because they simply become very numerous, which further aggravates the problem of a shortage of ammunition for the air defense system. Much worse is that a significant part of the UAVs are so small in size that no existing air defense weapons can either detect them, or even hit them, since neither the radar nor the missile defense systems are simply designed for such purposes.

In this regard, the case that occurred in July 2016 of the year is very indicative. The extremely high level of technical equipment and combat training of the personnel of the Israeli armed forces is well known. However, the Israelis could not do anything with a small, slow-moving, unarmed Russian reconnaissance UAV, which appeared above the northern regions of Israel. First, the air-to-air missile from the F-16 fighter, and then the two Patriot missiles, passed by, after which the UAV went unhindered into Syrian airspace.

In connection with these circumstances, the criteria for the effectiveness and effectiveness of air defense systems may be completely different. As the air defense weapons themselves.

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:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 16 July 2017 07: 34
    Interesting stuff. Only we will never know the real truth about the losses inflicted by the air defense - everything is too confused and, at times, covered in a veil of secrecy.
  2. Amurets
    Amurets 16 July 2017 07: 37
    The first air defense system to achieve combat success, and very loud, was the Soviet C-75. 1 May 1960, he shot down the U-2 American reconnaissance aircraft over the Urals, causing a huge international scandal. Then C-75 brought down five more U-2 - one in October 1962 of the year over Cuba (after which the world was one step away from nuclear war), four - over China from September of 1962-th to January of 1965.

    "The inglorious completion on May 1, 1960 in the Sverdlovsk region of the flight of the U-2 American spy plane manned by F.G. Powers is widely known."
    “Meanwhile, few people know that the leaders in the number of U-2s shot down to this day are anti-aircraft gunners of the People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA). In the mid-60s, they destroyed five U-2u spy planes in such a way,” Asami1 in fighter terminology. "
    "In addition, they own the palm and in the world's first successful combat use of the S-75 anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) for a real purpose - the RB-57D reconnaissance aircraft. This happened on October 7, 1959 in the sky over Beijing, more than six months earlier than the Soviet air defense forces "landed 'G. Powers."
    i_kosmonavtika_2002_02 / p9.php
    I deliberately did not write a comment, but simply quoted. because the history of the S-75 SAM is described quite well.
  3. Lopatov
    Lopatov 16 July 2017 09: 14
    In my opinion A. Khramchikhin in his article incorrectly puts emphasis in principle. In fact, he suggests that we judge the effectiveness of the guard dog by the number of bitten dogs ...
    To consider that the main task of anti-aircraft systems is to bring down enemy aircraft is somehow not military ...

    Let’s imagine an anti-aircraft complex, which with a probability of one unit knocks down an aircraft at any altitude when any existing countermeasures are applied. What are the actions of the enemy? That's right, do not fly into the zone of its effective application. The result is zero downed aircraft. That is, using the A. Khramchikhin rating scale, is it completely useless?
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 16 July 2017 11: 05
      Quote: Spade
      What are the actions of the enemy? That's right, do not fly into the zone of its effective application.

      Wrong. Rush KR. Let him knock as much as he can.

      And the little article, against the background of S. Linnik's reviews from the same site, is simply insulting wretched, НМВ.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 16 July 2017 12: 03
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Wrong. Rush KR. Let him knock as much as he can.

        Uh ... a strange opponent. Could you name him? Who doesn’t really need their own airplanes, helicopters and other aircraft?
        1. marder7
          marder7 16 July 2017 14: 35
          shovels are entitled to all 100. An example is the Israeli conflict over Suez shot down 2 F-4s in a row, after which flights in this area stopped. "squares" covered the area from raids simply by the very presence - no one in their right mind will climb to where you are slammed like a fly.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 16 July 2017 17: 25
          Quote: Spade
          Who doesn’t really need their own airplanes, helicopters and other aircraft?

          KR = Cruise Missile
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 16 July 2017 18: 14
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            KR = Cruise Missile

            Are they free? Wrote "any aircraft"
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 16 July 2017 19: 54
              Quote: Spade
              Are they free?

              Well, as a keepsake - Tomahawk $ 5M, the division with-400 $ 1G.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 16 July 2017 20: 05
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                Well, as a keepsake - Tomahawk $ 5M, the division with-400 $ 1G.

                Why one cruise missile? Hundreds Thousands. Tens of thousands. Wrote, the probability of defeat of any aircraft is equal to one. That is a "black hole".
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 16 July 2017 21: 52
                  Quote: Spade
                  That is a "black hole".

                  I did not know that it was a death star. I thought you were talking about the air defense system of our world, which has a finite number of channels and ammunition.
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 17 July 2017 07: 21
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    I thought you were talking about the air defense system of our world, which has a finite number of channels and ammunition.

                    No, I'm talking about the "ideal" air defense system, as a model. Because the probability of failure per unit is unattainable.
  4. sivuch
    sivuch 16 July 2017 09: 32
    Lord, again Khramchikhin, a great expert and statistician. His S-75 in Vietnam is shot down by F-111
    1. venik
      venik 16 July 2017 11: 22
      Quote: sivuch
      Lord, again Khramchikhin, a great expert and statistician. His S-75 in Vietnam is shot down by F-111

      And what? Do not shoot down? Or maybe there was no F-111 ??
      1. sivuch
        sivuch 16 July 2017 14: 17
        In Vietnam, there were F-111s. This is the only thing that is true. But there was no S-75. There were SA-75 Dvina, which is not the same thing. And they didn’t shoot down the 111th, because they had restrictions on the minimum height. And the F-111 flew only at criminally low altitudes. Only ZA or S-125 could shoot them down
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 16 July 2017 15: 19
          Quote: sivuch
          There were SA-75 Dvina, which is not the same

          Igor, do you think many people know how Dvina differs from Volkhov? Khramchikhin, he certainly does not see the difference. No.
          1. sivuch
            sivuch 16 July 2017 15: 33
            Need to educate
            1. Bongo
              Bongo 16 July 2017 15: 37
              Quote: sivuch
              Need to educate

              Unfortunately, this is of little interest to anyone. Publications on technical topics are read on average by 7-10 thousand people. About 1 / 10 part of the site visitors.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 16 July 2017 17: 33
                Quote: Bongo
                7-10 thousand people read.

                Not so little.
                Quote: Bongo
                About 1/10 of site visitors.

                The rest go to the "opinions" section to read how Ukrainians freeze. There they are dear.
          2. Amurets
            Amurets 16 July 2017 15: 40
            Quote: Bongo
            Igor, do you think many people know how Dvina differs from Volkhov? Khramchikhin, he certainly does not see the difference

            Sergei! Hey. Let the antennas count. And if you tell how “Wild Weasels" were diving under the beam, then this will probably be news in general. Moreover, in Vietnam there was no S-125, much less S-200.

            Minimum lesion heights for SA-75 and S-75 series air defense systems. And at low altitudes, in Vietnam, 57mm and 37mm caliber anti-aircraft guns worked.
            1. Bongo
              Bongo 16 July 2017 15: 42
              Quote: Amurets
              Sergei! Hey. Let the antennas count.

              Hi, Nikolay!
              Unfortunately, publications like this form a misconception about the history of combat use and the capabilities of air defense systems.
              1. Amurets
                Amurets 16 July 2017 16: 19
                Quote: Bongo
                Unfortunately, publications like this form a misconception about the history of combat use and the capabilities of air defense systems.

                I completely agree. It was necessary to hit the target at the training grounds, but in real conditions, if you repelled a raid and didn’t miss the enemy to the target, you already completed your task without even hitting the target. In Vietnam used the technique of "False start"
                "Further, a false-start scheme was introduced in the NRC, which was mentioned above, - turning on the transmitter of the radio command for rocket control without launching a rocket, which misled the pilots. Having received such a signal -" as if launching a rocket "- to its reconnaissance receiver, pilots tactical aircraft immediately made anti-missile maneuvers, and on this basis they were distinguished on the screens of strategic missile forces from heavy strategic ones that could not do sharp maneuvers. The inclusion of a “false launch” during interaction with fighter aircraft forced the enemy to be forced to maneuver and thus impair their position in the battle. " In general, who cares, a link to an article: "How Dvina defended the sky of Vietnam."
              2. Sirocco
                Sirocco 22 July 2017 11: 11
                Quote: Bongo
                Unfortunately, publications like this form a misconception about the history of combat use and the capabilities of air defense systems.

                Also such quotes from the article.
                Russian radars simply could not see them; accordingly, guidance on them was not provided.
                This is about the attack of the Kyrgyz Republic of Syria. Russian radars saw everything they needed to see, and the purpose of the attack was to reveal the work of our air defense in Syria. Our air defense workers and those who stand above them are not fools, and understood the essence of this attack.
            2. Tochilka
              Tochilka 16 July 2017 23: 19
              strange table. the length of the missiles on it is 1 meter 6 centimeters ... The commas are incorrectly set. It should be 10,6 m. And the diameter is strange. They are two-stage!
          3. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 16 July 2017 17: 13
            Quote: Bongo
            How is Dvina different from Volkhov?

            And the "Desna" pushed to pick up?
        2. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 16 July 2017 17: 08
          Quote: sivuch
          Only ZA or C-125 could shoot them down

          At the time of the F-111's death, there were no S-125 air defense systems in Vietnam. According to newspaper reports, the F-111 was shot down by a small-caliber ZA (even anti-aircraft large-caliber machine guns) ... I recall even a newspaper photograph with a Vietnamese anti-aircraft calculation of ZPU ... in the commentary on the snapshot claimed that this calculation knocked down the F-111 ....
      2. owl
        owl 16 July 2017 14: 38
        An Israeli expert probably confused the F-111 with the F-117?
  5. Cord127
    Cord127 16 July 2017 13: 29
    The article is interesting, but with a bunch of inaccuracies and silences. For example, the aircraft S-97 VKP, AWACS E-3s Hokaido and F-15 from Israel, no one has ever shot down. But they were given air defense. 1981 Iraq 3 divisions C-125, 5 divisions “Square”, C-75m, regiment ZU 23-2 and C-60 reactor destroyed losses 0. 1982 Valley Be as 24 divisions S-125, “Buk”, “Square”, “ Shilka "etc. in less than 2 days, 19 out of 24 were destroyed, with 15 slightly more than 2 hours. The rest are just broken. 78 - 82 aircraft were shot down in the air. Losses 0. 2007 Syrian reactor. Radars "did not see" the aircraft even at the time of the bomb drop. Result reactor destroyed loss 0.
    1. Maz
      Maz 16 July 2017 15: 30
      Don’t worry, now everyone sees
    2. sivuch
      sivuch 16 July 2017 15: 41
      Hokaido is an island in Japan, what does it have to do with Hel Avir? And what is this E-3s?
      ? בקיצור, באיזה כיתה אתה לומד
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 16 July 2017 21: 01
        Your fellow countryman confused about. Hokaido with Grumman E-2 Hokai.
      2. hohol95
        hohol95 16 July 2017 21: 06
        Was the Grumman E-1983 Hokai shot down over the Mediterranean Sea in 2?
    3. hohol95
      hohol95 16 July 2017 21: 00
      Grumman E-2 "Hokai" - not Hokkaido!
    4. hohol95
      hohol95 16 July 2017 21: 04
      Israel became the first foreign customer of Hokai: in 1977-78 this state purchased four E-2C Group O in the USA. On June 27, 1979, the Hokai crew coordinated and guided six F-15A and a pair of Kfirs over southern Lebanon. As a result of the air battle, the Israelis managed to bring down six of the eight Syrian MiG-21s. This was the first time Israelis used the F-15. For a long time, these fighters were introduced into battle only under the control of an AWACS aircraft. In the 1982 air battles over Lebanon, AWACS aircraft repeatedly carried out successful guidance of Israeli F-15s and Phantoms. In December 1983, one Hokai managed to bring down the Soviet calculation of the S-200 air defense system, which was in Syria on a business trip, over the Mediterranean Sea. The missiles were launched at a range of 190 km.
      So in 1983 Hokai was not shot down ???
  6. Scratchy doll
    Scratchy doll 16 July 2017 13: 50
    Loss 0, loss 0, loss 0, so big, and he believes in fairy tales, especially in the second case.
    It didn’t even suit the fact that the article of the “expert” was written in the same mainstream, otherwise they won’t publish it.
    1. Cord127
      Cord127 16 July 2017 14: 29
      And here are fairy tales. Check it yourself. Search in the search engine Iraqi / Syrian reactor, air defense Bek valley. You will find much more detailed descriptions and conclusions that you will not like at all.
      1. Scratchy doll
        Scratchy doll 17 July 2017 19: 49
        Because tales. Everything would have worked out in 1982, there was no need to call for help from the USA and NATO in 1983, then the same thing happened in Lebanon-2.
  7. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 16 July 2017 17: 27
    Regarding the "unconfirmed" information about the use of the Pantsir air defense system in the Donbass ... In my opinion, this is a "full bullshit"! The version of Roman Skomorokhov about the presence of two Tor-M air defense systems in the Lugansk militia, which were partially understaffed in the warehouses of the Lugansk anti-aircraft missile regiment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and has been restored, has some right to real existence.
  8. Vadim237
    Vadim237 16 July 2017 23: 56
    Against dropping kamikaze and shock, you need to create air defense drones.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 17 July 2017 14: 35
      Better based on a helicopter. Ka 52 as a platform sub-radar radar. And a completely new weapon.
      By the way, with the wide distribution of compact UAVs, it is worth creating a version of a willow-arrow-willow with a purely radio command guidance and warhead of increased power.
  9. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 17 July 2017 18: 36
    The conclusion is that in modern conditions the poorest air defense can be quickly depleted and destroyed by cheap flying debris. This means that fighter-bombers steer especially little noticeable. That is the US approach. This approach is more expensive therefore it is not very suitable for us. It’s sad.
  10. kipish412
    kipish412 19 July 2017 12: 02
    Luganchans beat with MANPADS from the roofs of houses. And I didn’t see tori and beeches there under our border;
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 21 July 2017 14: 43
      Quote: kipish412
      .A torus and beech I did not see there

      And on a fig it all in vain to show? Remember the story of the capture of the "military town" of the Lugansk air defense regiment? It was alleged that the Buk’s alumni managed to get out of Lugansk, and only one malfunctioning Buk missile launcher remained on the regiment’s territory. Photos of this installation were "printed out" by all and sundry! Later, on one TV channel, an interview was shown with a former Armed Forces member of the Armed Forces, who served on the installation that Kiev was intensively “sucking in” the Russian Armed Forces ... “Kent” confirmed that he recognized “his” installation, that it was the installation of the AFU; and at the same time he mentioned that after capturing the barracks of the Lugansk anti-aircraft missile regiment, on this territory the people even saw “2 or 3” defective “beech” installations abandoned by alumni when taking equipment out of Lugansk, because this equipment was in a “deplorable” state, due to unskilled operation.
  11. solovald
    solovald 23 January 2018 07: 58
    It was very interesting to read (I hope the above stat. Material is true), especially about the successes of “Cubes” (we were prepared for them at the military department). Colonel teacher, making the "lyrical", as he called them, retirement from classes, spoke about the experience of the participation of this air defense system in the Arab-Israeli conflicts. I remember how they escaped the Shrikes, who posed a real threat. When starting Shrike, the air defense system turned off the locator and immediately turned on the neighboring one, etc. along the chain until the anti-radar missile “expired”. Another teacher was, to put it mildly, not a very high opinion of the Egyptians, as fighters - like another prayer, so everyone begins to pray together, abandoning their posts, weapons, and "there’s no grass there." Once, according to his story, the Israelis speculated on such a "smoke break", quickly jumped on a helicopter and ... stole the station of the RC.