Military Review

AARGM (AGM-88E) air defense breakthrough weapon

66
AARGM (AGM-88E) air defense breakthrough weapon



AGM-88E AARGM is a medium-range airborne anti-radar guided missile used to destroy enemy air defense (DEAD).
The objectives of the program are to overcome the main air defense systems of the former USSR and the Russian Federation.





Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) - "Advanced Anti-Radar Guided Missile"
System AARGM program ACAT 1C, is an improved version of the AGM-88Cs (block VI)

AARGM allows you to apply weapon in the required range of confrontations on the principle of "shot and forget"


The WGU-48 / B active homing head of an AARGM rocket can work in conjunction with an ARH receiver to counter the tactics of deactivating the radar radar system (SA-3 battery managed to survive in 1999, during the NATO attack of Yugoslav troops and bring down the F-117 Nighthawk ) or be guided autonomously to non-radiating targets. AARGM is a network weapon that receives tactical intelligence information through the built-in receiver and analyzes the real-time weapon impact (WIA) until the target is hit.

Applied "conformal antenna" (the shape of the antenna, the most suitable for the unit carrier)



In AGSN - WGU-48 / B, active target recognition and analysis algorithms are applied, which makes it possible to strike not only the radar of the air defense system, but also, for example, vehicle control systems (ZR carrier), control system machines, and power plants.

In the event of disabling the air defense radar, the GOS keeps trajectories using the stored GPS / INS data.

SU and GOS are designed taking into account unification for possible use in air missiles - Ground for assault aviation, including for the Navy and the US Marine Corps.

When tested in 2008, AGM-88E demonstrated the following capabilities (according to the TOR): a side maneuver to minimize damage from "friendly" fire from a planned strike area and then return to the avoidance impact path.

Modifications:
CATM-88E - educational and training
DATM-88E - ground-based simulator

Optional:
unified suspension assembly - a pylon from Lockheed Martin Aeronutronics TAS with an integrated sensor-detector.


Sensor receiver-rangefinder integrated into the pylon, provides low cost and high accuracy of direction finding. Able to quickly and accurately determine the position of the emitting radar. The system provides identification in 120 degrees in the vertical plane and 240 degrees of coverage in azimuth, and adds just 20 kg to the weight of the aircraft. It can be used to significantly improve the effectiveness of AARGM rockets, as well as provide additional range of passive detection sensors and increase the ability to perform a strike.

Contractor: Alliant Techsystems, Woodland Hills, California, USA
Development / Participation: USA (Raytheon), Germany (BGT), Italy (Alenia)
Commissioning: November-2010
Engine: TTRD (improved RD Thiokol SR113-TC-1 from AGM-88) dual-mode thrust (afterburner, cruising speed)
Length: 13 feet 8 (cm xnumx)
Diameter: 10 inches (25,4 cm)
Wingspan: 44 (112 cm)
Weight: 795 pounds (361 kg)
Speed: Mach 2 +
Range of application: 60- 170 km
Control and guidance system: GPS / INS, Homing by air defense radar, MLS millimeter wave (MMW) radar, multi-spectral command system
BCU: up to 70 kg monoblock WAU-7 / B, high power with tungsten striking elements.
Carriers:
• Navy: F / A-18C / D, FA-18E / F, EA-18G, EA-6B Prowler
• ITAF: Tornado IDS / ECR
Compatibility with platforms: F-35, F-16 C / J,

Total production: 2169
Unitary cost: USD $ 994 000
Total project cost: USD $ 1,9 billion

Long-term goal of the program - dimensioning for placement in the internal compartments of the F-22 and JS, while maintaining the achieved performance characteristics.


Counteraction
(excerpts from the newspaper Vremya News"Correspondent: N. Poroskov)

JSC Defense Systems Victor Vishchuk:
Only the Soviet Union was seriously engaged in the protection of the PRR in the world. However, all attempts were limited to constructing a double of the station to be protected. This double set aside from the main radar and tried to reorient the missile at him. This was done for the radars of old anti-aircraft missile systems, such as C-200 (such a rocket Ukrainians shot down a plane flying from Israel a few years ago), and for new C-300. Under the auspices of the NPO "Almaz", the "Dubler" radio-technical protection complex was developed and tested. But it was more a complex of detection of PI, and not protection from them. Everything was limited to testing, not a single product went into the series.

Doctor of Technical Sciences Professor S. Narbikov (Chief Designer of Kuntsevo Design Bureau OJSC, founder of 1 Design Bureau OJSC)
Those defense complexes were doomed. They were bulky and the same as at the main station, and even more powerful transmitters. From them to two or four false emitters had to lay waveguides for tens of meters to transmit energy. This is a rectangular metal tube. It took a lot of time to deploy the protection complex, it was very vulnerable. Even a small fragment could damage the waveguide, the leaktightness was broken, and their whole system was rendered unusable. Then there were attempts to introduce flexible waveguides, resembling fire hoses. But they swayed in the wind, energy was lost at the bends. Another idea is to install reflectors that do not require waveguides. However, here we are faced with energy losses during transmission. In addition, it was difficult to control the radiation from the reflector.

S. Narbikov: "... The false spot should be brighter and stand aside. Our autonomous emitters create a number that can reach 12. Their deployment time is 20-30 minutes. Emitters are automatically controlled from the main station, depending on its mode, completely imitating it. Foreigners call them either jammers or distractors. Each radiator is a mini-transmitter with power [i] at least 4 kilowatts per pulse. Its weight is about 80 kg, it runs on powerful batteries in standby mode for 24 hours, for radiation - 3-4 hours. Pseudo-emitters are transported in a specially converted Ural vehicle. [/ I]

Author:Somewhat confused by the claimed power of noise controllers in 4 kW, and even "in pulse"




Originator:
"Navy Training System Plan for the AGM-88 HARM and AARGM Systems", US Navy Raytheon Company 870 Winter Street Waltham, MA 02451 Diehl BGT Defense GmbH & Co. KG Postfach 10 11 55 88641 Überlingen Germany http://www.aleniaaermacchi.it
Photos used:
http://www.raytheon.com http://defense-update.com/ http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com http://www.diehl.com/de/diehl-defence.html http://www.aleniaaermacchi.it http://www.globalsecurity.org http://www.ausairpower.net
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim April 27 2012 09: 23
    -1
    Whatever their missiles are, ours are better in many respects, given the fact that certain samples have been tested in military conflicts.
    1. older
      older April 27 2012 09: 43
      +7
      laughing Maxim, the Americans are stepping on the same rake as before ... They really believe that our air defense consists only of electronic systems and is not protected at all ...
      1. Civil
        Civil April 27 2012 10: 56
        +3
        but the topic of anti-PRR missiles is not disclosed,
      2. VAF
        VAF April 27 2012 19: 26
        0
        Quote: older
        They really believe that our air defense consists only of electronic systems and is not protected at all ...


        Absolutely, +++++! drinks

        Quote: older
        step on the same rake as before ..


        And here it was necessary to add, which is characteristically visible and clearly reflected in the reports on the losses of aviation, with participation in various armed conflicts over the past decades! good
    2. tiomka
      tiomka April 27 2012 11: 13
      -4
      here it is, the position of the true local patriot! 1
    3. Odinplys
      Odinplys April 28 2012 04: 25
      -4

      Another horror story has not passed the test on this site ...
  2. YARY
    YARY April 27 2012 09: 28
    -6
    Again cartoons! For every F, we’re cunning, with an X! laughing
    1. older
      older April 27 2012 09: 45
      +3
      Andrey, and this one about which you wrote Just with a twist or with a twist? laughing
      1. YARY
        YARY April 27 2012 10: 02
        0
        With subsurface laughing laughing
  3. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 27 2012 09: 58
    +1
    There is such a thing about Gazetchik E for a long time already in service.
    http://pvo.guns.ru/rtv/gazetchik.htm
    so dance

    and yes, it’s useless against our air defense system because the surveyors do not shine at the complexes, but it looks something like this http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF%F0%EE%F2%E8%E2%ED%E8%EA -% C3% C5
    A radar in firing systems are included only at the time of launch for a short time.
    1. Ares
      Ares April 27 2012 10: 32
      +9
      Quote: leon-iv
      and yes, it’s useless against our air defense system because the surveyors do not shine at the complexes, but it looks something like this http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CF%F0%EE%F2%E8%E2%ED%E8%EA -% C3% C5


      PRR data can be used for almost any type of modern VHF radar, including the ones you brought in, as well as for backlight locators when you turn them on.
      1. Kars
        Kars April 27 2012 10: 36
        +5
        Quote: Ares
        practically for all types of modern VHF radars, including those that you brought, as well as for backlight locators when they are turned on


        I hope that such a missile can be intercepted by a short-range air defense system taken into account, for example, a tor that will guard the radar?
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 27 2012 10: 46
          +6
          The torus does not guard the complexes. The TOP is an independent military complex. It has its own tasks. Newspapers will cover Morpheus and armor.
          1. Kars
            Kars April 27 2012 11: 03
            +7
            Quote: leon-iv
            TOP is an independent military


            first pass
            The Tor system is designed to cover important administrative, economic, and military facilities, the first echelons of land forces from strikes anti-radar and cruise missiles, remotely piloted aircraft, planning air bombs, aircraft and helicopters, including those made using stealth technology. It can work both manually, with the participation of operators, and fully automatic. In this case, the Tor system itself controls the designated airspace and independently knocks down all air targets that are not recognized by the friend or foe system.

            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 27 2012 11: 06
              +4
              but I denied that it can)))
              He has other tasks to cover the columns.
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm April 27 2012 21: 02
                0
                For leon-iv Yes to the point, and after deployment too. At one time, we shot down missiles at the southern test ranges with the Osa AKM launcher.
          2. viruskvartirus
            viruskvartirus April 27 2012 14: 11
            +1
            First of all, Morpheus ... for this is created ....
        2. Ares
          Ares April 27 2012 10: 47
          +3
          Quote: Kars
          I hope that such a missile can be intercepted by a short-range air defense system taken into account, for example, a tor that will guard the radar?


          Yes, of course it can. Therefore, there is always a confrontation between systems.
      2. leon-iv
        leon-iv April 27 2012 10: 38
        +5
        Did I deny it?
        Question How effective it will be.
        For example, stands the Gamma-DE shines for 400 km. sees the group flies passes to the CP. KP distributes targets to complexes.
        And the complexes are silent. They turn on for a maximum of 1 minute and all the farther the complex falls off the position.
        And no one has yet decided how to suppress such an air defense.
        1. Ares
          Ares April 27 2012 10: 50
          +7
          Quote: leon-iv
          And no one has yet decided how to suppress such an air defense.


          I would not be so categorical. It all depends on the conditions and quantity of equipment of the warring parties.

          Quote: leon-iv
          For example, stands the Gamma-DE shines for 400 km. sees the group flies passes to the CP. KP distributes targets to complexes.
          And the complexes are silent. They turn on for a maximum of 1 minute and all the farther the complex falls off the position.


          To do this, aviation uses flight modes along a low-altitude profile.
          1. leon-iv
            leon-iv April 27 2012 10: 55
            +4
            To do this, aviation uses flight modes along a low-altitude profile.
            do you think nobody is waiting for them there?
            Yes, and Ik have problems with airplanes that can go profiles for a long time on PMV. The same Su-34 was VERY long taught to fly the PMV.
            I would not be so categorical. It all depends on the conditions and quantity of equipment of the warring parties.
            I’m talking specifically about the US Armed Forces. Others we are not rivals in the wrong class.
            1. Ares
              Ares April 27 2012 11: 16
              +3
              Quote: leon-iv
              do you think nobody is waiting for them there?


              There is nobody behind the front line. From there, usually from low altitudes, they will launch PRR along advanced air defense systems.

              Quote: leon-iv
              Yes, and Ik have problems with airplanes that can go profiles for a long time on PMV.


              Why do you think so? There is no need to cuddle completely to the ground, you can walk quite comfortably at an altitude of 200-300 m.
              1. leon-iv
                leon-iv April 27 2012 12: 35
                +3
                Behind the front line no one
                A radar field somewhere gone?
                From there, usually from low altitudes, they will launch PRR along advanced air defense systems.
                And who told you that the air defense systems will be lit. Where to get TsU.
                Why do you think so?
                F-111 written off in 96 other similar aircraft do not produce
                There is no need to cuddle completely to the ground, you can walk quite comfortably at an altitude of 200-300 m.
                This is not PMV on the radar will glow
                1. Ares
                  Ares April 27 2012 15: 45
                  +3
                  Quote: leon-iv
                  A radar field somewhere gone?


                  Quote: leon-iv
                  This is not PMV on the radar will glow


                  You forget about the horizon. At an altitude of 200 meters you can be found only 60 km away. The average range of Harm application is 90 km. You will always be detected in fact only at the time of launch (with a difference of 5-10 seconds for target designation of PRR and launch)

                  And who told you that the air defense systems will be lit. Where to get TsU.


                  In any case, for the implementation of air defense tasks, detection radars will be turned on, as well as backlight radars when firing. Also, controlled false targets will initiate the work of both of them in the air defense zone.
                  Therefore, the ground component alone will not solve the problem.
                  For effective opposition to enemy aviation, a complex interaction of their own air forces and air defense systems is needed.
                  1. leon-iv
                    leon-iv April 27 2012 16: 09
                    +1
                    You forget about the horizon.
                    no, therefore radars are placed on high ground and raise the web as much as possible.
                    http://www.rusarmy.com/pvo/pvo_vvs/rlk_barier-e.html для примера
                    In any case, for the implementation of air defense tasks, detection radars will be activated
                    no doubt but they will be in the distance + passive detection.
                    Also, controlled false targets will initiate the work of both of them in the air defense zone.
                    for this, a bistatic location is used
                    Therefore, the ground component alone will not solve the problem.
                    And where I said that only air defense will work without coordination with the military air defense interceptors, software, IA, VKP, AWACS and U

                    So let's try to think about how to suppress air defense with acceptable losses.
                    1. Ares
                      Ares April 27 2012 17: 02
                      +2
                      Quote: leon-iv
                      no, therefore radars are placed on high ground and raise the web as much as possible.


                      It is far from always possible to use elevations, and raising the antenna by 15-20 meters does not solve anything in the fight against PRR carriers, the range of their missiles will still be higher than the range of their detection at low altitudes (200-300m)


                      Quote: leon-iv
                      no doubt but they will be in the distance + passive detection.


                      They cannot be far away, since the detection range of aircraft at low altitudes relative to the advanced positions will be generally insignificant. With passive detection, too, not everything is so smooth. Most often, air defense breakthrough aircraft come with radar turned off and in radio silence mode.


                      Quote: leon-iv
                      for this, a bistatic location is used


                      This does not affect the classification of false guided EPR simulator targets.

                      So let's try to think about how to suppress air defense with acceptable losses.


                      As I said, everything will depend on the concentration of the opposing forces, the training of personnel. There are no unsolvable problems.
                      1. leon-iv
                        leon-iv April 27 2012 17: 42
                        +1
                        It is far from always possible to use elevations, and raising the antenna by 15-20 meters does not solve anything in the fight against PRR carriers, the range of their missiles will still be higher than the range of their detection at low altitudes (200-300m)
                        show me the place where you cannot find a hill with a height of 200 meters
                        They cannot be far away, since the detection range of aircraft at low altitudes relative to the advanced positions will be generally insignificant.
                        The most important thing is to fix the beginning of a raid from afar. TC, they will not be able to go the entire site at this height. + Data will be received from AWACS + interceptors + military. By the way, I lied about the drummers of the Europeans still flying tornadoes. And to fly for a long time at 200-300 meters is very dangerous and dramatically reduces the flight range.
                        This does not affect the classification of false guided EPR simulator targets.
                        why? and what to mean by imitators
                2. VAF
                  VAF April 27 2012 19: 41
                  +1
                  Quote: leon-iv
                  This is not PMV on the radar will glow


                  It is correct PMV in the daytime from 0 to 100 meters, at night 200 meters, there are slight deviations in the + direction - it is above the plain, wooded, mountainous, desert and water surfaces!
                3. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm April 27 2012 21: 15
                  0
                  There is no need to cuddle completely to the ground, you can walk quite comfortably at an altitude of 200-300 m.
                  I support, at this height they will glow
            2. VAF
              VAF April 27 2012 19: 39
              0
              Quote: leon-iv
              The same Su-34 was VERY long taught to fly the PMV.


              Everywhere you +, because everything is correct and competent, but here I do not agree at the root, because Of all the machines capable of flying in an automatic machine for PMV (the low-altitude flight mode with the rounding of the terrain in the automatic mode, we can have the Su-24 (starting with the M-ki), the Su-34-e, the Tu-160, but the only thing is vertical planes, and amers also have horizontal, but not in this matter.

              All our other machines, produced in the USSR, starting with the Yak-28, Su-7-x, Mig-21, Tu-22-x, feel great at an altitude of about 50 meters during the day, but at night, of course, it is more difficult. here it is purely experience, knowledge of the pilotage of the terrain and skill (flying skill), therefore, to pass "on hand" at an altitude of about 50 meters and below for 1 hour or 1,5 does not pose a big problem (you just don’t notice the time, the stabilizer is just in case you work out (trim) for pitching and all that remains is to hold the handle (or horns), depending on the type, in neutral and forward) !!! good
              1. leon-iv
                leon-iv April 27 2012 21: 04
                +2
                it is clear that the Su-24 specifically under it sharpened both the wing and the profile.
                But just think of flying at least 100 km to the PMV any pilot will immediately turn gray and lose 10 kg.
                1. VAF
                  VAF April 29 2012 20: 30
                  0
                  Quote: leon-iv
                  But just think of flying at least 100 km to the PMV any pilot will immediately turn gray and lose 10 kg.


                  With all due respect to you, who told you this ???

                  Both 500 and 800 km walked at heights much lower than 100 meters during the day, and there is something gray hair, and didn’t lose a gram in weight?

                  You can confuse this with refueling in the air on heavy machines, yes there, you can lose weight, especially with screws, but what would turn gray ???

                  This is you, dear little bit, too much ... !!!
            3. 443190
              443190 April 27 2012 19: 58
              +1
              Don’t star .... The experience of flying on MV and PMV was implemented on the old SU-24s, moreover, with enveloping the terrain and even in automatic mode.
    2. 443190
      443190 April 27 2012 19: 50
      +1
      After turning off the locator, the rocket goes to the target at the stored coordinates. And here accuracy is not important. The main station is silent. But the station is silent and rocket launch is difficult.
  4. Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov April 27 2012 10: 06
    +7
    All this is good in the fight against a weak enemy, and Russia can answer that way, for a long time later they will look for the remains of the president, in the ruins of the White House
  5. Ion coaelung
    Ion coaelung April 27 2012 10: 44
    -2
    With such a toothpick you can only pick your teeth!
  6. Nechai
    Nechai April 27 2012 11: 02
    +1
    Quote: leon-iv
    There is such a thing about Gazetchik E for a long time already in service.

    If you equip it with an amazing package! In general, there will be no price for him. As long as his b / c allows you to not be washed off anywhere. Having chosen a position on the appropriate area of ​​the terrain, stand and "shine" - here I am! give me! And blame all the "mallards and wild geese that flock to the decoy." Only to provide more anti-sabotage cover for the area, to take into account the possibility of an assault landing in the vicinity. And now WE will lead the aggressor on the leash THERE and THEN when WE NEED TO. WE will dictate our will to him!
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 27 2012 11: 05
      +5
      no need to blame, otherwise they will crush
  7. Walther
    Walther April 27 2012 11: 56
    +9
    I think that in the event of a war with the United States, 20 such missiles will be launched for each of our radars. Do we have anything like that? And most importantly in what quantities? Write pozh-hundred.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 27 2012 12: 30
      +3
      Chukchi is not readers and googel zobanel.
      X-58USHKE
      X-31PD
      which are all more serious these things
      1. Dan099
        Dan099 April 27 2012 15: 35
        +9
        The X-31, after all, has been in service since 1989 and the number of them, as I googled 200-300 pieces.
        X-58 - in 1978, the adopted quantity was not found.

        The americans
        AGM-88 more than 6500 pieces !!!
        Here is the imbalance
        1. NIVOVOD
          NIVOVOD April 27 2012 15: 37
          +10
          In many positions we are behind the USA. But this forum can not talk about it. Only positive about Russia, otherwise they will
        2. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 27 2012 15: 38
          -1
          you do not read letters from behind?
          X-31PD approx. 1000.
          There is no data on the Kh-58UShKE.
          But these missiles are much more serious and complex than the AGM-88, therefore there are fewer of them. But for our tasks there will be enough of them.
          1. Ares
            Ares April 27 2012 16: 38
            +7
            Quote: leon-iv
            But these missiles are much more serious and complex than the AGM-88, therefore they are fewer.


            Again, where did you get that?

            Quote: leon-iv
            There is no data on the Kh-58UShKE.


            She is only being tested. De facto, we can only talk about the Kh-58U and Kh-31PD standing in service.
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 27 2012 17: 33
              0
              Again, where did you get that?
              habitat for GOS and energy can not be got anywhere. + dofiga everything.
              1. Ares
                Ares April 28 2012 01: 17
                +2
                Quote: leon-iv
                + dofiga total


                Very reasonable.
                1. leon-iv
                  leon-iv April 28 2012 07: 40
                  -4
                  Well, if you say so, let's think.
                  1 GPS Interference Filter and Receivers
                  2 Power steering
                  3 Speed
                  4 Range
                  and all this without an increase in size will not succeed.
                  + Different application tactics. Tk their task is to saturate our complexes with mass. Ours is guaranteed to destroy their individual complexes.
                  1. Ares
                    Ares April 29 2012 00: 35
                    +3
                    Quote: leon-iv
                    1 GPS Interference Filter and Receivers
                    2 Power steering


                    I liked the joke about power steering) Apparently about filters and receivers, humor is even more subtle.

                    Quote: leon-iv
                    + Different application tactics. Tk their task is to saturate our complexes with mass. Ours is guaranteed to destroy their individual complexes.


                    Did you just come up with this? There is nothing like it.

                    PS I am sometimes struck by the wonders of the ingenuity of graphomania, with a fanatical wishful thinking and complete reluctance to remove pink glasses.
  8. heruv1me
    heruv1me April 27 2012 13: 08
    +13
    Well, here probably some Muscovites are sitting, I can’t count on the provincial for air defense, with our holes in it. What calms me down is that on my mukhos ... like a pen ... you want your expensive missiles to be wasted. Meet me on earth as Dudayev said.
    And in general, dear forum users, I write a little here, but your frank hatred is already tired, we can take a sober look at things. If you are preparing for war, so get ready, and do not hell shout that our trains are the most train in the world.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 27 2012 13: 16
      +2
      And in general, dear forum users, I write a little here, but your frank hatred is already tired, we can take a sober look at things.
      clarify to us then the situation
      Only without slogans and prosralipolymers
    2. NIVOVOD
      NIVOVOD April 27 2012 16: 05
      +4
      You don’t understand nifig - it’s so conceived, because the Americans (or our other enemies) if they want to attack our Motherland ... what do they want first of all? First of all, they will want to receive detailed information about us and will carefully read such forums and accordingly see , all our strength and powerful reading comments will simply be frightened and abandon their treacherous plans
    3. zevs379
      zevs379 April 27 2012 16: 16
      +3
      Quote: heruv1me
      And in general, dear forum users, I write a little here, but your frank hatred is already tired, we can take a sober look at things. If you are preparing for war, so get ready, and do not hell shout that our trains are the most train in the world.


      I agree !!!!! It’s time to seriously sort out what we are real and what’s for the mood. (Ardent - to you a stone in the garden)
  9. Nechai
    Nechai April 27 2012 13: 47
    0
    Quote: leon-iv
    no need to blame, otherwise they will crush

    And no one calls for substituted out of stupidity. After all, you can make them so angry that the ICBMs will burn. It began to "bake", go into the prepared "mink". smoked while the neighbors tug at the tiger's mustache. If necessary, we went to a new area and a new one. It's just that besides all the high-tech bells and whistles, we must create and do not forget to use simpler means of protection. In the GSVG, they made double tank trenches - an ordinary trench, but in it, in case of danger, turning back and sliding down the ramp, the tank completely hid below ground level, and even under a light overlap. And it could be hit only along the sheer trajectory of the projectile with a direct hit, or with a bomb again with a direct hit. So, in my opinion, there is always the opportunity to fool the enemy, only the little bundle must be turned on.
  10. DEMENTIY
    DEMENTIY April 27 2012 14: 54
    +2
    In the event of disabling the air defense radar, the GOS keeps trajectories using the stored GPS / INS data.

    Read more: http://topwar.ru/13885-aargm-agm-88e-oruzhie-proryva-pvo.html

    But this was invented for "Kolchuga" and the following similar passive target detection systems.
    It is a pity that Kuchma handed over Kolchuga with giblets to the states in 2002.
    Do not twist it - the machine is advanced, how many years it has been in service, and the amers have only been honored with a worthy answer.
    A rare pride and alas the shame of Ukraine.
    1. Kars
      Kars April 27 2012 14: 59
      +3
      Quote: DEMENTIY
      But this was invented for "Kolchuga" and the following similar passive target detection systems.



      and if it’s not a secret what the AGM 88 is driving over Mail? Does it radiate something? It seems like the word “passive” does not mean that?
  11. bazilio
    bazilio April 27 2012 15: 17
    -1
    I don’t know how real this is, but I heard that in Yugoslavia such PRRs were deceived using microwave ovens. If anyone knows, share the info
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 27 2012 15: 40
      +5
      These are the tales of the Viennese forest. Omerikanechey they just bullet for any reason
    2. Ares
      Ares April 27 2012 16: 04
      +7
      Quote: bazilio
      I don’t know how real this is, but I heard that in Yugoslavia such PRRs were deceived using microwave ovens. If anyone knows, share the info


      No son, it's fantastic ©
      A microwave, to put it mildly, is far from a radar. To deceive the PRR, it is very characteristic to simulate radar radiation in many ways.
  12. DEMENTIY
    DEMENTIY April 27 2012 15: 20
    +4
    Kars
    It's no secret - read the article carefully.
    If not enough, read the news of the armed forces and the US military-industrial complex.
    1. Kars
      Kars April 27 2012 15: 59
      0
      Quote: DEMENTIY
      Kars
      It's no secret - read the article carefully.


      So you quote, and all things.

      If I'm not mistaken
      In the event of disabling the air defense radar, the GOS keeps trajectories using the stored GPS / INS data.


      Read in full: http://topwar.ru/13885-aargm-agm-88e-oruzhie-proryva-pvo.html#comment-id-317501


      What disconnects the Mail? And I repeat the question of what radiation the AGM 88 induces? The radiation emanating from the mail is of course.
    2. Ares
      Ares April 27 2012 17: 05
      +6
      Quote: DEMENTIY
      It's no secret - read the article carefully.
      If not enough, read the news of the armed forces and the US military-industrial complex.


      PRRs are not aimed at Kolchuga complexes and other RTR complexes. They are passive in nature.
  13. Nechai
    Nechai April 27 2012 15: 22
    +1
    "If the radar is turned off, the air defense seeker keeps trajectories using the saved GPS / INS data."
    - provided that the GOS receives a true signal, and her brains are not powdered;
    - provided that it is a signal from the satellite of navigation, generally there is at the moment in nature;
    - when the navigation signal is lost, the gyroscope maintains the set course for no more than 5 minutes. flight, and from here the coverage area of ​​jammers of navigation signals is cleared;
    -digital map of the area will not work if the area is distorted by passive reflectors (such a measure was worked out in the USSR in order to force lionfish to make a slide in front of the air defense position)
    -the position of the air defense complex can be covered by large-sized shields, consisting of "knife" sections. Occupy easily in the transport position, you can "hide", and there are no tandem warheads for such missiles, nor doublet anti-aircraft missiles yet in nature.
    It is a pity that Kuchma handed over Kolchuga with giblets to the states in 2002.
    Actually "Kolchuga" was the answer and continuation of the Czech PRP-1 "Kopac" 1963-1979. and KRTP-81 "Ramona" 1980. "In the summer of 2005, the Czech Republic sold another Vera-E station to Estonia for US $ 4 million." Actually, they got acquainted with the work of these stations immediately after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact.
    1. postman
      April 27 2012 16: 02
      +6
      INS
      Quote: Nechai

      Nechai

      Quote: Nechai
      when the navigation signal is lost, g

      there is an INS-inertial navigation system for this
      Inertial Navigation System (INS / IMU)
      Initially, the INS receives the location point and speed from an external source (human operator, GPS satellite receiver, OSA of the carrier, etc.), and then calculates the change in its speed coordinates due to the integration of information received from motion sensors: accelerometer (angular and linear )., gyroscope, barometer, altimeter
  14. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 27 2012 17: 43
    0
    Let's move on to tactics. A simplified diagram of the construction of an air defense system is as follows: Along the border (line of combat dispute) at a certain distance on the dominant heights there are meter stations, taking into account the redundancy and overlapping of view areas. They work according to the schedule on duty. At other stations of the same kind, the crews sit and "stand by," that is, the station is in a "hot" or "cold" standby and ready to switch on and maintain a BR. CM locators are located in the same place, but as a rule they are in "hot" reserve. The detection range is 400-600 km. Their battle formations are also built on the basis of accounting for overlap and redundancy. In peacetime, they work as meter-long radars on schedule. RTR stations are in the same order. And somewhere far away there are ZGRLS and all sorts of other Voronezhs. This entire grouping has agreed on the main reserve frequencies, etc. And also, somewhere 40-50 kilometers away, the A-50 "dove of peace" flies with an attached escort from 4-12 SU-27s .... or a pair of MiG-31s ​​.... At the airfields, they sit in different degrees of readiness for departure A-50 crews and fighter pilots. And in the ambushes, air defense systems with various names subsided in the literal and figurative sense. Their radars are also usually in "hot" reserve. And this is only the first line.
    In the second and half-leading lines, both the equipment is older and the calculations are not so trained and the grid is less frequent ... But the saturation of battle formations with detection tools is sufficient for work. And the BRs of all kinds of KP and PU are still awake, they will receive information and distribute information.
    Information coming to the command post from the radar is transmitted to "interested" divisions or fighter aircraft. A-50 and Mig-31 as elements of software of central subordination can be lifted (relocated) to the most difficult areas for reinforcement.

    Now about the most important but also the most vulnerable place - the human operator.
    The first and main question is the question of operator training. In peacetime, front line operators are generally better trained due to their constant BR. But during the threatened period, all staff will be staffed and all operators trained properly. all the more so that over each workplace hangs: "found - give out!" - as a guide to action. The first thing the operator should do when he sees any mark is to issue its coordinates to the checkpoint in manual (voice) or automated mode. And only then you can figure out what kind of goal it is, what characteristics it has ... and is it a goal at all.

    Let's imagine how it all works. A number of F-117s take off from the enemy airfield. It is naive to hope that these subsonic aircraft will cope with the task of breaking through air defense. Therefore, several Growlers are attached to them, and in order to knock out the A-10 radar or any other aircraft that can work on the ground and carry PRR. Let us also assume that they come from different airfields and meet immediately before the start of the operation. distracting maneuvers aside as a special case. What we have ("not us, but you!" (c)): Growlers and A-10 are quite a normal target, which meter locators will detect in 400-500 kilometers. And immediately information will be issued to the higher command post (regiment, brigade, army, central control center) about the target (group of targets). The command post on duty (commander) will see the target on the tablet and, knowing the location of the forces and means, will give an indication of raising the level of readiness and subsequent switching on, on command, to other radars in the field of view of which the target is located, immediately the same information goes to the attached regiments of the air defense missile systems and aircraft, whose commanders make their decisions.
    Let's say the Growlers have scanned the signals of an operating radar and want to send PRR to this station. Then they need to reach the launch line, and this is a maximum of 280-300 km. Thus, Growler will be in the zone of destruction of our S-300s. And since they will be heading for us, what prevents the zrdn commander will highlight the target and use the "long arm" huh.gif Answer: nothing. Which means Groler's death.
    Suppose Growler started the RRP on this radar. The rocket, regardless of the death of Groler himself, flies to the target (the radar antenna). It will be detected 50-60 kilometers from the station, which automatically means the highest priority and will be triggered at a short range, and the anti-missile defense system will be immediately activated. The rocket will "go crazy" and fall between spaced radiation simulators.
    Let's say Groler turned on the jamming - the goal is a priority and is subject to destruction in the first place. Information about the interference again goes to the CP. They decide to turn on the backup radar, or turn on the radar radar, determine the coordinates of the PP using the triangulation method, and give the coordinates to the attacker, who has been standing in the zone for a long time, to reach the target in the radio silence mode and to destroy the target using the radar. Yes, and PRR can be used because Growler himself glows on a Christmas tree in the radio range.
    And also about the fight against interference: many stations have the technical ability to roughen the receiver threshold in certain sectors, all stations have the ability to adjust the frequency, all firing air defense systems have at least one radar (this is to say how many air defense are needed to saturate a certain breakthrough strip). And you also need to consider that almost all air defense systems interact with each other and have the ability to tactically turn on and off. And at the same time, the information on the KP will be complete, but it will come from different sources.

    While the group fought with the Growlers and the A-10, the insidious stealth managed to quietly approach a distance of 150-250 kilometers to the first line, where they were discovered by meter radars. Not for 600-1000 km of course - the reflected signal was scattered from their surfaces. A trained operator, having seen the mark and not even knowing that it is giving it to a higher command post (asked for it, give it out), in a minute the information about it is already at that checkpoint where they make decisions about turning on such and such a combat mode radar and radar radar in the sector SAM Those, in turn, discover the target, determine the characteristics and the target is already allocated for destruction .... In those 12-15 minutes that they will fly to the radar they will be given everything they can.
    And the deeper they will fly inside the group. the less they will remain, since they will be transmitted as a decreasing relay baton of a long-range, medium, small and supreme radar air defense system. MANPADS again attached. And that the first line does not live - the second lives. And even if some kind of lakiboy manages to break deeper, then on approach to the target of the bombardment he will be waiting for approximately the same principle built object-based air defense .... well, maybe just not so densely saturated with detection tools.

    The only case when it is possible to break through the air defense system is to overload the firing channels, but if you consider that you can always plan a precharge, then it is very difficult to do this ... the second possibility is the "human factor" (see the story of M. Rust), .... and the third is the speed and accuracy of information transmission ... and, as a consequence, the need for noise immunity of these channels, if the data transmission channels can be disrupted. then the efficiency of the system will decrease significantly. Losses will increase. (C) Mayorold (this man flew the A-50)
    1. 443190
      443190 April 27 2012 20: 14
      +2
      Air defense objects have always been listed in the list of priority objectives to be immediately destroyed by all available means. Therefore, they will be crushed by all visible weapons, depending on their distance from the front line and the abilities of the opponents in depth of destruction. Aviation ... Artillery ... Missile Forces ....
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv April 27 2012 21: 06
        0
        But will the complexes be in the PDP?
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm April 27 2012 22: 20
      0
      Then in 1987, democracy, glasnost was just beginning. But the Soviet military was not prepared for the new democratic conditions, and so it was difficult to shoot down or not to shoot down a light civilian plane. And so the young Matthias Rust managed to fly to Moscow. Lucky.
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv April 27 2012 22: 56
        0
        Rusta, how nice they drove along the entire route. There was no order.
    3. Ares
      Ares April 28 2012 01: 30
      +5
      Quote: leon-iv
      and all sorts of other "Voronezh".

      Quote: leon-iv
      Let's say the Growlers have scanned the signals of an operating radar and want to send PRR to this station. Then they need to reach the launch line, and this is a maximum of 280-300 km. Thus, Growler will be in the zone of destruction of our S-300s. And since they will be heading for us, what prevents the zrdn commander will highlight the target and use the "long arm" huh.gif Answer: nothing. Which means Groler's death.


      Sorry, but you're a little off topic. I already mentioned the horizon.

      Quote: leon-iv
      Detection range 400-600 km.


      Only at heights of 10 km and above. In real life, tactical aircraft will never go at such a height.

      While the group fought with the Growlers and the A-10, the insidious stealth managed to quietly approach a distance of 150-250 kilometers to the first line, where they were discovered by meter radars. Not for 600-1000 km of course - the reflected signal was scattered from their surfaces. A trained operator, having seen the mark and not even knowing that it is giving it to a higher command post (asked for it, give it out), in a minute the information about it is already at that checkpoint where they make decisions about turning on such and such a combat mode radar and radar radar in the sector SAM Those, in turn, discover the target, determine the characteristics and the target is already allocated for destruction .... In those 12-15 minutes that they will fly to the radar they will be given everything they can.
      And the deeper they will fly inside the group. the less they will remain, since they will be transmitted as a decreasing relay baton of a long-range, medium, small and supreme radar air defense system. MANPADS again attached. And that the first line does not live - the second lives. And even if some kind of lakiboy manages to break deeper, then on approach to the target of the bombardment he will be waiting for approximately the same principle built object-based air defense .... well, maybe just not so densely saturated with detection tools.


      All this is just an example of graphomania that does not take into account the real organization of air defense forces and the laws of physics.
    4. postman
      April 28 2012 04: 02
      +5
      Quote: leon-iv

      leon-iv

      Quote: leon-iv
      Move on to tactics

      Interesting.

      1st paragraph: WELL, there is no country that can "pull" (financially, such a deeply echeloned air defense of the COUNTRY, along the border contour, not to mention the "tactics" / front-line air defense (on the battlefield), what you write about is not real.
      Yes, and there have not been so many "doves of peace" A-50, and there are not, and it is unlikely to be (Some / almost all / countries cannot afford.

      2nd paragraph: very important factor. Really. From experience.
      I remember 1990. Ialoveni, Brigade, S-200. The major running behind the car, losing his cap with a shout: "I take everyone, in bulk, at once, all my ...", after he saw a board full of Slavs in the brigade.
      interpreters to some in the national language.
      District doctrines: the major gave target designation to the natives of the USSR republics by hitting his hand on the helmet, which is on the back of the head: "Run there, your mother ... yesterday you were told to be at the fuel and lubricants warehouse, but tell him what he should do"
      I remember: a soldier of Asian nationality, sitting on the KZV caponier behind the DShK (without cartridges), makes sounds with his lips: "That one, that, tu-tu-tu, Bzhzhzh, Bach" accompanying the (very) MIG-27 flying far away in azimuth, etc. .d. etc.
      St. lei: "get off, get off the infection from there g .... to. Everything is over, now the authorities will appear, mother ... remove him who thread."
      Refused TK during exercises.
      Sushki and MIGs twice completed a combat mission (if I'm not mistaken).
      The arrival of the "partisans" for the training camp ..... yes. This is YOU.
      They tried not to let in contact, in order to save the young generation.
      To perform a combat mission (if it was possible to persuade), escort of a conscript conscript was required.
      Which one are you talking about "usually better trained"?
      The same was said by friends from the "north", they were on the S-300.
      Moreover, I cannot say that we have such a "properly trained" line-up. Judging by what their acquaintances who served in the Bundeswehr said, they have enough of the same.
      We "saw" goals from Romania, almost to Turkey (if I'm not mistaken). But at what altitude?
      An unidentified plane sighting from the Turkish coast. They called, almost "telegraphed", waited for an answer, lost, found, lost completely, no answer, found 27 minutes later on the return course. Where he was, what he did, AND WHAT we had to do, probably still unknown.
      3rd paragraph F-117-? from which airfield? And why? 117 - "trick" tihushnik, night paskudnik, But no matter how not an air defense breakthrough plane. YES AND HE IS NOT a typical AGM-88 carrier. Using them on it is only POSSIBLE.

      If you hang it up for him, he will definitely "shine", losing his only advantage.
      Will go: Tornado, F-18, with a bunch of F-4E, F-4G V, F-4G (yes, yes, I know, old, removed (almost), "brick" BUT after upgrades to the database in 9 countries until 2015),
      F-4EJ (if starting from the Far East)
      Probably someone will carry an antique AGM-78, "Mortar" AS-38 to the "heap" if they dig it up.
      Maybe with the EF-111A (probably somewhere else in zashnikov?)
      Can be launched forward drones QF-4 (if any already)
      They will go under the guise of EW fighter jets and aircraft, about a sector with the greatest possible multi-directional attack (will be determined by the front line or border)
      The third tier is all that can storm, or carry cluster warheads,

      If the terrain allows, at the lowest possible height, with complete silence until the launch of the missile launcher is fixed, using satellite intelligence data, intelligence data, receiving information from a wandering UAV from its television tracking system and radio direction finder receiver. Most likely at night.
      If it’s plain, then right under the powerful EW cover, right from the moment it was discovered.
      Phase "0" (before the breakthrough) will definitely be a KR strike and / or strike UAVs and / or sabotage.

      EA-18 Growler - only if in the Far East (no one will let him from his 800km to the Baltic or from the North, and it is unlikely at the World Cup)
      The A-10 Thunderbolt II will fight tanks and Tunguska elsewhere, in the fields. There is nothing for him to do in the scenario you are describing.
      There will be no "death" of the above two.
      400-500 km in real conditions are in doubt.
      Probably more realistic to talk about 200 (300) km?

      The "launch line" of the AGM-88 is not 300 km, but 200 (170) maximum, and even then not with PMA. Really from 120-150 km and closer.
      200 (300) -120 = 80 (180) km. 80 km / 1100 km / h (305 m / s) = 260 (585) s from the notch to the start line ..
      STARTING WILL BE A GROUP, under the guise of electronic warfare.
      For 260 sec. "The command control officer on duty (commander) needs to see" the target on the tablet and, knowing the location of forces and means, "give an indication to raise the degree of readiness and then turn it on on command, etc." further, the "commanders" need to make "their own decisions."
      Note:
      AGM-88 speed from 2M (680 m / s)
      S-300 (in the plate)
      ZR speed from 1800 to 2100 m / s (maximum)
      Of course there is "Favorite" (3-200, target speed up to 2800m / s).
      But there is one BUT: S-300 never took participation in real hostilities. S-400 is the same.

      AGM-88 was used in real (with a stretch of course) military operations.
      And although the% of confident hitting targets starts from 10 (for "Shrike").
      Quote: leon-iv
      and work on it short-range, as well as immediately will be included in the protection system against PRR.

      I have not heard of the successful "interception" (destruction) of AGM-88, even early modifications..Loss of purpose, self-destruction, yes.
      Maybe just missed it.
      After starting up, the carriers are turned away and left on the afterburner (F-4 to 2,1M), the rest are close to this.
      Arithmetic for grade 5: AGM-88 launched fly, carriers turned around (unfold) fly away, ZR - launched fly towards.
      War of calculators and robots.
      Fighters cover the waste. Attack aircraft are waiting for the result of the action of PRR.
      Quote: leon-iv
      Let's say Groler turned on jamming - the priority is


      The truth does include electronic warfare (if you really had to) not one Growler, but all the bandits, both specialized and what is on board carriers and support aircraft .. That would be full of milk.
      I saw the flare from our electronic warfare (and we, unfortunately, due to objective reasons, these tools are worse) is impressive.
      In order to effectively counteract (and most importantly, during), it is necessary, as V.I. Lenin: "Learning, learning and learning again" + time is needed (reaction time, processing, development of a solution and methodology, decision-making, active opposition (eg: filtering, calculating a probable trajectory, rebooting in the end, resetting the CO / tracking C ) - seconds go by, the carriers are approaching (and quite quickly) to the launch point ...
      Here again to paragraph 2 at that time (past) let’s say it wasn’t so (the elder brother was in Libya, he was telling), but now how? (I honestly do not know).
      "Frequency tuning" - will not hide the very radio emission of the radar, not 70 years.
      View the SIP and AIDS settings for the AGM management computer. Software Algorithms.
      Location: Know and track the exact location.
      Our work intervals were from 5 to 17 minutes. The officer looks at the grid: "attention is the satellite transit time, turn off."
      All the same, everyone knew then.
      Now there are more satellites, better quality, foreign civilian planes fly over the country, + weapons control aircraft (we generally do not have access there).

      I can’t say anything about the "coarsening of the receiver threshold in certain sectors". I don't know. What is it?

      What "meter" locators do you mention? Meter range? Type P-? Type F?
      Are you sure that they will be able to find BATTLE targets closer than 100km in reality?
      After all, not at 20.000m they will fly into a breakthrough (as in the radar avenues).
      Vaughn in an interview with Vremya novostei, Ph.D. prof. S. Narbikov said the same:
      "This is a delusion. The main beam is as narrow as a pencil, this beam scans quickly."
      Here is how you can "quickly" with a pencil (diameter 1-2 cm) QUICKLY scan a segment of a sphere with an area
      S = (2rh + a2) r = 400km, a = 400-500 km, h = 270- 350 km
      [center] [img] http://www.bo
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv April 28 2012 07: 51
        0
        [b2] postman
        I will answer only the first point in the hotel I will check in and answer the others.
        WELL, there is no country that can "pull" (financially, such a deeply echeloned air defense of the COUNTRY, along the border contour, not to mention the "tactics" / front-line air defense (on the battlefield), what you write about is not real.
        Why not? the saturation of air defense in Russia is an order of magnitude greater than that of any country in the world. The number of complexes indicates this. Yes, and strikes will be on certain objects.
        Yes, and there have not been so many "doves of peace" A-50, and there are not, and it is unlikely to be (Some / almost all / countries cannot afford.
        At the moment, Russia has 11 A-50 and 1 A-50U another 2 sides in Taganrog for modernization.
        I remember 1990. Ialoveni, Brigade, S-200. The major running behind the car, losing his cap with a shout: "I take everyone, in bulk, at once, all my ...", after he saw a board full of Slavs in the brigade.
        ,,, mice ......, found, lost completely, no answer, found after 27 minutes on the reverse course. Where he was, what he did, and what we had to do, is probably still unknown.

        This year there should no longer be conscripts. Partisans have not been allowed to defend against air defense since 2000.
        1 You describe PEACE time as you think that will change when there will be a military.
        F-117-? from which airfield? And why? 117 - "trick" tihushnik, night paskudnik, But no matter how not an air defense breakthrough plane. YES AND HE IS NOT a typical AGM-88 carrier. Using them on it is only POSSIBLE.
        meanwhile, amers used it to suppress air defense

        Will go: Tornado, F-18, with a bunch of F-4E, F-4G V, F-4G (yes, yes, I know, old, removed (almost), "brick" BUT after upgrades to the database in 9 countries until 2015),
        Yes, tornadoes go (although there is also fun with their condition at home I will throw off the link)
        F-18 yes
        Phantoms xs that they have a resource but that it changes the tactics remains the same
        Maybe with the EF-111A (probably somewhere else in zashnikov?)
        They wrote off everything sorry for the good birds.
        Everything must be run away then I will unsubscribe.
        There is a calculator on the Internet for calculating the range of missiles. So there are very interesting numbers obtained. Because physics is one for all.
        1. postman
          April 28 2012 13: 39
          +4
          Quote: leon-iv
          Почему нет?

          It was!! (BEFORE 1987)
          about 2 thousand fighter-interceptors, thousand anti-aircraft missile systems. Radio-technical air defense troops of more than 50 radio-technical units and hundreds of units armed with several thousand radars, troops and air defense forces of military districts and fleets, fighter aircraft, and this is several hundred air defense systems and about a thousand aircraft.
          This is what was ONLY in the GDR:

          Analysis in a document (see title picture)
          Well, or dig here: http: //www.foia.cia.gov
          A very interesting analysis of Current SAM Coverage of the USSR: air defense density from the height of exit to the line of attack.
          From 40000ft to 300 - melts right before your eyes.
          / How much it cost, and what it led to /
          But not to eat now.

          on the cards it’s clear who, what and where from

          real density here. But it's on paper.


          Quote: leon-iv
          At the moment, Russia has 11 A-50

          And refueling for them?
          (Saudi Arabian Air Force at 5 E-3A = 8 KE-3A)
          AEW & C:
          The US Air Force currently has 32 E-3s.
          Royal Air Force-7 (9)
          French Air Force 4- E-3F
          Germany 17 E-3 (one lost) / Geilenkirchen base
          Saudi Arabian Air Force 5 E-3A (These, although not in NATO, but who would believe that from the south, without them)
          Further, what can the thread from this rise, is it still not rusted ?:
          Avro Shackleton AEW.2

          Boeing 737 AEW & C
          Boeing E-767
          Boeing PB-1W Flying Fortress
          British Aerospace Nimrod AEW3
          MCD AD-3W / 4W / 5W Skyraider
          EADS CASA C-295 AEW
          Embraer r-99 erieye
          Grumman af-2w
          Grumman E-1 Tracer
          Grumman E-2 Hawkeye
          Grumman TBM-3W Avenger
          Gulfstream G550
          IAI Eitam
          KJ-1 AEWC
          KJ-200
          KJ-2000
          Lockheed EC-121
          Lockheed EC-130V Hercules
          Lockheed P-3 AEW & C
          Saab 340 AEW & C (S 100 B / D Argus)
          Saab 2000 AEW & C

          work on CABS (NATO ASP platform) - end date 2012

          AGM-88 (all modifications)
          USA: 6500 units (produced from 2003: 22969)
          for 2003: 603 (Italy, Germany, OEA, Koya, Taiwan)

          Quote: leon-iv
          You describe PEACE TIME

          I really hope, but (according to the history of my country) I think it will be a year or two, it turned out: "as always." "Russia is not ready again when we were ready."
          The queues at the recruiting points-you can’t exactly expect.
          The work of the Cheka on "traitors and traitors" will definitely be, for objective failures the most intelligent and innocent will be slapped.
          F-117 was used for bombardment, but WHERE and with what weapons?
          PSA mainly Tk. using rocket weapons. He found himself.
          I would not (personally) want to be an F-117 pilot in an operation such as "Valley of Dreams" against the Russian Federation.
          On the F-4, F-18 somehow calmer ....
          By the way (about meter):
          Long-wave air defense radars (F-117A range up to 54 km)
          Over-the-horizon radars are effective only beyond 900 km or more. Tracking at shorter ranges and guidance of air defense and SAM missiles is impossible.

          Quote: leon-iv
          Phantoms xs what they have with the resource
          - stayed. are flying.
          Did the Israelites remove them from the Black Squadrons?

          About EF-111A I read that on conservation.
          12 pieces EF-111s did not save?
          1. leon-iv
            leon-iv April 28 2012 14: 30
            -4
            I’ll add the main one in the evening, but the lower air defense map is fairy tales
            1 AWACS and U are all at the Ivanovo air base. They will isolate IL-78, they constantly fly and there is no special need for them. Tk 1 A-50 can hang in the air for a very long time. And especially the A-50U with PS-90.
            In air defense, where did the BUK (40 km) and Tor (20 km) go? Most recently, the M2 Belarussians were sold with a very tricky EMNIP Ginger radar to link to our air defense. So RIA cards need to be trusted very rarely
            The queues at the recruiting points-you can’t exactly expect.
            Correctly everyone will be in labor camps engaged in labor, as cities will be resettled.
            The work of the Cheka on "traitors and traitors" will definitely be, for objective failures the most intelligent and innocent will be slapped.
            What again are the tales about the purges of 37 years and detachments? After all, we must not forget that amers will also not be perfect robots. Feylat they are terrible, they just know how to do a good face in a bad game. For example, look at how many verts they lost in Afghanistan and for what reasons.
            On the F-4, F-18 somehow calmer ....
            doubtless but less effective. Just tell me what prevents the same KP from giving, for example, the S-300V TsU, they were detached and very quickly dumped. Or arrange an ambush from beech trees. No wonder they were made on a caterpillar track.
            At the same time, we should not forget about such a masterpiece aircraft Mig-31B which is remade in BM. And his radar specially sharpened the sweat search for CR on extremely small. And he will notice the drummers.
            By grunts This will be GOAL # 1 for any aviation. and it’s pointless for them to work near the earth.
            Long-wave air defense radars (F-117A range up to 54 km)
            for which radars and what type of scanning the doppler or the clearance, how many points will the information from RTR look at.
            About EF-111A I read that on conservation.
            12 pieces EF-111s did not save?

            Funny, oh well, they’ll do little.
            Although the planes were beautiful then the American men were able to make planes.
            1. postman
              April 28 2012 15: 17
              +5
              Quote: leon-iv
              but the bottom anti-aircraft map is fairy tales
              ,
              well yes...
              the same as: radar resolution in azimuth, detection of targets located at negative elevation angles, uniformity of most air defense systems (from the point of view of the used wavelength range, ensuring high accuracy in determining coordinates, short operating time to orthcase, etc., etc.)

              Quote: leon-iv
              they are not special. Tk 1 A-50 can hang in the air for a very long time.

              relatively. About 4 hours without refueling.
              BUT THEM (number) is terribly small. To the whole country.

              Quote: leon-iv
              about cleaning 37 years
              ,
              no 1941- 1/2 1943
              Non-combat losses of senior officers in the Second World War
              Causes of Losses Years
              1941 1942 1943 1944 1945
              Repressed 27 21 4 - 1
              Shot 2 2 1 1 -
              in 1941: 27 generals (almost 82%) were shot.

              About detachments, I think there is an exaggeration.
              Acc. Directive No. 35523: - This is the field gendarmerie.
              Although I would not be surprised that they steered there (not all and not everywhere), people are specific, prone to an appropriate model of behavior.
              And the cases were most likely
  15. VAF
    VAF April 27 2012 19: 48
    0
    Quote: leon-iv
    We pass to tactics.


    I read everything, I agree everywhere, definitely +++++++! good

    Thank you for your work and patience!
  16. Hey
    Hey April 27 2012 19: 50
    -1
    One air defense officer (on one of the forums, I don't remember which one) proposed the following to combat the anti-missile defense system: additionally snobbish the radar, an anti-aircraft missile launcher coupled with a radar using air-to-air missiles, the "start" button of this installation withdraw directly to the radar commander.
    The meaning is as follows. The radar commander sees on the screen, breaking through to his radar, the PRR, not forwarding information to the command post, simply presses his "Start" button of his air defense system, his own radar will provide target illumination for his missile. Few of one will release two.
    The missiles for such an air defense system are full, you can even use a bit outdated. The time for passing the signal about the threat and reaction to it is minimal. Depends on the reaction and experience of the head of the radar.
  17. Captain45
    Captain45 April 27 2012 22: 02
    +3
    Of course, I apologize for getting into a dispute between professionals and air defense specialists, but I just read an interesting article on the Military Materials website "The Pentagon has rehearsed an attack on Russia and China." Combining computer simulations with real aircraft from Fort Yukon, Alaska. The exercise, codenamed Operation Chimichanga, pioneered a new concept of ultra-long-range strikes using fifth-generation F-4 fighters and B-22B supersonic bombers. " And the general conclusion: "Therefore, the only way to protect against operations like Chimichanga is the continuous duty of interceptors at the borders of the state and in the most important industrial areas of the country, as well as high-tech surveillance equipment." Until the early 1s, from Murmansk to Chukotka, everything that flew above 90 meters above sea level was visible on the radar screens, because the entire North was packed with radars and air regiments were stationed, there were airfields. And now in the tundra "burdocks" of locators are lying around, the runways, which are overgrown and crumpled by the permafrost.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 27 2012 22: 58
      -2
      KO and who will fly there
      Do American carriers know how to navigate the ice?
      And the teachings are just the teachings we ourselves conduct
      1. Captain45
        Captain45 April 27 2012 23: 26
        +1
        And strategic bombers are not based on aircraft carriers. Yes, and the road is shorter across the pole. Probably for good reason the USSR kept air defense in the Far North. You read the article, it details how many planes, what types, with what weapons.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 28 2012 08: 01
          0
          then the launch limits were different.
  18. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 27 2012 23: 31
    0
    take-off of strategists just doesn’t succeed in hiding the ZGRLS they will see. Yes, and in a special period, everything will be different.
  19. vylvyn
    vylvyn April 28 2012 02: 52
    -1
    I do not believe that we do not have an adequate solution for the PRR. So many anti-missile systems have already been invented, is it possible that not one of them works on PRR?
    1. Ares
      Ares April 29 2012 08: 20
      +2
      Quote: vylvyn
      I do not believe that we do not have an adequate solution for the PRR. So many anti-missile systems have already been invented, is it possible that not one of them works on PRR?


      Why is there no solution? PRR can be shot down, though with a certain degree of probability. An even more difficult problem is the interception of a volley from several PRRs. Therefore, as already mentioned, it all depends on the balance of forces and on the training of personnel.
  20. postman
    2 May 2012 14: 19
    +2
    Quote: Ares
    PRR can be shot down

    Hey. The facts of the interception of AGM-88 from D (block III) and beyond are not recorded.
    The problem is interception on the opposite course, too close approach speed.
    Operation "El Dorado Canyon",
    Hornets military debut in Libya (88 AGM 88B)
    Of the 585 AGM-88B launches in Operation Desert Storm in Iraq, 92% met their target.
    The operation of Yugoslavia - the effectiveness of the AGM-88B missiles decreased to 48%.

    Therefore, upgraded to D, C, Cs, E
  21. Evil Booth
    Evil Booth 14 December 2019 11: 13
    0
    negative ordinary chatter as always. the only thing that has changed in the PRR is the range limit, it has grown from 104 to 170 km, but this is still the range when starting from a height of 15 km at a speed greater than cruising (that is, at a thousand km / h at speeds above sound even a maximum of 22/35 flies spending hundreds of kilometers, as before, wasting all fuel and this is at nth heights with the smallest load weight). that is, you need to have 1 object unprotected in any way and nothing in advance. something like this PRR with a range of 104, using the s-125 with a range of up to 25 km with mobility in half an hour from 70 years of development ... more than 500 different attacks were clearly struck by 2 complexes with their own losses 2 aircraft out of 1000 against 25 systems on the ground. Now imagine the work of the desired PRR against the battery of shells when the standby radar is on, which the PRR does not reach in range and does not see it in frequency (the wavelength of the duty say 1 and 50 meters), the duty staff fries from several sides, turning off periodically, similarly they contain cm and DM components are again turned off much more often than the flight time, knowing where they are, outside the range of defeat soldier and often switchable, the plane can be seen both from the right and from the left as well as the PRR from the side because I irradiate from the side, as in this case the PRR will go from 170 km of business 120 to the target when that target is already turned off)))))))))))))) )))) but the carrier will launch another PRR to the right and left ... XM))) and PRR DO NOT see meter radars. air defense air forces can start shooting down carriers at altitudes of about 400 km from about 15 km. and the time for which the plane to rise and descend beyond the horizon 2 times longer than the time during which the carrier at a height will be noticed and taken down BEFORE the launch of the PRR from a distance of 170 altitude of 15 km. and the carrier still needs to rise and accelerate, and this is also only 10 seconds .. for missile defense air defense it is 10 km of flight (or even under 30 if it is a 300V4 with a range of 350 km for a missile launcher)bully to go down 5 km is another minute and the horizon even lower so as not to even make a start. in addition, according to signals from the Air Force or distant radars or meter radars or already turned off closer, the missile launcher will go to the carrier, even without detecting the positions of the launch, not just the system. here in the last seconds and on-load tap-changers and stuff will work out so that the missiles fly well. when attacking from low altitudes, everything is a little different but the essence is the same. PS, but first hundreds of sprinklers sprinkled onto the base f22 on the ground. how do skadas pour into Saudi ports and f15 bases for 1000 km from .. and this is their entire combat radius with a minimum load of hours of flight at an altitude where they are seen! distant radar and so on and so forth. PS If you walk there are many videos of hits from both c75 ipo f16 and f15 with the subsequent display of aircraft debris because the slippers are strict there.
  22. Usher
    Usher 25 December 2020 02: 46
    0
    In case of disabling the air defense radar, the seeker keeps its trajectory
    Didn't have time to learn Russian? Or correct words from copy-paste?