Defend Moscow: missile defense, air defense and fighter

58
In the event of the beginning of a hypothetical full-scale armed conflict with the use of all available means and weapons, Moscow and the central industrial region are exposed to particular risks. The vast majority of strategically important military and administrative facilities are concentrated in these territories, which makes them an important target for the first attacks. As a result, our country needs to maintain and update the defense systems of Moscow and the surrounding regions in order to ensure the sustainability of state and military control even in the most difficult conditions.

Both in the past and now, the main threat to Moscow is the strategic nuclear forces of a potential enemy. Land and sea-based ballistic missiles, as well as strategic aviation and cruise missiles of various types. The effective use of ground forces is thus excluded, which creates a characteristic picture and requires the creation of a special defense structure.



Missile Defense

For a number of reasons, the main threat to the central industrial region and Moscow is the ballistic missiles of the likely enemy, located on land objects and on submarines. Understanding of this appeared in the middle of the last century, which led to the development and construction of an advanced missile defense system. In 1971, the A-35 system took up combat duty. To date, it has been replaced by the newer A-135 Amur, which is currently undergoing modernization.


Radar "Don-2"


System A-135 is operated by the 9 th missile defense division, which is part of the 1 th army of air defense and missile defense. All military units of this division, which are responsible for the operation of various elements of Amur, are located in the Moscow region - directly in the protected area.

The Amur receives information about the missile strike from the enemy both from the missile attack warning system and from its own tracking devices. The main component of the A-135 is the multifunctional radar station Don-2Н. Radar with active phased antenna arrays provides an overview of the entire upper hemisphere. The purpose of an ICBM combat unit type is determined at a distance of 3700 km and at an altitude of up to 40 thousand km. Don-2H is responsible for tracking and targeting interceptor missiles.

As part of the A-135 there are five firing systems with missile launchers. According to different sources, there are up to 68 missiles on duty at the same time. Now in operation are missiles 53Т6 / PRS-1, designed to intercept ballistic missiles in the near zone. A product with a special warhead is capable of hitting targets at ranges up to 100 km and altitudes up to 45 km. Currently, work is underway on the updated anti-missile PRS-1M. It will be distinguished by increased range and height of defeat, as well as improved shooting accuracy.

In recent years, defense industry enterprises have been working to improve the A-135 system, aimed at improving its tactical and technical characteristics. On the completion of such work will take several years. The upgraded version of "Cupid" is denoted as A-235. According to various estimates, the updated missile defense system will retain its functions, but will have advantages over modern ones.

Air defense

The task of protecting Moscow and the central industrial region from enemy air strikes and enemy cruise missiles rests with the other two units of the 1-th army of air defense and missile defense. These are 4-I and 5-I divisions of air defense, stationed in a number of settlements of the Moscow region. Armed with these divisions are modern anti-aircraft missile systems of several main types.


Tests prospective antimissile


The two air defense divisions from the 1 Army each consist of one radio engineering regiment and four anti-aircraft missile regiments. Almost all the anti-missile regiments of the two divisions have now been reequipped with C-400 systems. At the same time, two regimental sets of older S-5PM air defense systems are still in service with the 300 th air defense division. In the foreseeable future, a full rearmament of the division will take place, thanks to which it will expand its capabilities. In total, in the units of the 1 Army, an air defense missile defense system on duty costs around the 20 divisions with two types of anti-aircraft complexes.

Air defense divisions, armed with modern air defense systems, are able to protect Moscow, the Moscow Region and nearby regions from a number of air threats. C-400 systems are capable of fighting tactical and strategic aircraft, special aircraft for various purposes, as well as aviation weapons and cruise missiles. There is the possibility of destruction of ballistic missiles of short and medium range.

Several types of guided missiles are used to fight against different targets in different ranges. The maximum range for aerodynamic targets is defined in 400 km. Height - up to 35 km. The range of ballistic targets reaches 60 km. Each complex can simultaneously launch and direct up to 20 missiles.

Military aviation

At the bases of the Moscow region and the nearest regions a significant number of aviation units for various purposes are concentrated. There are fighter, bomber, transport and other parts. In the context of the defense of Moscow and the central industrial region, the regiments and divisions involved in the reconnaissance, control and interception of enemy aircraft are of the greatest interest.

In the city of Ivanovo, the 144 th regiment of long-range radar detection aircraft is based, the only one in the country. It has X-NUMX A-15 and A-50U machines, as well as one IL-50M air command point. At the airfield Chkalovskiy (Moscow region), the 22-I division of special purpose is based, having equipment for various purposes. It has 8 VKP IL-13 and IL-22М, as well as two aircraft IL-22 electronic intelligence.


The anti-aircraft missile regiment of the 1 Army Air Defense Missile Defense is deploying to the position


The Khotilovo airfield (Tver Oblast) is the base for the 790 th Fighter Aviation Regiment of the 105 th mixed division of the Western Military District. He owns the 24 interceptor MiG-31BM and MiG-31BSM, as well as up to 30 fighters Su-27, Su-27UB and Su-30СМ. Another squadron of MiG-31 interceptors, which is organizationally related to the 4 State Aviation Personnel Training and Military Test Center, is based at the SavaSleyka airfield (Nizhny Novgorod Region).

We should also mention the Kubinka airbase, where the 237-th Guards Center for the display of aircraft equipment is located. I.N. Kozhedub. The Russian Knights and Swifts aerobatics groups serve as part of the 237 CPCP. They have two dozen Su-27, Su-30CM and MiG-29 types of aircraft, suitable for solving initial combat missions.

It should be noted that in the regions of the central industrial region there are many other air bases and aviation connections with a large number of various vehicles. However, in their case, they are armed with transport and training aircraft, long-range bombers, tankers, as well as the entire spectrum of helicopter technology of the armed forces. For obvious reasons, such aviation units cannot participate in repelling a nuclear missile strike or an attack of long-range enemy aircraft. However, some of them can be used to retaliate or in solving other tasks.

Development prospects

Moscow and the nearest regions are of particular importance for the economy, as well as for military and government control, which places special demands on their protection, primarily against strikes with the use of strategic weapons. At present, the central industrial region has a developed defense system, including various means from the composition of different types of armed forces. In the future, the development of this system should continue.

The modernization of the Amur ABM A-135 system, which involves the production and implementation of various new types of products. The replacement of individual components of the Don-2Н radar and control systems has already started. It is important that these processes are carried out without removing the station from duty and stopping its work. At the same time, a new modification of a serial anti-missile with enhanced characteristics is being refined.


Aircraft aerobatic teams "Swifts" and "Russian Knights", based in Kubinka


Modernization of air defense units is still associated with the decommissioning of aging C-300PM anti-aircraft missile systems and the use of modern C-400. In the distant future, a new stage of updating the material part is expected. This time the regiments of the 1 division of the air defense and missile defense will have to master the latest C-500 complexes. While this air defense missile system is at the stage of development work, but in the future it will be tested and put into a series.

The serial production of modern fighters of a number of types continues, and this material part goes to various units, including the central region. So far, only the Su-30CM and the upgraded MiG-31 can be considered the newest on the bases of the Moscow region and the nearest areas. Over time, the share of new technology at the bases of the region will be increased, but so far the priority is the modernization of parts in other areas.

It is easy to see that in the construction of the defense of Moscow and the central industrial region, the greatest attention is paid to the means of anti-missile and air defense, while aviation is updated more slowly. The reasons for this are simple and straightforward. As an administrative and military center, Moscow and the nearest facilities are a priority target for a potential adversary. Therefore, it is precisely this region that runs the risk of being hit by the first blow of a potential enemy with the use of ballistic and cruise missiles, long-range aviation, etc.

Modern domestic air defense missile systems are capable of intercepting both aircraft and cruise missiles, as well as combat blocks of medium-range ballistic missiles. In the fight against enemy aircraft, they are assisted by modern fighter aircraft. For the interception of more complex ballistic targets meets the missile defense system being upgraded. Thus, strategically important areas of the country have modern and effective defense in depth.

This means that the results of the first attack of the enemy will be far from the desired, and the Russian armed forces and civilian structures will remain operational for the retaliatory strike and subsequent actions. This factor in itself can be an effective means of deterring the likely adversary from thoughtless actions and aggression.

On the materials of the sites:
http://mil.ru/
https://ria.ru/
https://tass.ru/
http://nvo.ng.ru/
http://russianknights.ru/
https://bmpd.livejournal.com/
58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    18 February 2019 05: 28
    An alarming article ... they survived what is called .... the enemy came close to our borders and now plans various options for attacking Russia.
    The breakdown of the INF Treaty directly points to this.
    In my opinion, the constant policy of pacifying the West by Russia has led to what we now have.
    Of course, it’s good that our military is considering how to defend themselves against the mass bombardment by the Tomahawks and Tridents ... but this is not enough to eliminate the threat of war ... the main source of danger for Russia is the US, who feel unpunished ... because there is no threat to the USA near its borders .. .a this means that it is necessary to create it and constantly click on this callus more painfully ... just like the United States is now doing in relation to our country.
    1. +2
      18 February 2019 08: 13
      Alexei, well, you don’t catch up with fear) What to do, not to be avoided. They have been upgrading the system for several years. While we seem to live. And not only this system is being upgraded. The enemy after the Second World War has already begun to plan. Let them plan. We need to get ready and not lose our heads.
      1. +4
        18 February 2019 08: 18
        smile Yes, there’s no fear here ... I’m generally an optimist in life ... we won’t die alive ... we just relaxed because of perestroika ... we believed in a bright democratic future for our rogue partners hehe ... he it turns out we have to protect our future with our teeth and hands in an adult way ... no one but ourselves will protect us ... such is se la vie.
    2. +2
      18 February 2019 08: 33
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      the main source of danger for Russia, the United States feels unpunished ... because there is no threat to the United States near its borders ... which means that we need to create it and constantly click on this callus more painfully ... just like the United States is doing with respect to our country.

      To do this, you need to have allies near the borders of the United States, and thanks to the post-Soviet foreign policy, we don’t have them.

      When there was the USSR, countries that did not like the world gendarme had where to turn for help. And the help was mutual, allied. That is why in the UN the word USSR had a serious weight. Up to fifty countries, on minor issues, didn’t even get a grasp of it — they looked at the decision of the Union and voted in unison. On large - read, but also voted as the USSR.

      Now, the Russian Federation itself is not so different from any other Capital country with all the consequences. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, we need the INF Treaty, and not the USA, since the flight time of cruise missiles from Latvia to Moscow is 2 minutes. We, our diplomacy needed to do everything so that the United States did not even have a reason for rhetoric to withdraw from the INF Treaty.

      No missile defense, air defense and fighter jets will have time to react if the INF systems are actually deployed in the Baltic states. How will it be there in reality, IF THAT, no one can predict. But such a situation can create the illusion overseas that a nuclear war against Russia can be defeated with impunity.
      1. +2
        18 February 2019 08: 50
        In reality, it will probably be different. There is a more plausible option, Ukraine. And the deployment of missiles on its territory. The battle between the Slavs is beneficial to everyone. And the Americans need to save up their strength for a future battle with China. Check out their planning. Until the 35-40s of the program. This means that a fight with China is most likely planned for this period. If we are not squeezed economically and the Maidan is not arranged for us, then Nezalezhnaya will be used. Which is already heavily pumped up striped. We go to the forum of Ukrainians and "enjoy" their Russophobic speeches. The hatred for Russians is off the charts.
        1. 0
          18 February 2019 09: 04
          Quote: dirk182
          There is a more believable option-Ukraine. And the deployment of missiles on its territory.

          To place INF in Ukraine it is still very, very much that needs to be done. And the deployment of medium- and short-range cruise missiles in NATO countries - in the Baltic, in the absence of an INF Treaty, is a matter of a very short time.

          The saddest thing is that we cannot answer in the same way - there are no countries in Latin America where we could deploy similar missiles. Washington knows this and behaves accordingly.
          1. +2
            18 February 2019 09: 59
            there is no one to blame, they themselves missed the moment
      2. 0
        18 February 2019 10: 44
        Quote: McAr
        On the other hand, we need the INF Treaty, and not the USA, since the flight time of cruise missiles from Latvia to Moscow is 2 minutes.

        What are your smart cruise missiles ....
        No, the Americans need the contract. For it limits our possibilities in Europe.
        1. +2
          18 February 2019 10: 47
          Quote: Spade
          What are your smart cruise missiles ....



          Quote: Spade
          No, the Americans need the contract. For it limits our possibilities in Europe.

          Yeah. Americans are torn off if we destroy Europe in the event of a nuclear conflict.
          1. +2
            18 February 2019 10: 59
            The Tomahawk will fly 619 km in 35-45 minutes.
            Quote: McAr
            Yeah. Americans are torn off if we destroy Europe in the event of a nuclear conflict.

            We will destroy American military bases in Europe, ports where they could land troops, airfields that they could use ...
            They really break off.

            But ICBMs can already be redirected to the United States, without being distracted by targets in Europe, Turkey or the Far East.

            As for profitable-unprofitable ... the United States could always strike with medium-range missiles on Russian territory. Because their ship and air options are not prohibited. And the basis for the use of nuclear weapons by the Americans is a "disarming" first strike.
            1. -1
              18 February 2019 11: 15
              Quote: Spade
              And the basis for the use of nuclear weapons by the Americans is a "disarming" first strike.

              Exactly. The INF Treaty did not give this opportunity. There is no such treaty, and the illusion may arise overseas that a "disarming" first strike is possible.

              Quote: Spade
              We will destroy American military bases in Europe, ports where they could land troops, airfields that they could use ...

              Destroy. Together with tens of millions of farmers, steelworkers and other civilians. So in Europe it is not for nothing that they are afraid of us? No wonder they consider the main evil of the planet? No wonder they want to eliminate us? Curious chess you have ...

              Maybe I got excited about 2 minutes, but we need the INF agreement more than the USA - they have where to bring cruise missiles closer, but we don’t.
              1. +2
                18 February 2019 11: 25
                Quote: McAr
                Exactly. The INF Treaty did not give this opportunity.

                Uh ... Once again, the INF Treaty does not prohibit the use of air and sea-based missiles.

                Quote: McAr
                Destroy. Together with tens of millions of farmers, steelworkers and other civilians.

                Well, who forced their authorities to accept the Americans? They themselves are to blame.

                Quote: McAr
                Maybe about 2 minutes I got excited, but we need the INF agreement

                This is the USA, he is needed. Since practically without limiting them in the possibility of delivering the first strike, it greatly limits the Russian ability to strike in the opposite direction.
                1. +1
                  18 February 2019 11: 28
                  Quote: Spade
                  This is the USA, he is needed. Since practically without limiting them in the possibility of delivering the first strike, it greatly limits the Russian ability to strike in the opposite direction.

                  What is a counter strike? Like they shoot, can't we?
                  1. 0
                    18 February 2019 11: 31
                    Quote: McAr
                    What is a counter strike?

                    This is when we launch missiles after we discovered a massive blow from their side by an early warning system, but before the first nuclear charge explodes on the territory of the Russian Federation.
                    The task is to prevent "disarming", i.e. impact on missiles on launchers.
                    1. +1
                      18 February 2019 11: 37
                      Quote: Spade
                      This is when we launch missiles after we discovered a massive blow from their side by an early warning system, but before the first nuclear charge explodes on the territory of the Russian Federation.
                      The task is to prevent "disarming", i.e. impact on missiles on launchers.

                      Okay! We have bombed Europe. Europe bombed us with the hands of the USA. What's in the bottom line? Washington's dream come true - they are intact, and their adversary Russia is in ruins. Yes, plus how much dough can be removed by providing "assistance" to Europe.

                      Do you not understand that if there is no INF Treaty, then NATO will place them along the perimeter of our borders? Where will we be able to deploy INFs to threaten US territory as well?
                      1. +1
                        18 February 2019 11: 44
                        Quote: McAr
                        Good! We bombed Europe. Europe bombed us with US hands. What is the bottom line? The embodied dream of Washington - they are wholeheartedly, and their opponent Russia is in ruins.

                        Why do you think so? It’s just that all ICBMs will fly away in the USA, and not just a part of how this can happen now. And in Europe and the like, medium and small missiles.
                      2. +1
                        18 February 2019 11: 56
                        Quote: Spade
                        Why do you think so? It’s just that all ICBMs will fly away in the USA, and not just a part of how this can happen now. And in Europe and the like, medium and small missiles.

                        ICBMs are much easier to intercept than INF. In addition, some of them have already been destroyed by cruise missiles according to the scenario.

                        It is such an illusion that can arise overseas. Cruise missiles destroy Russian land-based ICBMs or most of them. Russia spends its INF in Europe - the United States can’t reach. The remaining Russian land-based and naval ICBMs on the submarine are intercepted.

                        The INF Treaty did not give such opportunities - the United States could not destroy all Russian land-based ICBMs, it simply did not reach. There is no agreement, and NATO medium-range missiles deployed along the perimeter of the Russian Federation cover the entire territory of Russia.

                        So we need the INF Treaty more than the United States.
                      3. +2
                        18 February 2019 14: 49
                        Is it easier to intercept an ICBM than an INF? Since when?
                      4. +1
                        18 February 2019 21: 18
                        The ICBM itself is larger, it flies higher and longer, therefore it gives more time and response to missile defense systems.
                      5. 0
                        19 February 2019 14: 45
                        It flies higher and much faster, and cruise missiles, which you position as destroyers of ground ICBMs, are generally slow aerodynamic targets.
                2. +1
                  18 February 2019 18: 52
                  Quote: Spade
                  Uh ... Once again, the INF Treaty does not prohibit the use of air and sea-based missiles.

                  It is very difficult to discreetly accumulate a large number of sea and air carriers near the borders of Russia. But if the missiles are at the base on the ground, then they cost a week, a month, another. The enemy gets used to them and then they start ...
                  1. +1
                    18 February 2019 19: 08
                    Quote: sabotage
                    It is very difficult to discreetly accumulate a large number of sea and air carriers near the borders of Russia.

                    Sorry, there were 464 ground-based missile launchers in Europe during the Cold War. These are approximately 8 (eight) Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. Let me remind you that 11 destroyers of this type participated in the second war in Iraq.
                    About aviation, I will not say anything. She does not need to "accumulate", she is already in place.
                    1. 0
                      18 February 2019 21: 21
                      I add - on one of their submarines 154 Tomahawk and not the fact that we will spot such submarines, for example in the Kara Sea. It’s not even a fact that we will detect the launch and flight of the Tomahawks until they begin to fall on our cities.
                    2. 0
                      18 February 2019 22: 10
                      Quote: Spade
                      Sorry, there were 464 ground-based missile launchers in Europe during the Cold War. These are approximately 8 (eight) Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. Let me remind you that 11 destroyers of this type participated in the second war in Iraq.
                      About aviation, I will not say anything. She does not need to "accumulate", she is already in place.

                      And when was the last time 8 arly berks came to our waters unnoticed? And at least they should simultaneously enter the Baltic, and the Black Sea, and the White / Kara / Barents. After all, you need not just shoot somewhere, you need to cover most launchers. And they are a little spread out over the territory.
              2. 0
                19 February 2019 04: 29
                Quote: McAr
                Destroy. Together with tens of millions of farmers, steelworkers and other civilians. So in Europe it is not for nothing that they are afraid of us? No wonder they consider the main evil of the planet? No wonder they want to eliminate us? Curious chess you have ...

                What protection method do you propose? Detonate these nuclear warheads and nuclear warheads on their territory? To destroy your own population?
                One powerful argument against countering the destruction of millions is bilateral treaties and the elimination of the deployment of American missiles on its territory ... belay
                Or is your correct world offering the deployment of American missiles on both sides of the conflict? wassat
                1. +1
                  19 February 2019 05: 00
                  Quote: ROSS 42
                  Quote: McAr
                  Destroy. Together with tens of millions of farmers, steelworkers and other civilians. So in Europe it is not for nothing that they are afraid of us? No wonder they consider the main evil of the planet? No wonder they want to eliminate us? Curious chess you have ...

                  What protection method do you propose?

                  Now? I'm afraid it's too late to offer anything. A new round of the arms race is provided to us. But now it will not be NATO against the Warsaw Pact, but increased by 12 NATO countries against Russia.

                  Foreign policy is a continuation of domestic. How dull and headless our domestic policy is, you know no worse than me. The same is external. Our diplomacy lacks foresight - earlier it was necessary to think, take appropriate steps and do everything so that the Russian Federation had at least one ally near the US borders. If Washington knew that the Russian Federation could place the INF in somewhere in the Caribbean, they would think a thousand times whether to leave the INF Treaty.
                  1. 0
                    19 February 2019 06: 15
                    Quote: McAr
                    If Washington knew that the Russian Federation could place the INF INFORMATION somewhere in the Caribbean ...

                    And if my grandmother had a bolt - she would not be a grandmother.

                    From a certain moment the Russian Federation became too expensive for the "bases" in the Caribbean. And what now - lie down and die?

                    Quote: McAr
                    How dull and headless our domestic policy is, you know no worse than me. Same and external

                    Politics is not yours, stop shaming.

                    Math is not yours either:

                    Quote: McAr
                    cruise missile flight time from Latvia to Moscow 2 minutes

                    Yeah, for sure ... if you go to bed like that at 20 - well, a trifle laughing

                    Quote: McAr
                    senseless

                    The Russian language, too, the campaign, is not yours ... and what are you doing here at all - I do not understand request
      3. +1
        18 February 2019 14: 19
        The main thing is that the enemy should be sure, not in the least, never doubted that if he "twitches," we will definitely, without alternative, use all the military power that we possess. While it is enough even for overseas friends. With such his "confidence" Russia will be able to, will have the opportunity to improve the technical part and increase the number of weapons, further strengthening this "confidence". And it's really bad if she (confidence) disappears from our "friends"
      4. 0
        18 February 2019 14: 34
        I think that the 500s will see launches of the RSMD from any territory adjacent to Russia - in the first seconds of launch.
  2. 0
    18 February 2019 06: 58
    "The modernization of the missile defense system A-135" Amur "is being carried out, which provides for the production and introduction of various products of new types."

    Given that the system was built in ser. - the end of the 80s - it's high time. Just in those years he took part in the construction of one of the objects.
    1. +1
      18 February 2019 15: 31
      07 23.12.2018 Nudol SPU (source) Plesetsk Seventh launch, fifth successful launch, second launch from SPU. According to Western data, the rocket flew in 17 minutes 1864 miles (about 3500 km).
      This news was before the New Year, at once in several sources. One of them: http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-806.html Complex 14C033 Nudol, rocket 14A042

      Posted by: DIMMI
      Created: 10.05.2014/21/04 40:XNUMX:XNUMX
      Changed: 20.01.2019/20/42 51:XNUMX:XNUMX PM
      Comments: 0
      Categories: LAND / Missile defense systems / 14Ts033 OCD Nudol, rocket 14A042 /
      DATA FOR 2019 (standard replenishment)
      Complex 14TS033 / OKR "Nudol", rocket 14A042 - PL-19
  3. 0
    18 February 2019 07: 16
    Earlier, during an alliance, in discussions with friends, it was believed that they say it’s worthless to live next to the industrial facilities of the military-industrial complex. Like the first to go to a different place, for obvious reasons - the first goal. But in the last, about eight years, you understand, you live under the roof of a missile defense system, and aviation in the region can calmly (relatively) sniff, for example, whitewaters. For obvious reasons, the author could not even roughly name the brands and quantity of aviation in the regions. We are forced to build up technology, and the latest in science is sacred, even in a quiet time. And yet, no matter how things were inside the country - I really would not want to lose those people (clearly whom) who contribute to the development of our Army.
  4. +4
    18 February 2019 11: 50
    Our overseas "partners" do not cover the capital, but organize the protection of bases and position areas of ICBMs, strategic industrial centers, and we have no other country except the first capital. Such a concentration of everything and everything in one metropolis in a very limited space, as well as 10% of the population, is a clear and direct threat to the existence and territorial integrity of the country. Not a single air defense and missile defense system is able to provide a 100% probability of protection against a massive strike. Moreover, in this case, the attacking forces' task is facilitated by this very hypertrophied concentration of everything and everything in a limited space, which means that the concentration of air defense missile systems can be increased many times even with a decrease in forces and means attacks with guaranteed destruction of state, military, financial management, destruction of command and control structures of headquarters and the central command and control center of the combat arms. There is no need to wage a prolonged continental war like the last century, however, our liberals have already sold and betrayed us without a war, we don’t just have to wait a bit to fight with us, the corrupt ruling elite (cattle-breeding term) will destroy us if it doesn’t sell us, then it will destroy us. which is what he has been doing for 30 years, having reached the trough.
  5. 0
    18 February 2019 12: 39
    The detection height of 40 thousand km is not too much?)
    1. 0
      18 February 2019 14: 38
      Geostationary orbit 35 786 km
      1. +1
        18 February 2019 17: 36
        With a range of 3700 km, he has an interesting radiation pattern ...
  6. +1
    18 February 2019 13: 29
    In Soviet times, there were Air Defense Forces of the Country. The fighter aircraft of the Air Defense Forces of the Country had 68 airfields, on which stood the aviation garrisons of the Air Defense Forces of the Country. I don’t know how many air garrisons there were in the Moscow Air Defense District, but in the building where I served there were the Kursk and Efremov garrisons that covered Moscow from the south. Now the danger of raids from the south and southwest has increased many times, but only Khotilovo from the north and Savasleyka from the east have been preserved. Cuban with aerial acrobats have nothing to do with it. There is nothing to say about the air defense of the remaining regions of Russia, at all.
    1. Qas
      +1
      18 February 2019 13: 57
      Are we going to defend one Moscow? In 1812, when a French leader with his army went to Russia, they burned Moscow, almost to ashes. Versions of who and why did this several but not the essence, Moscow was burned. Russia survived and until recently developed. What are we only protecting one region? The rest of the country is not important?
      1. -1
        18 February 2019 14: 58
        There is a variant of the "National Missile Defense System", which includes satellites for detecting missile launches around the globe, 3000 silo launchers throughout the country, long-range interception for missiles based on the A 926, with nine maneuvering interceptors each, the second echelon of about 140 divisions , on the basis of the modernized Antey 4500 or the new C 500 and the third echelon of 1000 launchers, to destroy warheads, at altitudes up to 45 kilometers - the estimated cost of the program is 6 trillion rubles - 8 years of work at least. But as you can see for the budget, this is not an option.
      2. -1
        18 February 2019 21: 01
        The agreement was about limiting missile defense (now I do not know whether or not) for one missile defense area in our country and in the states. We chose the defense of the capital, the Americans are defending their missiles.
        1. +2
          18 February 2019 21: 42
          Now not valid.
    2. -1
      18 February 2019 14: 41
      There is air defense and missile defense in the regions, the new air defense system will eliminate this deficiency in missile defense.
  7. +1
    18 February 2019 19: 01
    I read - laughed!
    Where in the neighboring regions are many fighter jets? Take the Tver region. Of the three aviation fighter regiments (Khotilovo, Andreapol, Bezhetsk), only one flown in Khotilovo. And the Su-30SM was not there. Only the MiG-31, Su-27SM and Su-27 that change to the Su-35S.
    That's all! The air defense system is not here, and this is the most dangerous direction in terms of enemy aircraft attack from the Baltic states and cruise missiles.
  8. +1
    18 February 2019 19: 29
    The modernization of air defense units so far is associated with the decommissioning of aging S-300PM anti-aircraft missile systems

    What is it to write off immediately? You can put on the least threatened areas, or on the extreme to put the same Syria. But do not throw in the trash
    This time, the regiments of the 1st Air Defense Division will have to master the latest S-500 systems. While this SAM is at the stage of development work

    In fact, the S-500 is already at the test stage, and is approaching the final stages

    PS In general, we need more population and greater dispersion over the vast expanses of our vast homeland. And then 70% came to the west of Russia - of course it’s easier for the enemy to beat when everything is so tight. Ideally, it would more or less evenly populate the entire southern and central strip of Russia. And do something with demographics. According to current trends, by the end of the century, 70 million will remain on such a huge territory. A sort of Mongolia at maximum speed

    I want at least half a billion Russians. Ideally, a billion +
    1. -2
      18 February 2019 19: 53
      "According to current trends, by the end of the century, 70 million of us will remain on such a huge territory. A kind of Mongolia at maximum speed" These latest trends have been trying for 30 years that by the end of a year there will be 100 of us, no 90, no 70, no 50 and so on and so on - and the population is growing and growing, the next census will clearly show this.
      1. +1
        18 February 2019 20: 58
        Quote: Vadim237
        and the population is growing and growing

        It grew only in a short period of 2010-2013, and by a few ~ 80 thousand per year. And then, partly due to migrants. Another 2 with something lama gave Crimea. All the rest of the time in 28 years of modern Russia, the number of people fell and grew old. Urgent action is needed because it is a snowball
        1. 0
          18 February 2019 21: 30
          Vadim lives inspirationally and selflessly - his population is growing from year to year, the number of S-400 is growing, even there will be a S-500, which will surely beat everything that flies to us, even, probably, the Russian economy and the people's salary are also stable are growing.
          1. 0
            19 February 2019 12: 26
            Unlike you, pessimists, I rationally look at things, believe in the best, and it happens, and the number of C 400 divisions is increasing every year, the air defense re-equipment program until 2020 is more than successful.
  9. -3
    18 February 2019 19: 33
    So far, only the Su-30SM and the upgraded MiG-31 can be considered the newest at the bases of the Moscow region and the surrounding areas

    Oh well, really not far from Moscow there are no best fighters in the world (before the Su-57) Su-35? I do not believe
  10. -4
    18 February 2019 19: 34
    This means that the results of the first enemy attack will be far from desired, and the Russian armed forces and civilian structures will remain operational for a retaliatory strike and subsequent actions

    Forget about retaliatory strike, it will not be. Of course, the strike will be reciprocal, as soon as our system is spotted by the massive launch of US strategic nuclear forces
  11. -3
    18 February 2019 22: 51
    "Lapti" !!!! Plan A. Moscow has already been taken, in Moscow itself there are already at least 500.000 Western adherents living quietly, supporting Putin in public, shouting "Crimea is ours !!" in general, they pretend to be patriots, but in fact in the X hour they will become completely different people. Plan b . And why shoot exactly in Moscow !! ?? Didn't you ask this question !? The missiles will sharply change course and fall around Moscow 400-600 km, and as a result, Moscow itself, together with its factories and research institutes, will cease to live, and the regions themselves will carry tablecloths with bread and salt to NATO members, there are such thieving governors that the hope for their patriotism is doubtful, so what do you think "Lapti" !!!!!!!!!
  12. 0
    19 February 2019 01: 24
    Quote: McAr
    On the other hand, we need the INF Treaty, and not the USA, since the flight time of cruise missiles from Latvia to Moscow is 2 minutes

    Actually not cruise missiles, but ballistic missiles. In two minutes, a cruise missile will pass a little over 30 km ...

    Quote: McAr
    And the deployment of medium and short range cruise missiles in NATO countries

    Short-range missiles are missiles with a range of up to 150 km. Why use them? The agreement, by the way, spoke about missiles LESS range, not small. And missiles with a range of 500 to 1000 km fell into this category

    Quote: McAr
    ICBMs are much easier to intercept than INF. In addition, some of them have already been destroyed by cruise missiles according to the scenario.

    Long-range missile defense one FIG that intercept. ICBM or INF. Moreover, it is easier to intercept medium-range missiles, in particular ballistic ones, since they have a lower speed than ICBMs. And they can be intercepted by complexes of the S-300 / S-400 type, which are simply not able to intercept ICBMs. Means of interception will be trite more than means of intercepting ICBMs

    If the calculations will sleep or thump - then easily destroyed. But do not forget that positional areas are not located on the border. Before these Pr cruise missiles will have to fly at least half an hour through the territory, not the desert, where there are no air defense systems ...

    Quote: McAr
    Do you not understand that if there is no INF Treaty, then NATO will place them along the perimeter of our borders?

    NATO can place around the perimeter of our borders. Maybe, but not the fact that it will place in the reach of our percussion instruments

    Quote: Vadim237
    I think that the 500s will see launches of the RSMD from any territory adjacent to Russia - in the first seconds of launch.

    Uh-huh, when they are still beyond the radio horizon. Don't turn a non-existent product into another "wunderwaffe"

    Quote: Xazarin
    The agreement was about limiting missile defense (now I do not know whether or not) for one missile defense area in our country and in the states. We chose the defense of the capital, the Americans are defending their missiles.

    No longer valid. And they defended their missiles all year 2 or 3. Then the system was mothballed and was no longer used
    1. 0
      19 February 2019 12: 29
      And you don’t have to turn anything up and invent anything, since there are already over-the-horizon radars for detecting cruise missiles, and even the C 500 remained in the iron only with tests.
    2. -1
      19 February 2019 12: 33
      Quote: Old26
      Actually not cruise missiles, but ballistic missiles. In two minutes, a cruise missile will pass a little over 30 km ...

      Let this my mistake be the biggest problem of the Russian Federation. Good?

      Pershing, the production of which is now unlimited, even under the conditions of the Warsaw Pact, reached Moscow in less than 10 minutes. How many seconds will NOW from Latvia count yourself. And do not forget to report. And then, you see, I’m wrong, but you’ll definitely calculate everything.

      Quote: Old26
      In the agreement, incidentally, it was said about RADIUS rockets, rather than short ones.

      Let this be the second of the possible problems of the Russian Federation. Good?

      Quote: Old26
      NATO can place along the perimeter of our borders. Maybe, but not the fact that it will place in the reach of our percussion instruments

      Yes, the hedgehog is clear that it will not post. The United States and NATO as a whole greatly respect sovereignty and other democratic institutions. They will apologize to God for test tubes and for Iraq. You just have to wait for the symphonic cancer orchestra on the mountain to whistle after a rain on Thursday, and that’s all.

      Shashechki you or go?
  13. +1
    19 February 2019 01: 39
    The article is very weak. The author simply copied the information from Wekipedia. It is noticeable that he does not understand air defense / missile defense. S-300 / S-400 are systems, not complexes. The A-35 missile defense system was in trial operation and did not play a special role in Moscow's missile defense system. Does the author seriously believe that the Swifts and the Knights are on alert?
  14. 0
    19 February 2019 03: 21
    "According to various sources, up to 68 missiles are simultaneously on duty."
    Isn't 68 enough to protect against a massive ICBM strike?
    1. 0
      19 February 2019 12: 30
      Yes, that’s the point - there should be at least 10 times more launch mines around Moscow and the surrounding areas.
      1. 0
        19 February 2019 15: 01
        That's for sure. And it is desirable that there would still be missiles of the long-range intercept.