Military Review

Air defense of the Republic of Korea. Airspace control radar systems and missile systems of object air defense and missile defense

117

Before starting a review of South Korea's air defense system, I want to tell you how the idea arose to make a publication on this topic. Once again I am convinced that the comments of some visitors to the "Military Review" are an inexhaustible source of inspiration. In the past, after the categorical statements of a very "patriotic" resident of fraternal Belarus, who stated that before the purchase of the Russian S-400 air defense systems, Turkey did not have its own air defense system, I made a review from several parts on stories development and condition Air Defense of the Turkish Republic.


However, this comrade, when he was told that an article had been written especially for him, literally stated the following:

Thank you - as an author, I will definitely not read you.

Well, I also learned along the way that my publications are "Russophobic", and I myself live in Haifa.

Recently in the section "News»In the publication "In the West, they note the complete digitization of the S-350 Vityaz air defense system another commenter wrote:

Why are American bases in Kazakhstan protecting the KM-SAM of the Almaz-Antey development?

It was after such another example of Russian "patriotic" thought that the idea was born to make an overview of the air defense system of the Republic of Korea and consider how and what the American bases in this country are covered with. It is clear that the "patriots" will most likely remain unconvinced, they rarely look at the "Armament" section. But I would like to hope that a significant part of the readers will still be interested in how the air defense and missile defense system of the Republic of Korea is built, what objects cover and where the KM-SAM air defense systems are deployed.

Since the middle of the last century, Seoul has been Washington's closest ally, a large American military contingent has been deployed on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and close defense cooperation is being conducted between the countries. Until the mid-1980s, the South Korean army was almost fully equipped weapons American-made or produced under American licenses at national enterprises. The development of high-tech industries: mechanical engineering, aircraft construction and electronics made it possible to move on to the creation and production of our own models of military equipment and weapons. At the same time, the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan regularly purchases certain types of defense products abroad, but at the same time the United States continues to be the main partner in military-technical cooperation. The Republic of Korea, with a relatively small area of ​​the country, is among the ten countries with the highest defense budget. In 2019, about $ 44 billion was spent on military needs, which makes it possible to equip the armed forces with the most modern and high-tech weapons.

The South Korean radio and anti-aircraft missile forces are part of the Air Force. In addition to long-range and medium-range air defense systems, designed to provide object air defense and missile defense, the ground forces of the Republic of Kazakhstan have short-range anti-aircraft missile systems and rapid-fire small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery installations. South Korean URO destroyers make a significant contribution to the provision of air defense of coastal areas.

Radar airspace control of the Republic of Korea


Currently, the territory south of the 38th parallel is very tightly controlled by means of radar control. Currently, there are 18 permanent radar posts operating in South Korea. Four stationary posts are located at a distance of less than 20 km from the line of demarcation with the DPRK, that is, within the reach of North Korean long-range artillery.


Layout of radar posts in the Republic of Korea

The presented diagram shows that more than half of the radars are located in areas bordering the DPRK. Radars located on the coast and islands also control part of the territory of the PRC and Japan.


Satellite image of Google Earth: a radar post on Pennyondo Island

Most of the stationary radar posts with high-power radars are located on natural heights, are well equipped in engineering terms and are adapted for long-term combat duty.


Satellite image of Google Earth: a radar post on Jeju Island

According to information published in open sources, the Command of the Radio-Technical Troops, which is organizationally subordinate to the Air Force, has up to 25 medium and long-range radars at its disposal. The Radio Engineering Command is entrusted with the task of guiding subordinate forces and means designed to ensure constant control of the airspace over the territory of the country and adjacent sea areas, as well as to detect, identify and track aerodynamic and ballistic targets, aim fighters at them or issue target designations to ground-based weapons. Subordinate to the command are two groups of control and management, two radio engineering brigades for airspace control and a separate squadron of AWACS aircraft. Taking into account the area of ​​South Korea, even if 2/3 of the existing radars fail, the remaining ones guarantee the presence of a continuous radar field over the entire territory of the country and will ensure control of the southern regions of the DPRK and the sea water area at a distance of 150-200 km.

The main part of the radars that constantly monitor the airspace of the Republic of Kazakhstan and adjacent territories are new stations that meet modern requirements. However, there are exceptions: until recently, the AN / MPQ-43 radars, built in the mid-1960s and delivered to South Korea along with the American long-range air defense systems MIM-14 Nike-Hercules, were in operation. Approximately 15 fixed radar posts are equipped with FPS-303K radars from LG Precision. Since 303, the FPS-2012K radars have been replacing the AN / TPS-43 radars produced in the United States during the Cold War.

Air defense of the Republic of Korea. Airspace control radar systems and missile systems of object air defense and missile defense

Antenna post of radar FPS-303K

The FPS-303K radar with AFAR is installed permanently under a radio-transparent dome, which protects against adverse meteorological factors. According to the information published on the manufacturer's website, the three-coordinate radar can function in automatic mode, transmitting data on air targets directly to the air defense command post. The FPS-303K radar operates in a frequency range of 2-3 GHz and, when located on a hill, is capable of detecting a MiG-21 fighter flying at low altitude, at a distance of 100 km. The maximum detection range of medium-altitude targets exceeds 200 km.

Also on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan there are four AN / TPS-63 radars. This radar operates in the frequency range 1,25-1,35 GHz, its instrumental range is 370 km.


Radar AN / TPS-63 on position

Unlike the stationary FPS-303K, the AN / TPS-63 radar manufactured by Northrop Grumman can be relocated within a reasonable time and used to eliminate "holes" in the radar field.

The Republic of Korea is a member of the elite club of countries with long-range radar patrol aircraft. The Air Force has four Boeing 737 AEW & C (E-7A) AWACS aircraft. This aircraft was originally created by order of Australia on the basis of a passenger Boeing 737-700ER and in terms of its capabilities is an intermediate option between the E-3 Sentry (E-767) and the E-2 Hawkeye. The use of a relatively inexpensive Boeing 737 airliner and a more compact, although not so productive and long-range radar as a base, made the AWACS aircraft much cheaper.

The basis of the Boeing 737 AEW & C (E-737) radar system is the AFAR radar with electronic beam scanning. Unlike the American E-3 and the Japanese E-767, the aircraft uses a multifunctional MESA radar with a fixed antenna and a laser defense system against missiles with an IR seeker AN / AAQ-24 by Northrop Grumman. Communication equipment and electronic intelligence was developed by the Israeli company EIta Electronics.


South Korean aircraft DROLO E-737

To provide a 360 ° field of view, the aircraft uses four separate antennas: two large on the plane's axis and two small ones that look forward and backward. Large antennas are capable of viewing a 130 ° sector to the side of the aircraft, while smaller antennas monitor 50 ° sectors in the nose and tail. The radar system operates in the 1-2 GHz frequency range, has a range of 370 km and is capable of simultaneously tracking 180 air targets, automatically dropping information on ground command posts and aiming interceptors at them. The integrated electronic reconnaissance system detects radio sources at a distance of more than 500 km.


Jobs operators E-737

An aircraft with a maximum take-off weight of just over 77000 kg is capable of a maximum speed of 900 km / h and patrolling for 9 hours at a speed of 750 km / h at an altitude of 12 km. The crew is 6-10 people, including 2 pilots.

On November 7, 2006, Boeing received a $ 1,6 billion contract with South Korea for the delivery of four E-737 aircraft in 2012. The Israeli company IAI Elta also took part in the competition with its AWACS aircraft based on the Gulfstream G550 business jet. However, it should be understood that the defense capability of the Republic of Korea is very dependent on the United States, which has a large military contingent and a number of military bases in this country. Under these conditions, even if the Israelis offered a more successful car on more favorable terms, it was very difficult for them to win.


Satellite image of Google Earth: E-737 aircraft at Gimhae airbase

The first aircraft for the South Korean Air Force was delivered to Gimhae Air Force Base near Busan on December 13, 2011. After passing a six-month test cycle and eliminating the shortcomings, he was officially recognized as fit for combat duty. The last fourth aircraft was delivered on October 24, 2012. Thus, less than 6 years have passed since the conclusion of the contract for the supply of modern AWACS aircraft to its full implementation.

Currently, South Korean E-737s carry out regular patrols along the borders with the DPRK, and also conduct reconnaissance of air and surface targets and identify the location of land and ship radars during flights over the Yellow and East China Seas.


South Korean aircraft AWACS E-737, accompanied by an F-15K fighter

At least one plane takes to the air almost every day. During flights over areas in which there is a risk of interception of an AWACS aircraft by a fighter aviation potential enemy, he is accompanied by heavy South Korean fighters F-15K.

Medium and long-range anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems deployed in the Republic of Korea


Direct combat control of the actions of anti-aircraft missile batteries is carried out from the central command post of the Air Force and Air Defense, located at the Osan airbase. The Air Defense Command is mainly entrusted with the functions of administrative management of anti-aircraft missile units and their material and technical supply. Currently, the Joint Air Force and Air Defense of the Republic of Korea has three anti-aircraft missile brigades equipped with complexes: MIM-104D Patriot (PAC-2 / GEM), MIM-23В I-Hawk, Cheolmae-2 (KM-SAM). To cover the positions of medium and long-range air defense systems, as well as radar posts from air attack weapons operating at low altitudes, short-range complexes KP-SAM Shin-Gung and Mistral are used, as well as towed anti-aircraft artillery mounts 20-mm KM167A3 Vulcan and 35- mm GDF-003.

The main task of anti-aircraft missile brigades is to provide cover for the most important political, administrative and military-industrial centers of the country in cooperation with fighter aircraft, which primarily include the capital region. The brigades have a mixed composition, include divisions of medium, long and short-range air defense systems.

In the past, the long-range MIM-14 Nike-Hercules air defense systems played a significant role in providing the air defense of South Korea. The first stationary positions of "Nike-Hercules" appeared in Korea in the late 1960s, after the massive deployment of Soviet ICBMs devalued numerous air defense systems that were part of the air defense of the North American continent. You can read more about this here: "How Soviet ICBMs Eliminated American Air Defense Systems".


Training launch of the MIM-14B rocket in 1974

The US-made Nike-Hercules air defense system included bulky radars for detecting and tracking air targets, massive launchers with hydraulic lifts and was actually stationary. Its relocation was difficult and time-consuming. In total, five MIM-14 Nike-Hercules batteries were deployed in South Korea, which controlled almost the entire territory of the country and a significant part of the DPRK's airspace. The Nike-Hercules battery had its own radar facilities and two launch sites with four launchers each.


The layout in South Korea of ​​the MIM-14 Nike-Hercules air defense system and their affected areas as of 2009

As part of the Nike-Hercules air defense missile system, a solid-propellant missile defense system was used with a launch mass of about 4860 kg and a length of 12 m, it had a passport range for hitting air targets up to 130 km with an altitude reach of 30 km. The minimum range and height of destruction of a target flying at speeds up to 800 m / s are 13 and 1,5 km, respectively.


Anti-aircraft missile MIM-14 on display at the South Korean Museum

However, in practice, a very large anti-aircraft missile with a radio command guidance system with a fairly high probability, in the absence of organized interference, could destroy an air target of the Il-28 type flying at subsonic speed at an average altitude at a distance of no more than 70 km. At a longer range, Nike-Hercules was able to fight such large and low-maneuverable aircraft as Tu-16 and Tu-95. This is due to the fact that the radio command guidance scheme in the case of a large distance from the tracking radar gave a large error. The capabilities of the complex to defeat low-flying targets were insufficient.

South Korea was in the 21st century one of the few countries where the MIM-14 Nike-Hercules air defense system was on alert. Maintaining the hardware part of the air defense system, the first modification of which entered service in 1958, at the final stage of its life cycle, was associated with great difficulties. Although the MIM-14B / C Nike-Hercules modification, also known as the "Improved Hercules", had improved operational and combat characteristics compared to the first purely stationary prototype, the hardware part of the complexes deployed in South Korea had a large share of vacuum devices ... This negatively affected reliability, increased operating costs and increased energy consumption. In addition, the Nike-Hercules was single-channel and could not simultaneously fire at multiple targets. In terms of noise immunity, the air defense system, designed in the 1950s, no longer met modern requirements.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the MIM-14 Nike-Hercules air defense system in the vicinity of Incheon International Airport, the image was taken in October 2013, shortly before the decommissioning of the complex

Nike-Hercules' service in the Republic of Korea continued until 2013. However, given the significant number of short-range ballistic missiles in North Korea, the command of the South Korean army decided not to dispose of the obsolete missiles, but to convert them into operational-tactical missiles, called Hyunmoo-1 (translated as "Guardian of the Northern Sky"). The first test launch at a range of 180 km took place in 1986. The conversion of the decommissioned MIM-14 anti-aircraft missiles into the OTR began in the mid-1990s. A modified version of this ballistic missile with an inertial guidance system is capable of delivering a warhead weighing 500 kg to a range of about 200 km. To launch ballistic missiles, both standard launchers of the Nike-Hercules air defense missile system can be used, as well as specially created towed launchers.

Another "dinosaur" of the Cold War, still on alert in South Korea, is the MIM-23В I-Hawk air defense system. The operation of the Hawk family air defense systems, supplied as part of American military assistance, in the armed forces of the Republic of Korea began in the early 1970s. The first low-altitude air defense systems belonging to the American army were deployed on the Korean Peninsula in the mid-1960s.


Launcher SAM "Hawk" 38th Air Defense Brigade of the US Army

In the 1980s and 1990s, in the south of Korea, there were more than 30 positions of the Hawk air defense system of the South Korean and American armies. In the late 1990s, the American Advanced Hawk air defense systems were decommissioned, and at present, the modernized low-altitude MIM-23В I-Hawk systems belonging to the Air Force of the Republic of Kazakhstan are deployed in Korea. At the beginning of the 21st century, more than 20 MIM-23V I-Hawk batteries were in stationary positions in South Korea. Currently, eight South Korean batteries are in service, deployed in the southern part of the country.


The layout and the affected area of ​​the MIM-23B I-Hawk in South Korea as of 2009

In the early 1990s, the South Korean air defense systems "Improved Hawk" underwent a modernization program and ensure the destruction of air targets at a distance of 1 to 40 km and an altitude of 0,03 to 18 km in a difficult jamming environment. Each battery is connected to a centralized automated air situation warning system, but if necessary, it can operate autonomously.


Launcher and radar elements of the MIM-23 Hawk air defense system

The anti-aircraft missile battery has: a command post, an AN / MPQ-62 radar, an AN / MPQ-64 impulse radar and two fire platoons, a technical support unit with transport-charging vehicles and other auxiliary equipment. The fire platoon consists of an AN / MPQ-61 target illumination radar and three launchers with three missiles on each.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the MIM-23В I-Hawk air defense system in the vicinity of Ulsan

All the MIM-23В I-Hawk air defense missile systems that have survived to this day in the RK are deployed at higher elevations, which allows them to more effectively fight low-altitude air targets. In the past, during the exercises, the air defense units of the Republic of Kazakhstan regularly practiced the transfer and deployment of low-altitude mobile systems in reserve positions.


Google earth snapshot: SAM MIM-23В I-Hawk in an emergency position in the Kengi area

Currently, the South Korean complexes "Improved Hawk" are close to full resource depletion and will be decommissioned within the next few years.

After North Korea created its own analogue of the Soviet operational-tactical missile R-1980 in the late 17s, the question arose of protecting important military and civilian facilities located on the territory of the Republic of Korea from missile strikes.


The position of the American air defense system "Patriot" in South Korea

In the mid-1990s, the leadership of the US Department of Defense decided to deploy the Patriot PAC-8 air defense system to cover the American airbases Osan and Kunsan, where the combat aircraft of the 51th Fighter Aviation Regiment and the 2st Fighter Aviation Regiment are based. Currently, US military bases are covered by Patriot PAC-3 complexes, which have higher anti-missile capabilities.


The layout and the affected area of ​​the American air defense systems of the Patriot PAC-2/3 air defense system in South Korea as of 2009

At present, four batteries of the 35th Air Defense Brigade of the US Army are deployed at the American airbases Osan, Gunsan and at the South Korean Suwon airbase. In the past, one American Patriot PAC-2 battery was stationed at the Korean Gwangju airbase. American air defense systems "Patriot" are primarily designed to protect US military facilities located in South Korea.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the Patriot PAC-3 air defense system at the Hosanne airbase

An anti-aircraft battalion can have up to six fire batteries. The Patriot battery includes: AN / MSQ-104 battery item, AN / MPQ-53 multifunctional radar (for PAC-2) or AN / MPQ-65 (for PAC-3), up to eight self-propelled or towed launchers with four MIM-104 C / D / E missiles on each, AN / MJQ-20 power supplies, communications and antenna-mast devices, transport-charging machines, a mobile maintenance point, tractors and transport vehicles.


The maximum range of destruction of aerodynamic targets exceeds 80 km, ballistic targets - 20 km. The maximum height of destruction of aerodynamic targets is up to 25 km, ballistic targets - up to 20 km.

In the mid-1990s, the leadership of the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Kazakhstan initiated a program to create its own SAM-X air defense system, which was supposed to replace the outdated Nike-Hercules. However, due to technical and financial difficulties, the South Korean anti-aircraft missile system did not leave the design stage. In connection with the need to replace the exhausted MIM-14 Nike-Hercules air defense system in 2007, the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan decided to purchase eight MIM-104D Patriot PAC-2 / GEM batteries from Germany. In 2008, former German anti-aircraft missile systems arrived at an air defense training center near the city of Daegu, where Korean crews were being prepared.


Training launch of the MIM-104D anti-aircraft missile of the South Korean Patriot PAC-2 / GEM complex

In 2015, it became known that the American corporation Raytheon received a contract worth $ 769,4 million to bring the South Korean Patriot air defense system to the level of PAC-3. It is reported that as a result of the modernization of the Patriot PAC-2 GEM purchased in Germany, their anti-missile capabilities will significantly increase. Already, the Patriot air defense system is part of the Korea Air and Missile Defense System (KAMD), a national air and missile defense system being created in South Korea.


At the moment, Patriot anti-aircraft systems are deployed in the northern and central regions of the Republic of Korea. Taking into account the limited range of interception of ballistic operational-tactical missiles, air defense systems are deployed in the vicinity of large South Korean military bases and important administrative and industrial centers. For example, three batteries are currently deployed south of downtown Seoul. For part of the Patriot air defense system, the former positions of the Hawk air defense system were used.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the MIM-104D Patriot air defense system in the vicinity of Seoul

Another modern anti-aircraft missile system on alert in the Republic of Korea is the Cheolmae-2, also known as KM-SAM. The development of this complex began in 2001, it was jointly led by the Russian concern VKO "Almaz-Antey" and the engineering design bureau "Fakel" in cooperation with the South Korean companies Samsung Techwin, LIG ​​Nex1 and Doosan DST. The customer was the South Korean government's Defense Development Agency.


Elements of SAM Cheolmae-2

The battery of the Cheolmae-2 air defense system consists of a radar, a mobile command post and 4-6 self-propelled launchers on the chassis of an off-road truck. Each SPU has eight interceptor missiles housed in transport and launch containers.

The mobile multifunctional three-coordinate radar provides simultaneous tracking of dozens of targets and the firing of several of them, as well as the transmission of target information and the necessary commands to the missile immediately before launch and during its flight.


Multifunctional radar SAM Cheolmae-2

The radar with an active phased antenna array rotating at 40 rpm operates in the X-band and provides a view of the airspace in a sector up to 80 ° vertically.


Anti-aircraft missile used in the Cheolmae-2 air defense system

According to information published in open sources, the anti-aircraft missile for the South Korean air defense system Cheolmae-2 was created on the basis of the 9M96 SAM developed by the Fakel ICB. The Korean-made missile defense system is equipped with a combined guidance system: command-inertial guidance at the initial and middle sections of the flight path and active radar at the final one. A rocket with a length of 4,61 m, a diameter of 0,275 m and a mass of 400 kg can perform maneuvers with an overload of up to 50g. The range is up to 40 km, the height is up to 20 km. It is reported that the Cheolmae-2 air defense system has anti-missile capabilities. But it is absolutely obvious that the effectiveness of a complex with a relatively short firing range when used against ballistic missiles will be much inferior to longer-range systems.

All elements of the Cheolmae-2 air defense system have been mass-produced in South Korea since 2015. The massive deployment of this type of anti-aircraft systems began in 2017.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the Cheolmae-2 air defense system in the Chungchon area

As of 2019, 10 Cheolmae-2 batteries have been deployed in South Korea. All of them are located on natural heights, on the former positions of the "Improved Hawk" air defense system. However, two positions are known, on which elements of the Cheolmae-2 and MIM-23В I-Hawk air defense systems are placed side by side.


Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the Cheolmae-2 and MIM-23В I-Hawk air defense systems in the Gimpo area

The diagram below shows that the new Cheolmae-2 anti-aircraft systems are deployed in areas bordering North Korea. In the event of an armed conflict with the DPRK, they should become a barrier to the hopelessly obsolete in their bulk, but from this no less dangerous North Korean combat aircraft.


The layout of the Cheolmae-2 air defense system in the Republic of Korea

Some Cheolmae-2 batteries are located less than 30 km from the border with the DPRK. Thus, taking into account the coordinates of the deployment points and the firing range, the assertion that the Cheolmae-2 air defense systems cover the American bases located in the central part of the country is absolutely not true. Although the Republic of Korea and the United States maintain close allied relations, it is clear that the anti-aircraft systems of the Republic of Korea and the United States will primarily oppose aerodynamic and ballistic targets aimed at their own facilities.

South Korean missile destroyers, which have medium-range missiles in their armament, play a significant role in coastal air defense. In total, the RK Navy has 12 URO destroyers, the most modern of which are three ships of the King Sejong (KDX-III) class.


South Korean destroyer "King Sejong" (DDG-991)

The King Sejong-class destroyers are analogous to the US Arleigh Burke-class URO destroyers. They are equipped with the American Aegis BIUS and the AN / SPY-1D multifunctional radar. The first destroyer was commissioned in December 2008, the second in August 2010, and the third in August 2012.


Satellite image of Google Earth: a destroyer of the "King Sejong" anchored in the water area of ​​the Busan Naval Base

In addition to other weapons, each destroyer has 80 Mk 41VLS cells, which contain SM-2 Block III missiles with a maximum range of 160 km for hitting air targets and an altitude reach of over 20 km.

Missile defense of the Republic of Korea


Foreign experts believe that as of 2020, the DPRK may have more than 30 nuclear charges. Pyongyang has at its disposal several hundred operational-tactical missiles. Also in North Korea created and successfully tested MRBM, SLBM and ICBM. These missiles, in addition to high-explosive fragmentation warheads, can be equipped with cluster, chemical and nuclear warheads, which poses a great danger to American military bases, as well as civilian and defense South Korean facilities. Although, due to the significant circular probable deviation, North Korean missiles are unsuitable for hitting point targets, in the event of their massive use and equipping with unconventional combat units, the material and human losses of South Korea can be very high. Thus, during a massive attack on Seoul with Hwaseong-6 and Nodong-1/2 operational-tactical missiles, carrying warheads equipped with Soman and VX persistent nerve agents, the number of victims can reach hundreds of thousands. and material damage - billions of dollars.

It is clear that the military-political leadership of the Republic of Kazakhstan is forced to reckon with such a threat. But the creation of a national anti-missile defense system is a very costly program, and now only experimental and design developments are underway to create South Korean missile defense systems. The modernization of some of the Patriot PAC-2 GEM air defense systems purchased in Germany to the level of PAC-3 allows with a fairly high degree of probability to intercept only single OTRs and does not provide protection in the event of their massive use. The situation is aggravated by the fact that the standard radar systems of the Patriot air defense missile system have limited capabilities to detect attacking ballistic missiles.

For timely notification of a missile attack in 2012, the Republic of Korea purchased from Israel two radars of the EL / M-2080 Green Pine radar. The contract worth about $ 280 million, in addition to the radars themselves, included the supply of spare parts and consumables, auxiliary equipment, and personnel training.


Antenna post of radar EL / M-2080 Green Pine

The EL / M-2080 Green Pine radar with AFAR has been produced by the Israeli company ELTA Systems since 1995. A radar station operating in the frequency range from 500 to 2000 MHz is capable of detecting a target at a distance of up to 500 km and can operate simultaneously in search, detection, tracking and missile guidance modes. A station in a given detection sector against the background of interference tracks more than 30 targets flying at a speed of more than 3000 m / s.


Satellite image of Google Earth: radar EL / M-2080 southwest of Chinhon

The EL / M-2080 radars were stationed on top of mountains in the central part of the country in the vicinity of Chinhon and Chohan. A new site was built for the EL / M-2080 radar located near Chinhon, and until 2017 the radar antenna post was open. 5 years after commissioning, the antenna was covered with a radio-transparent dome to protect it from adverse meteorological factors. For the early warning radar station in the Chohang area, a site was used where a stationary radar post was previously located and there was a protective radome for the antenna.


Google Earth satellite image: EL / M-2080 radar east of Chohang

In 2018, it became known about the purchase of two more EL / M-2080 Block C radars. The contract value is $ 292 million, its final implementation should be completed in 2020. It is believed that the commissioning of four Green Pine stations will allow timely registration of a missile attack from the most likely directions.

However, the deployment of the EL / M-2080 radar, which makes it possible to promptly inform about a missile attack, does not solve the problem of intercepting ballistic missiles. American and South Korean air defense systems "Patriot" are unable to guarantee coverage of most of the country. In 2014, the Americans offered to deploy the THAAD anti-missile system in South Korea.


THAAD missile defense system launcher

The AN / TPY-2 radar, which is part of the THAAD anti-missile system, operates in the X-band and is capable of detecting a ballistic missile warhead at a distance of 1000 km. An anti-missile missile with a launch weight of 900 kg is capable of destroying a target at a distance of 200 km, an interception height of 150 km.

Initially, the South Korean leadership, fearing a negative reaction from China to the deployment of the AN / TPY-2 radar, which is part of the THAAD anti-missile system, which, being under the operational control of the command of the US armed forces, could view the territory of the PRC, refused this proposal. The impetus for a change in the position of official Seoul regarding the deployment of the American missile defense system on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan was the DPRK's fourth nuclear test and flight test of the Tephodong-2016 ICBM in early 2 (under the guise of launching a North Korean satellite into low Earth orbit). In mid-2016, a US-Korean agreement was announced on the deployment of one THAAD battery (six launchers with 24 anti-missiles) in the Republic of Korea.


THAAD launcher in position in South Korea

In September 2017, a THAAD missile defense battery was deployed on a former golf course 10 kilometers west of Gumi, Soju County, North Gyeongsang Province, about 300 kilometers southeast of Seoul.


Radar AN / TPY-2 in position in South Korea

Analysis of satellite images of the THAAD anti-missile complex position indicates its temporary location. Compared to the well-equipped positions of the American Patriot air defense systems deployed in the vicinity of American airbases, this launch site is poorly prepared.


Google Earth Satellite Image: THAAD Position in Songju County

The THAAD battery located in Songju county primarily covers US military bases in South Korea, leaving a number of regions of the country, including Seoul, without its "umbrella". In this regard, in Korea, voices began to be heard louder and louder that they needed a second battery that would cover the metropolitan metropolitan area. It is not excluded that in the event the DPRK conducts new nuclear missile tests, Seoul and Washington will decide to increase the number of American missile defense systems in South Korea.

In 2016, after the next North Korean missile tests, the leadership of the Republic of Kazakhstan announced its intention to introduce American SM-3 Block IA interceptors into the ammunition load of King Sejong-class destroyers. However, no practical steps have yet been taken to implement this plan.

Apparently, the leadership of South Korea in the future decided to rely on its own long-range anti-aircraft missile system, tentatively designated L-SAM. In 2014, the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Kazakhstan reserved an amount equivalent to $ 814,3 million for R&D on the L-SAM air defense system. It is planned to start testing the complex in 2024. According to information published by the Defense Research Agency, the L-SAM air defense system, in addition to fighting enemy aircraft, should provide the upper level of the echeloned missile defense system of the Republic of Korea. The complex will be entrusted with the task of intercepting ballistic missiles at altitudes up to 60 km in the final leg of the flight. If the development and testing of the complex can be completed in accordance with the schedule, the system will be put into service in 2028.

To be continued ...
Author:
117 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 29 July 2020 18: 23 New
    10
    The air defense and missile defense of South Korea deserves respect because, having begun to create its own armed forces in the fifties and, at first, almost completely dependent on supplies "from outside", now it is a fairly independent formation that develops modern (and in air defense) weapons systems as well. Thanks for the essay, we look forward to continuing.
  2. English tarantas
    English tarantas 29 July 2020 18: 51 New
    +3
    Wow, very interesting. It is especially interesting that, after looking through all the pictures with the designation of the air defense positions and their ranges, I noticed a strange tendency - the bulk of the air defense is located in the western part of the border with the DPRK. It seems that the eastern part is less interesting to the enemy and will be a secondary direction. Interestingly, is their defense on land also tightened to the west, or is it more evenly spread out? What are the southerners planning to do in the event of a war, at least in general terms, what are they going to do with China? Judging by the caution with the placement of radars that make it possible to look at the lands of China, they hope that the Chinese will not enter the conflict openly and fully, although they hold air defense and missile defense on the west coast, and look a little to the south, despite the fact that it is almost empty from the east.
    We look forward to the continuation with impatience and now I want to know what the Japanese have there? Sergey, how do you look at such a topic for articles?
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 29 July 2020 18: 59 New
      0
      There is such a concept: theater of operations is a theater of military operations. Moreover, one of the main in the formation of the army.
      1. English tarantas
        English tarantas 29 July 2020 19: 26 New
        +1
        Yeah, with the ground forces, it's clear, I just never saw the geographical maps of Korea. But what prevents aviation from flying through mountainous areas? What prevents to place objects there - potential targets for aviation?
        1. Grazdanin
          Grazdanin 29 July 2020 19: 49 New
          -1
          It makes no sense to place air defense in the mountains.
          1. There are no large bases to be guarded.
          2. Ground-based radars in the mountains are useless. Radio waves propagate very poorly.
          1. Bongo
            30 July 2020 02: 56 New
            +7
            Quote: Grazdanin
            It makes no sense to place air defense in the mountains.

            Apparently you have not read this publication very carefully. Approximately 80% of air defense systems and almost all stationary radars are located just on the tops of the mountains.
            Quote: Grazdanin
            Ground-based radars in the mountains are useless. Radio waves propagate very poorly.

            On the contrary, the installation of radars on natural heights allows them to increase their range and monitor the underlying surface. Taking into account the operating experience in the mountains of the American AN / TPS-43 radar in Korea, the three-coordinate FPS-303K was created, which sees low-altitude targets much better.
            1. Grazdanin
              Grazdanin 30 July 2020 07: 56 New
              -1
              Naturally, the radar must be located on the tops of the dominant heights. But this is not possible everywhere. Depends on the nature of the area. I spoke specifically about the East Korean Mountains.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 30 July 2020 04: 11 New
          +2
          Korea has E-737s ... that fly along the borders.
          1. zyablik.olga
            zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 07: 16 New
            +1
            Quote: Zaurbek
            Korea has E-737s ... that fly along the borders.

            Yes, but keeping them in the air is too expensive.
    2. Bongo
      30 July 2020 02: 49 New
      +8
      Hello, hello
      Quote: English tarantass
      Having looked through all the pictures with the designation of air defense positions and their ranges, I noticed a strange tendency - the bulk of the air defense is located in the western part of the border with the DPRK.
      In areas bordering on the DPRK, we are primarily talking about the protection of the largest administrative and industrial centers of Seoul and Icheon, which are very vulnerable in the event of a surprise attack by North Korean aviation.
      Quote: English tarantass
      Interestingly, is their defense on land also tightened to the west, or is it more evenly spread out?

      In the DPRK, the demarcation line with the ROK is still called the "front line" during the war years 1950-1953. North Korean troops advanced far enough south and captured Seoul. Of course, South Korea remembers this.
      Quote: English tarantass
      what are they going to do with China?

      Given the power of the PLA Air Force and the fact that numerous Chinese short-range cruise and ballistic missiles are aimed at South Korean military facilities and American military bases of the Republic of Kazakhstan, an armed clash with the PRC will be a disaster for the Republic of Kazakhstan. In this case, Seoul has only hope for the United States.
      Quote: English tarantass
      I want to know what the Japanese have there? Sergey, how do you look at such a topic for articles?

      Alexander, you practically read my mind. Japan also has a fairly strong air defense system and is creating a national missile defense system. Such reviews, although very time consuming, I do with great pleasure. Another question is, are many readers interested in this? request
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 30 July 2020 07: 45 New
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        How many readers are interested in this?

        You see the number of your views. In% to visits to the site - a little, but in absolute numbers - decide for yourself.
      2. English tarantas
        English tarantas 30 July 2020 15: 32 New
        +3
        Another question is, are many readers interested in this?

        Of course, I want more people to read you, but do not forget that you can be read by 100 passers-by, or maybe 10 long-time readers who understand the topic and thank you for your efforts.
        1. Bongo
          30 July 2020 15: 43 New
          +3
          Quote: English tarantass
          Of course, I want more people to read you, but do not forget that you can be read by 100 passers-by, or maybe 10 long-time readers who understand the topic and thank you for your efforts.

          It's a shame not that they read little, but that they don't want to think. It often happens that "urya-patriots" are driving an outright blizzard on a neighboring branch, although on the same day a competent article (not necessarily mine) on the same topic is published in the "Analytics" or "Armament" section.
  3. Hwostatij
    Hwostatij 29 July 2020 19: 27 New
    +2
    Comrades, please tell us who is in the subject, will all these radars remain operational when a nuclear mine is detonated in the atmosphere? Thank you in advance.
    1. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 29 July 2020 22: 41 New
      +2
      Quote: Hwostatij
      Comrades, please tell us who is in the subject, will all these radars remain operational when a nuclear mine is detonated in the atmosphere? Thank you in advance.


      Yes, they will.


      It all depends on the range of the detonation of a nuclear land mine.
    2. Bongo
      30 July 2020 03: 11 New
      +6
      Quote: Hwostatij
      Comrades, please tell us who is in the subject, will all these radars remain operational when a nuclear mine is detonated in the atmosphere?

      If a nuclear mine is blown up on the territory of the DPRK, then this will not have a special impact on the state of the South Korean radar field. But in the event of an explosion of an OTR with nuclear warheads on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, South Korean radars within a radius of several tens of kilometers can be deactivated by their electromagnetic pulse. In addition, after the explosion of a nuclear charge, an ionized zone that is not visible to the radar is formed for several hours.
    3. DominickS
      DominickS 30 July 2020 05: 54 New
      0
      To detonate a nuclear mine in the atmosphere, it must still be delivered to the point of detonation. Air defense and missile defense was made for this purpose to prevent this. Something these "nuclear bombs", recently, have become almost a panacea for all troubles.
      1. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 07: 19 New
        +3
        Quote: DominickS
        In order to detonate a nuclear mine in the atmosphere, it must still be delivered to the point of detonation.

        Taking into account the number of copies of "Scud" available in the DPRK, this is quite realistic.
  4. Odysseus
    Odysseus 30 July 2020 01: 32 New
    +3
    As always, an interesting article. Thanks to the author. I would also like to read about the DPRK. But here, of course, it is more difficult with reliable information.
    As for the air defense itself. It seems to be very powerful, but against one opponent. And still not enough. More precisely, against the DPRK Air Force, even excessive, but against their ballistic missiles, it is completely insufficient.
    This is if the DPRK strikes first. But if the USA + South Caucasus attack first and cover most of the missile bases, then this air defense can intercept the remaining missiles.
    1. Bongo
      30 July 2020 03: 16 New
      +6
      Quote: Odyssey
      As always, an interesting article. Thanks to the author.

      Thank you! hi
      Quote: Odyssey
      I would also like to read about the DPRK. But here, of course, it is more difficult with reliable information.

      As far as I can tell, the DPRK's air defense system is now in decline. Radars and hardware of Soviet-made radars and air defense systems, the newest of which were made in the 1980s, are finalizing their resource. Information from American, South Korean and Japanese intelligence sources is regularly published in the open access. Based on this and satellite images, an overview of the DPRK air defense can be done.
    2. +5
      +5 30 July 2020 07: 07 New
      +3
      The cunning Juche made missile bases in the mountain holes ... You can't cover them without nuclear weapons ... they dug for 70 years, the gnomes of Middle-earth would die of envy
      1. KKND
        KKND 1 August 2020 07: 56 New
        +1
        Quote: 5-9
        70 years of digging, the gnomes of Middle-earth would die of envy

        Obviously, we live in a world of jingoistic fantasy.
        There are no mountains in the South Caucasus at all. The army of the northerners will easily defeat the southerners wassat
        Get creative further.
        1. +5
          +5 1 August 2020 11: 54 New
          -2
          Of course, I understand that I want to give a hand, if not to the Americans themselves, then at least to their satellite bedding ...
          But where is in your loyal phrase even an attempt to refute the fact that only one Juche artel will inflict unacceptable damage on the Samsung in just half a day?
          1. KKND
            KKND 1 August 2020 13: 27 New
            +2
            Quote: 5-9
            But where is in your loyal phrase even an attempt to refute the fact that only one Juche artel will inflict unacceptable damage on the Samsung in just half a day?

            Show the map where the production capacity of Samsung is shown in the reach of the SC artillery. Let me remind you that there should be only 50-70 km from the border. And indicate the percentage of all plants available to Samsung that are in danger.
            Let me remind you that the burden of proof lies with the claimant.
            1. +5
              +5 1 August 2020 15: 09 New
              0
              Ohhh .. Samsung is the nickname of the southerners, as the Juche of the northerners.
    3. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 07: 20 New
      +3
      Quote: Odyssey
      As always, an interesting article.

      Who studied what ... such a normal reconnaissance.
      1. Zufei
        Zufei 30 July 2020 08: 26 New
        +2
        Such analytics is a godsend for Gru Eun. Solid material. However, as always.
  5. Free wind
    Free wind 30 July 2020 02: 47 New
    +1
    Nice cars.
  6. Dante Alighieri
    Dante Alighieri 30 July 2020 03: 22 New
    +8
    Sergey, hello! I read the article in one breath. As always, the material is excellent with tons of visual examples and topographic details. This alone betrays the author with a head - such scrupulous and responsible authors on the resource unit, and in the topic of air defense - generally one. I am glad that you are still with us and continue to educate us. One question. Time passes and information, unfortunately, tends to become outdated. In this regard, do you plan to re-analyze the current state of the Russian air defense system and compare it with the data that you previously published in your articles? It would be very interesting to look at the dynamics in this area. And then, as far as I remember, extreme materials on this topic ended with approximately the following resolution: the number of decommissioned S-300PT complexes exceeds the number of S-400 complexes coming to replace them, and therefore, even taking into account the technological superiority of the latter, these funds may not be enough to defend against the likely forces enemy. Over the years, I can certainly confuse something, but last time the article made a real sensation on me. From this it is very interesting how things are today, because the S-300PT should have been the turn of the S-300PS and S-300PMU. The latter, however, seem to have been modernized, but again I don’t know for what time period these activities allowed us to extend the available resource.
    1. Bongo
      30 July 2020 03: 42 New
      10
      Quote: Dante
      Hello, hello!

      Kirill, hello! Thank you for the appreciation of my work! But until they stop persecuting journalists in our country (this will happen when the regime is changed), I will refrain from a detailed description of the state of the air defense of the Russian Federation and the CSTO. Not all my children have grown up yet, and I don’t want to let down the administration of the Military Review. There have already been precedents ... hi
    2. Bongo
      30 July 2020 03: 48 New
      +5
      Quote: Dante
      From this it is very interesting how things are today, because the S-300PT should have been the turn of the S-300PS and S-300PMU. The latter, however, seem to have been modernized, but again I don’t know for what time period these activities allowed us to extend the available resource.

      In this regard, I can say that the last operational Russian S-300PTs were handed over to Armenia, we have not had systems of this type since 2013. The differences between the S-300PS and S-300PT-1 in terms of combat capabilities are minimal. They use the same hardware and missiles. The difference is that the S-300PT is towed, while the S-300PS is self-propelled. The cardinal modernization of the S-300PT / PS is meaningless, the element base is hopelessly outdated, and the missiles have not been produced for a long time. In the best case, the elements of anti-aircraft systems are undergoing refurbishment.
      Py.Sy. There are active links to other articles at the end of this post. You might be interested. hi
    3. Octopus
      Octopus 30 July 2020 07: 52 New
      +9
      Quote: Dante
      reanalysis of the current state of the Russian air defense and its comparison with the data that you previously published in your articles?

      As far as I remember, the author was convincingly asked about the Russian air defense not to write anything like that. Not asked in the comments. For Belarus and Kazakhstan it is still possible, but for Russia it is better not.

      Actually, the fact that the situation with the defense in Russia is a little different, as reported by the Zvezda channel, is practically a military secret.
      1. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 09 New
        +5
        Quote: Octopus
        For Belarus and Kazakhstan it is still possible, but for Russia it is better not.

        Seryozha was also asked not to write about the CSTO. Part of the publication devoted to the air defense of Belarus had to be deleted, and the review devoted to the air defense of the Russian Federation did not come out at all.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 30 July 2020 08: 15 New
          +3
          Yes, I just remember his work. By the way, the comments were also partially rubbed there.
          1. zyablik.olga
            zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 19 New
            +3
            Quote: Octopus
            Yes, I just remember his work. By the way, the comments were also partially rubbed there.

            So it was. yes Seryozha then freaked out, and wanted to quit with "writing" altogether.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 30 July 2020 08: 26 New
              +3
              Well, Sergei writes too thoroughly.

              In principle, there are quite a few popular articles on the resource, including from regular authors, and, for example, in the A&C articles on the fleet, you can subtract something strange for the supposedly second military power in the world, but in order to take it like this, and show with pictures that RF cluster air defense with "roots" older than the 80s, and the level of the 50s of the United States, the beginning of NORAD, will never be achieved - no, this is not yet necessary.
              1. Dante Alighieri
                Dante Alighieri 30 July 2020 15: 29 New
                +4
                So it was Seryozha then freaked out, and wanted to quit with "writing" altogether.

                This state is familiar to many, and I am no exception, although sometimes I do not and I return to my "Deep State of neo-feudalism", although this is a real scientific article, some of which has even been published in the VAK publications, so this will not go to the general public.
                As for the air defense, it's a pity that we won't see the continuation, I remember, I even took those publications and showed them to junior students as an example of how deep analytics can be done relying only on news messages and google maps. Damn, how long has it been ...
                1. Bongo
                  30 July 2020 15: 37 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Dante
                  As for the air defense - it's a pity that we won't see the continuation

                  Kirill, six months ago I had a cycle dedicated to specific air defense systems. There I was a little "naughty". Here is a link to the final part, at the end of each part there is an active link to the previous one.
                  https://topwar.ru/169425-zenitnaja-raketnaja-sistemy-s-400-i-zenitnyj-raketnyj-kompleks-s-350-s-pricelom-v-buduschee.html
                  1. Dante Alighieri
                    Dante Alighieri 30 July 2020 16: 35 New
                    +2
                    Thank you missed. Recently, I rarely visit the resource and then raid. Only now, when the crown is quietly subsiding (or pretending to subside), there is time for something more than work and sleep. I will definitely read it and save it just in case, you never know)))
        2. Darkesstcat
          Darkesstcat 30 July 2020 11: 46 New
          +1
          And what was there if in short? It is clear that we (RB) do not have finances and funds for normal weapons.
          1. Bongo
            30 July 2020 14: 56 New
            +4
            Quote: Darkesstcat
            And what was there if in short? It is clear that we (RB) do not have finances and funds for normal weapons.

            Heavily stripped down option:
            The state of the air defense system of the CSTO member countries
            https://topwar.ru/139810-sostoyanie-sistemy-protivovozdushnoy-oborony-stran-uchastnikov-dogovora-o-kollektivnoy-bezopasnosti-chast-1.html
  7. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 30 July 2020 04: 13 New
    +3
    I also read the last article and remember the debate. Thank.
  8. +5
    +5 30 July 2020 07: 04 New
    -1
    This is all great, although it is known how the PAC-3 intercepts single Houthi Scuds, and a stationary complex with a sector shelling and a minimum border in the 60th, sorry in the 21st century, except to call it a hat ... Therefore, one hope for our own, dear, Russian developed. .. But ... Seoul is at gunpoint with 700 guns from 152mm and above in closed and protected positions ... plus MLRS .. In half a day, industrial potential will be turned into dust and without missiles and without yadrenbaton .... A MiG-21 and 23 yes, they are trying to sabotage the authorities, but what's the point?
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 07: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: 5-9
      This is all great, although it is known how PAC-3 intercepts single Houthi Scuds ..

      Is there a RAS-3 in Saudi Arabia? But even with not the most advanced PAC-2, the Saudis intercepted more than half of the targets.
      Quote: 5-9
      yes, and a stationary complex with a sector shelling and a minimum border of 60m, sorry in the 21st century, except to call it a hat ...

      I don’t know how well you know about hats, but since when did “Patriot” become stationary, as for the “minimum border”, what did you mean at all? what
      1. Viktor Sergeev
        Viktor Sergeev 30 July 2020 08: 11 New
        -1
        In fact, the Patriot, not being such, can be attributed precisely to stationary, since the time of its deployment is quite long, and the fact that it has an inclined launcher requires several complexes at once, if necessary, block the space from several sides. so that the Patriot is a stationary complex that allows you to move it. For example, I can cite C200, the same does not seem to be a hospital, so here we are, in order to collapse the division, we struggled for a week (according to the standard day).
        1. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 17 New
          +2
          Take an interest in the time of deployment and folding of the Patriot air defense system. Your example with the S-200 is far-fetched. In terms of mobility and deployment time, the S-200 was comparable to the American Nike-Hercules air defense system.
          Quote: Victor Sergeev
          that he has an inclined launcher requires several complexes at once, if necessary, block the space from several sides.

          What a stupid thing ... fool VO has repeatedly published satellite images of different variants of the Patriot positions. You probably never heard of mutual cover either. With regard to inclined and vertical start, then each method has its advantages and disadvantages. An inclined start is energetically more beneficial.
          1. Viktor Sergeev
            Viktor Sergeev 30 July 2020 08: 59 New
            +2
            It is immediately obvious that you have never turned off the C200, especially when there are not enough soldiers and almost no one knows how to do it. I was doing this in 1994, and so we rolled this miracle for 2 weeks, and then twisted the cable for another month. It's beautiful on a piece of paper, and when everything has already grown into the ground, and the cables in the channels (and the channels have half-collapsed and the cables are not pulled out), but everything is old, it is better not to touch at all. I am silent about deployment, since it is almost impossible to put launchers on the ground, concrete wells are needed, and the position under the radar station needs to be prepared on a hill of 6 meters, otherwise the C200 turns into useless crap that is not able to see low-flying targets.
            Could you tell me where and when the folding and unfolding of Nike Hercules was carried out? The same "hospital" as deployed and stood until it went for scrap.
            The inclined method of placement does not have advantages, except that the savings on deploying the rocket in flight and possibly the cost, but ours overcame this, having come up with the idea of ​​deploying the rocket during launch. It's just that the Patriot was deliberately considered as a means of target air defense, because the basis of the American air defense is aviation and they did not even really think to cover the troops on the march, especially recently, when they are fighting by attacking, suppressing the enemy in the bud.
            1. Bongo
              30 July 2020 15: 07 New
              +4
              Quote: Victor Sergeev
              It is immediately evident that you have never turned off the C200, especially when there are not enough soldiers and almost no one knows how to do it

              Excuse me, but how did you carry the database if the complex was not fully manned?
              Who sat in the cockpits, served the starting positions, how was the work of the technical division carried out?
              Quote: Victor Sergeev
              I was doing this in 1994, and so we rolled this miracle for 2 weeks, and then twisted the cable for another month. It is beautiful on a piece of paper, and when everything has already grown into the ground, and the cables in the channels (and the channels have half collapsed and the cables are not pulled out), but everything is old, it is better not to touch at all. I am silent about deployment, since it is almost impossible to put launchers on the ground, concrete wells are needed, and the position under the radar station needs to be prepared on a hill of 6 meters, otherwise the C200 turns into useless crap that is not able to see low-flying targets.

              What you are describing does not seem to be a relocation, but a folding of the complex with its subsequent transfer to storage or disposal.
              Quote: Victor Sergeev
              Could you tell me where and when the folding and unfolding of Nike Hercules was carried out? The same "hospital" as deployed and stood until it went for scrap.

              In Germany and South Korea, the Nike-Hercules air defense system regularly changed positions. The latest modifications of this complex in terms of mobility were higher than the C-200V.
              Quote: Victor Sergeev
              The oblique way of placing no merits,

              There is no inclined placement method, there is an inclined start. With an oblique launch, the advantage lies in a more optimal trajectory, the cost and design of the rocket is also simpler. The downside is the heavier and more expensive launcher and the impossibility of circular fire.
              Quote: Victor Sergeev
              It's just that Patriot was deliberately considered as a means of object air defense.

              Perhaps you should study the history of the Patriot air defense system in more detail. About 15 years ago there was a detailed article on this topic in the journal "Technics and Armaments".
              1. Viktor Sergeev
                Viktor Sergeev 30 July 2020 17: 51 New
                +1
                And so they carried it. I am a platoon commander, according to the starting battery of 24 soldiers and 2 platoon commanders, in reality 1 platoon commander and first 4 soldiers, then 2, then one. We had 3 officers for the entire launching battery, so the three of us loaded the missiles and sat in the cockpit and carried out combat duty by 2 divisions in turn (they walked every other day for 36 hours). So they served: there are no spare parts, the relays sink, there is a dent on the automation unit (as the relay sticks (it does not go into preparation) you take a scrap and hit the dent), you made the gaskets yourself, they sent them from Novosibirsk to Moscow for a sealing tape (like adhesive tape), and the division is ready anyway.
                Yes, we rolled up and transferred for storage, but this is also done when relocating, one to one, only we also need to unfold, and this is more terrible than folding, there one synchronization of the PU and the cockpit will take several days, and the PU must be horizontally placed with jacks and a lot still what to do.
                Yes, an inclined launch was beneficial, it was, until ours came up with the idea of ​​deflecting the rocket towards the target at the start with the help of air rudders. As for the creation of the Patriot, I'm not interested, I know what the C300 is and its 5 minutes to deploy (in variant B) and the Patriot with its 30 minutes, I think in reality it takes 40-60 minutes.
                1. Bongo
                  31 July 2020 02: 09 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Victor Sergeev
                  And so they carried it. I am a platoon commander, according to the starting battery of 24 soldiers and 2 platoon commanders, in reality 1 platoon commander and first 4 soldiers, then 2, then one. We had 3 officers for the entire starting battery, so the three of us loaded the missiles and sat in the cockpit and carried combat duty by 2 divisions in turn (they walked every other day for 36 hours).

                  It is clear that in such a mode and with such a number of personnel, there is no need to talk about the normal carrying of the database. But then you shouldn't cite your case as a typical example of rebasing. In Soviet times, the standards for folding / deploying the S-200 were repeatedly confirmed, but in most cases the cables were dropped in the old position.
                  Where is your division located? The coordinates of all the positions of the C-200 are known to me.

                  Quote: Victor Sergeev
                  And about the creation of the Patriot, I'm not interested

                  But in vain you are, you just reminded me of a "patriot" from Belarus, who also answered - "I have not read, and I will not read." How can you judge something and draw conclusions without having information?

                  As for the S-300V air defense system, have you often deployed in the field? Usually, the S-300V divisions took turns carrying the DB in places of permanent deployment. Very few S-300Vs were produced. Before the collapse of the USSR, about 10 brigades were equipped with them.
                  1. Viktor Sergeev
                    Viktor Sergeev 31 July 2020 07: 56 New
                    +1
                    Who told you that with such a number there is no need to talk about being on alert? We are Russians, we can handle everything. A group of divisions (2), each one that I described, each with 2 missiles on the launcher, was on duty after a month, and when one division was on duty, officers of the other were involved in this (albeit in a slightly more sparing mode). We were on duty normally, everything was ready.
                    I wonder by whom the standards were confirmed? Showy teachings? Can you imagine what cables for C200 are, how many are there, and the price? If the cables are thrown, then the battalion commander and his officers will pay from their salaries for life. Everything is registered. Damn, in order to take out only one spare parts for our starting battery, we need a couple of KAMAZ trucks with trailers, and according to the state for the whole group, except for the sit-down Krazovs, we had one KAMAZ and Ural to transport officers. I generally keep quiet about winter. It is immediately clear that you have never encountered the C200.
                    By the way, how did we "comply with the standards." When the order came to dismantle the complex, no one knew how to do it, and after all, people served for 20-30 years, and so they fulfilled this standard and I will surprise you, we had one of the best division groups in the country.
                    As for "I will not read" I am interested in the result and its assessment. You can want everything, but get a Patriot.
                    There are two types of air defense systems related to the C300: object (Patriots type) and C300V. Any of the C300s, except the most ancient ones, unfolds very quickly, if necessary, even an object one. Now in Russia there are more than 20 S300V complexes, given the saturation with other air defense means, this is quite enough for performing local tasks.
                    Do you think 10 air defense brigades is not enough? We had an air defense brigade, so it closed Novosibirsk in a circle. The goal of air defense is to cover dangerous areas or important objects.
                    1. Bongo
                      31 July 2020 13: 08 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      Who told you that with such a number there is no need to talk about being on alert? We are Russians, we can handle everything.
                      wassat What was that?
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      each with 2 launchers

                      On one "gun" 2 missiles - how's that?
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      I wonder by whom the standards were confirmed?

                      The standards that were spelled out in the operating manual, and which have been repeatedly confirmed in practice. However, they are of course impracticable if the battalion is understaffed and poorly trained.
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      Can you imagine what cables for C200 are, how many are there, and the price?

                      I can imagine, moreover, that this was exactly what was envisaged for the emergency relocation to a new position. The cables remained in place, and nothing prevented them from being used when re-placing them at a capital position. Let me tell you a little secret, even much more modern S-300Ps carry a permanent database in stationary, well-prepared positions in engineering, and the situation with the cable industry is similar. Although there are much fewer cable lines.
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      once it is clear that you have never encountered the C200.

                      You are extremely "perceptive", but if you are such a tough professional, tell me to an amateur, how did you normally carry the database with a severe shortage of personnel? Okay, you don't need a lot of intelligence at the starting position, and in Soviet times, they were usually served by fighters recruited from the Central Asian republics. But how would you urgently reload six "guns"? Who serviced cabins K-9 and K-2? After all, you can't put just anyone there, to work there you need certain abilities and conscripts passed a tough selection. I am also interested in how you managed to use the "unmanned" TPM, for which there were no drivers, and how did you work without diesel engine operators of the DGA? Who assembled the missiles in the technical division and refueled them, with such a severe shortage of personnel?
                      All this I mean is that you should not assume that someone is more stupid or less informed than you.
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      As for "I will not read" I am interested in the result and its assessment. You can want everything, but get a Patriot.

                      The fact that your "patriotism" is off the charts is understandable ...
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      There are two types of air defense systems related to the C300: object (Patriots type) and C300V.

                      Excuse me, after the "dvuhsotka" at what complex did you serve?
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      Do you think 10 air defense brigades is not enough?

                      After all, you even write the designation of the air defense system incorrectly, and you hardly know how many S-300V we have now.
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      We had an air defense brigade, so it closed Novosibirsk in a circle.

                      Are you wondering how Novosibirsk is covered now?
                      Quote: Victor Sergeev
                      The goal of air defense is to cover dangerous areas or important objects.

                      Are you the captain of the obvious?
      2. +5
        +5 30 July 2020 08: 19 New
        -3
        Isn't it ERINT with them? In the video, they thrashed 13 pieces from one PU, one SCUD.
        In such ideal conditions for pro conditions, the complex must shoot down more than 90%.
        Half an hour to get ready, is that a mobile?
        The lower limit of hitting targets at the Soviet level 60x ...
        1. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 21 New
          +2
          Quote: 5-9
          Isn't it ERINT with them?

          Have the Saudis on the RAS-2? wassat
          1. +5
            +5 30 July 2020 08: 22 New
            0
            And in PAC2 there are 16 missiles on one launcher?
            1. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 24 New
              +1
              Quote: 5-9
              And in PAC2 there are 16 missiles on one launcher?

              Four
              1. +5
                +5 30 July 2020 08: 27 New
                0
                Well, if 13 missiles were launched from one launcher, what do they have? :)
                1. zyablik.olga
                  zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 11: 15 New
                  +2
                  Quote: 5-9
                  Well, if 13 missiles were launched from one launcher, what do they have? :)

                  Where did you get this?
                  1. +5
                    +5 1 August 2020 11: 56 New
                    -2
                    From the video ... Didn't you?
    2. Odysseus
      Odysseus 30 July 2020 16: 17 New
      +2
      Quote: 5-9
      ... And the MiG-21 and 23, yes, they are pounding the authorities, but what's the point?

      If the DPRK strikes first, then, of course, your conclusion is correct. Not one air defense system will intercept so many targets. The density of ballistic missiles, MLRS, artillery fire, aircraft, drones will be deadly.
      But this is a fantastic option. The DPRK will never strike first, then they will simply be turned into dust with pleasure in retaliation. An aggressive war against the US and ROK is impossible for them.
      But the United States is constantly threatening to "finally solve" the Korean question.
      That is, it is necessary to simulate the DPRK's ability to strike back, which will not be intercepted by the US and ROK combat-ready air defenses. This is a very interesting topic, but to answer you need to know exactly what the DPRK has.
      And no one knows for sure smile
    3. English tarantas
      English tarantas 30 July 2020 16: 42 New
      +2
      And the MiG-21 and 23, yes, they are pounding the authorities, but what's the point?

      The point is that after the first artillery shells that fell, no one prevented the southerners from shutting up all these 700 guns. The northerners probably don't have very good air defense, but they need to break through, and there are a lot of bombing targets, so any nonsense like the MiG-21 can also do harm. And also do not forget about the possibility of the participation of Chinese aviation.
      1. +5
        +5 31 July 2020 11: 05 New
        -2
        These guns are in protected mountain positions, and it will not be possible to knock them out in weeks. If at all without nuclear weapons it turns out. The Juche people dug holes in the mountains for decades. Well, they have a breakthrough MZA and anti-aircraft missile systems, so you can't go down below 4 km.
        And for critical damage to the Samsung industry, a few hours of shelling will be enough.
        In case of war, Samsunia is a kabzdets.
        1. English tarantas
          English tarantas 31 July 2020 12: 54 New
          +2
          These guns are in protected mountain positions

          How do you imagine a concrete shelter for a howitzer, which cannot be destroyed by several hits of 100-500 kilogram TNT charges?
          These guns are in protected mountain positions

          It is enough to find exits and the shallowest places, and it is corny to bring them down. So underground structures are destroyed, quickly and inexpensively, and the bunker becomes a grave. For example, one CR or one approach of a fighter-bomber may be enough for an exit.
          And for critical damage to the Samsung industry, a few hours of shelling will be enough.

          I recommend finding out how it was during World War II. Something after the Battle of Britain (and Normandy) the industry did not stop for the Germans (and the British). And the capabilities of aviation (in the South Caucasus) make it possible to break through air defense systems in less than a couple of hours, inflict critical losses on it and destroy most of the strategic targets. In the event of the outbreak of hostilities, the northerners will have to concentrate troops. Now imagine what the F-16 will do with a column from the 20th century on the march in a couple of passes (they may not even have time to scatter for a few minutes).
          1. +5
            +5 31 July 2020 13: 31 New
            0
            What are concrete, why? There are mountains and rocks. Intra-mountain complexes and cities count. For each barrel, there are several real positions and several false ones. Those several thousand places that need to be processed at least 500, and in real life 1000 and 1500 kg. Moreover, the clogged outlet will be cleared in a few hours. The Juche people have been preparing for more than half a century, everything is serious there.
            And in the mountains, quantity rules, not manufacturability ...
            Samsuns themselves have no illusions who will unite whom in case of war ..
  9. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 30 July 2020 08: 05 New
    0
    For the South Caucasus, the main thing is that the NC, in turn, is rather underdeveloped in the means of electronic warfare, and in aviation. Otherwise, given the size of the SC, ground-based electronic warfare sources would extinguish, if necessary, the air defense system. Well, everyone knows how the Patriots are able to control the situation.
  10. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: 5-9
    The lower limit of hitting targets at the Soviet level 60x ...

    And how much does the S-400 have? By "Patriot" EMNIP - 3 km. Not bad for a long-range complex.
    1. +5
      +5 31 July 2020 11: 08 New
      0
      You do not understand at all what this is about and you are confusing the minimum range and altitude.
      The S-400 has 5-10 meters ... in detecting and hitting low-altitude targets, the Patriot is just 2 heads worse than the S-400 and a head lower than the Buk.
      1. Bongo
        31 July 2020 14: 01 New
        +3
        Quote: 5-9
        You do not understand at all what this is about and you are confusing the minimum range and altitude.

        Excuse me, maybe you should be more clear about your thoughts? Who wrote this:
        Quote: 5-9
        stationary complex with sector shelling and minimum border in 60
        Maybe with a minimum target hitting height? And do you sincerely believe that the 48N6 SAM with a semi-active homing system has a minimum defeat height of 10 m over the entire firing range? wassat
        1. +5
          +5 31 July 2020 14: 08 New
          0
          Damn, if we are talking about Meters, then it is clear that we are talking about height ...
          What does "the entire range" have to do with it?
          You also write about the round earth and the radio horizon ...
          Are we at the military forum or mommy's or fishing forum?
          1. Bongo
            31 July 2020 14: 13 New
            +3
            Quote: 5-9
            Damn, if we are talking about Meters, then it is clear that we are talking about height ...

            It is not clear, formulate your thoughts carefully.
            Quote: 5-9
            What does "the entire range" have to do with it?

            I'm afraid to disappoint you, but at 2/3 of the maximum launch range, the 48N6 SAM family has a minimum height within 50 m, i.e. comparable to MIM-104D.
            Quote: 5-9
            You also write about the round earth and the radio horizon ...
            Are we at the military forum or mommy's or fishing forum?

            Give without demagoguery? No.
            1. +5
              +5 1 August 2020 12: 04 New
              -1
              What does 2/3 of the 48N6 range and 50 meters have to do with it? This is precisely demagoguery.
              The Patriot, in principle, has at least 60 meters, so he cannot even defend himself from the attack of the CD or helicopter aircraft on the WWII.
              I read an interview with the A-10 pilot, who told how they extinguished the cassette with the most vulgar of these Patriots during the exercises and, coming from the rear and into the PMA ...
              You seem to be spinning in a frying pan to justify the 3 gigantic disadvantages of this in parts of a beautiful complex, but which make a suicide bomber out of it
  11. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 30 July 2020 08: 23 New
    +3
    Quote: 5-9
    Half an hour to get ready, is that a mobile?

    Excuse me, is S-300PT a mobile complex?
    1. +5
      +5 31 July 2020 11: 09 New
      -1
      All S-300s are mobile and have a short coagulation-unfolding time, unlike Pzhtriot ..
      1. Bongo
        31 July 2020 14: 14 New
        +1
        Quote: 5-9
        All S-300s are mobile and have a short coagulation-unfolding time, unlike Pzhtriot ..

        What is the deployment time for the S-300PT?
        1. +5
          +5 31 July 2020 16: 03 New
          0
          Okay, let's go, an hour and a half repeat ... You still write about the wretchedness of 5B55 ... But this is 78 years old, not great ...
          1. Bongo
            31 July 2020 16: 27 New
            +1
            Quote: 5-9
            Well, okay, go away

            I do not have a goal to "get away" someone, but I hate shouting and categoricalness. negative
            Quote: 5-9
            You still write about the wretchedness of 5B55 ... But this is 78 years old, not great ...

            And what is the "wretchedness" of 5V55 and what kind of missile defense do you specifically mean? If the radio command 5V55K, which was put into service in 1978, then they were all used up during the training and control firing in the mid-1990s. "Poor" 5V55RM with a firing range of up to 90 km ceased to be produced about 15 years ago, and they, together with 5V55R (75 km), were included in the ammunition load of the S-300PS air defense system, which until recently formed the basis of our air defense missile systems.
            1. +5
              +5 31 July 2020 16: 58 New
              -1
              I mean, remembering something that is no longer in real life is not very correct ... PT was still a little unfinished, and the category of 40+ years.
              And half an hour of closing the Patriot as it was 35 years ago, and remained ... and the sector bombardment ... and 60 meters .... It was about this.
              1. Bongo
                1 August 2020 02: 57 New
                +3
                Quote: 5-9
                I mean, remembering something that is no longer in real life is not very correct ...

                S-300PTs were operated in our country until 2013, after which they were transferred to Armenia. Remind me when the last PAC-1 left the United States, and let's compare the anti-missile capabilities of the not-perfect PAC-1 and the S-300PT / PS?
                Quote: 5-9
                And half an hour of closing the Patriot as it was 35 years ago, has remained.

                In conditions of air supremacy of enemy aviation, it is not the time of deployment that is much more important, but the time of folding. Apparently the Americans are not too afraid of losing air superiority. As for the time of folding the S-300P / S-400 from the capital, equipped for carrying a long-term OBD position, it will be even longer than that of the Patriot. Inquire about the timing of dismantling the low-altitude detector tower, and what equipment is required for this.
                Quote: 5-9
                and sector bombardment ... and 60 meters ...

                As for the "sector bombardment", I have already written about the features of inclined and vertical launching, and I do not see the need to repeat myself. Here is a satellite image of the Saudi PAC-2 position. Do you have any thoughts on this?

                About "60 meters" ... Do you know the lower boundary of the 48N6 SAM engagement zone at a distance of 70 km from the launch site in ideal conditions of the test site, and at what cost and due to what effective defeat of low-altitude targets is carried out?
                And in conclusion, why do you think that the United States is incapable of creating a ground-based air defense system with a vertical launch? Haven't you heard anything about the marine SM-2 / SM-3? What prevents from transferring launchers to a mobile chassis?
                1. KKND
                  KKND 1 August 2020 08: 18 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Bongo
                  And in conclusion, why do you think that the United States is incapable of creating a ground-based air defense system with a vertical launch? Haven't you heard anything about the marine SM-2 / SM-3? What prevents from transferring launchers to a mobile chassis?

                  Yes, they are all capable of creating, they do not see the point of spending huge human (mental) resources on dubious systems. I saw an interview with the creators of "Patriot" on the net, so it looks like they are there (in the USA) as "Cinderella" sitting. So the developer said the more we sell, the more money will be for improving the complex.
                  After all, seriously speaking, the F-16 with two HAARMs can perform maneuvers at an altitude with a high overload of 50 km (or even less) from the C-400 launcher and more than one anti-aircraft missile will not hit it, but it can easily launch its HAARM. And this is just one of the ways to shut up the air defense, and a bunch of them were invented. And they continue to come up with new ones, and the energy of solid-propellant missiles will practically not grow.
                  1. +5
                    +5 1 August 2020 12: 18 New
                    -2
                    In real life, the effectiveness of all missile defense systems is rather low, they do not act as the main means of destroying air defense systems, only as an accompanying one.
                    And 50 km away the F-16 is either from the S-400 or from the Patriot only by timely care for the radio horizon ...
                    1. KKND
                      KKND 1 August 2020 13: 22 New
                      +2
                      Quote: 5-9
                      And 50 km away the F-16 is either from the S-400 or from the Patriot only by timely care for the radio horizon ...

                      If you are such a specialist, tell us what happens to the anti-aircraft missile immediately after exiting the inertial mode. Especially when shooting at a maneuvering target. Describe the process in detail. Using the term moment of inertia.
                      And then you will tell tales about gnomes.
                      1. +5
                        +5 1 August 2020 13: 27 New
                        -2
                        What does the inertial mode have to do with it, if you started writing about the F-16 overloads. At 50 km from the air defense system, the 48N6 or Mim-104 have enough energy to reliably defeat any maneuvering aerodynamic target ... Of course, one can argue about 100 or 120 km .. But not about 50
                      2. KKND
                        KKND 1 August 2020 13: 33 New
                        +2
                        How is the energy sufficient if the rocket mass has increased from 1500 to 1800 kg in total? For solid-fuel missiles, the specific impulse of 270 seconds, ideally, will no longer work. There are no miracles that the old and new missiles are not very different in terms of energy. Slightly increased the mass of the rocket and achieved a greater range.

                        watch from 10 minutes, storyteller.
                      3. KKND
                        KKND 1 August 2020 13: 39 New
                        +2
                        Quote: 5-9
                        Of course, you can argue about 100 or 120 km .. But not about 50

                        The storyteller will study the range of the S-75 in Vietnam, and this is a 2-stage rocket for a minute, where the 2nd stage is already a liquid-propellant engine.
                        Then you will argue
              2. +5
                +5 1 August 2020 12: 15 New
                0
                The anti-missile capabilities of the RAS-1 are generally near-zero. Proven by Iraq. Not a single SCAD was destroyed, in ideal conditions 32 out of 99 missiles were struck when 4x missiles were launched on 1 SCAD, which led to a deviation of 3-4 km ... Taking into account the accuracy of those SCADs and their clones and that they fired at cities, the result ZERO.
                How PAC-3 behaves in KSA, you can watch directly in the news .... Behaves badly.
                Well, the PT is the 78th year, and the missile defense functions were assigned to the S-300V ... the level of which the Americans exceeded only in the THAAD.
                The deployment time is equal to the collapse time ... HBO towers can be abandoned to save lives.

                Where did I say that I think that I am not capable? This is a cheap demagogic trick to ascribe some kind of nonsense to your opponent and then refute it with brilliance.
                You are already spinning to justify the Patriot's jambs that have not been corrected for 40 years, which turn him into a suicide bomber ...
                1. Bongo
                  1 August 2020 13: 31 New
                  +3
                  Quote: 5-9
                  The anti-missile capabilities of the RAS-1 are generally near-zero.

                  As for the "near-zero", you got excited, or rather - not high. But the S-300PT / PS had no anti-missile capabilities at all, and these complexes until recently formed the basis of our air defense.
                  Quote: 5-9
                  You can watch how PAC-3 behaves in KSA in the news ..

                  Let's not judge the effectiveness of this or that weapon by the "news". Do you have statistics on launches and targets hit? In addition, where did you get the idea that the CA has PAC-3?
                  Quote: 5-9
                  missile defense functions were assigned to the S-300V ...

                  How many S-300Vs have been built and how many are in our ranks? Or would you just shout louder "urya"?
                  Quote: 5-9
                  The deployment time is equal to the collapse time ... HBO towers can be abandoned to save lives.

                  wassat fool Have you ever been in the position of the air defense system? To what extent is your ability to detect low-altitude targets without towers deteriorating, and how can the complex work on CD?
                  Quote: 5-9
                  Where did I say that I think that I am not capable?

                  But you are talking about a limited shooting sector, or not?
                  Quote: 5-9
                  You are already spinning to justify the Patriot's jambs that have not been corrected for 40 years, which turn him into a suicide bomber ...

                  You should at least go to my profile for the sake of interest, before writing this ... fool
                  Underestimation of the enemy is typical for frankly stupid people, and in the long run leads to defeat.
                  1. KKND
                    KKND 1 August 2020 13: 53 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Bongo
                    Underestimation of the enemy is typical for frankly stupid people, and in the long run leads to defeat.
                    Reply

                    Sergey, hello, do you want a joke? I live in Moscow, so in the spring of 2019, the same week as the Americans left the INF Treaty, I was watching TV, like it was Friday, but I don't remember exactly. And then the broadcast is interrupted for 40 minutes and an inscription is shown on all main channels for 40 minutes. And in a scary, metallic female voice, it is recited cyclically, for 40 minutes. There it was said that something like a storm is expected, in connection with which it is necessary to find shelter. As a result, there was no storm at all, there was only drizzling rain. Then it was not explained at all by anyone.
                    These are our brave patriots cheers, they don't really want to get to heaven. In words, mostly brave.
                    I myself would not have believed it if someone told me that. But all of Moscow saw who was watching TV in the evening. And everyone gave up on it.
                    It's funny how the world is rolling into the abyss, and there are no even anti-war movements in Europe like the 80s.
                    Well, don't care.
                    1. Bongo
                      1 August 2020 13: 55 New
                      +2

                      Hi!
                      Quote: KKND
                      I watch the TV, like it was Friday, but I don't remember exactly. And then the broadcast is interrupted for 40 minutes and an inscription is shown on all main channels for 40 minutes. And in a scary, metallic female voice, it is recited cyclically, for 40 minutes. There it was said that something like a storm is expected, in connection with which it is necessary to find shelter.

                      This was most likely the development of a civil defense and emergency warning system. It's amazing that you generally watch a zombie.
                    2. KKND
                      KKND 1 August 2020 14: 05 New
                      +2
                      Yeah she was, it's funny that in the same week when the Americans completely withdrew from the treaty.
                      I like to watch state propaganda, I like to watch propaganda techniques, it is also interesting.
                    3. Bongo
                      1 August 2020 14: 07 New
                      +3
                      Quote: KKND
                      I like to watch state propaganda, I like to watch propaganda techniques, it is also interesting.

                      It makes me sick ... sad
                    4. KKND
                      KKND 1 August 2020 14: 13 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Bongo
                      It makes me sick ...

                      Well, it (propaganda) is also very different. There is a workshop, it's nice to listen to (1984 Oruela). And it happens like our clumsy. In order to conduct propaganda correctly, you also need to make efforts, but we do not bother, and that will do.
                      And then of course he starts to feel sick with this.
                      But hurray-patriots guys are of course persistent, everyone is ready to gobble up wassat
                    5. Bongo
                      1 August 2020 15: 14 New
                      +3
                      Quote: KKND
                      Well, it (propaganda) is also very different. There is a workshop, it's nice to listen to (1984 Oruela). And it happens like our clumsy.

                      My wife has her own business, selling television and satellite equipment. Sometimes, when I have free time, I am engaged in setting up satellite receivers and digital set-top boxes, when I switch to central Russian channels, I must turn off the sound. However, even without a sound, these disgusting faces are enough ... wassat
          2. +5
            +5 1 August 2020 15: 28 New
            0
            The PT has been in service since 78, the PAC-1 was only tested in 86 ... the S-300V was responsible for the theater missile defense, the second time I am writing to you.
            In fact, in Iraq, the first series of Patriot was useless. This is not a fact, but it was in fact. Today, the Saudis regularly catch (in the sense of missing) the strikes of the BR and CD in ideal conditions for themselves.

            What has it to do with the fact that we had a PT in service until 2013?
            We don’t measure up who is cooler than the Russian Federation or the United States? What does the enemy's assessment have to do with it?

            I just wrote to your article on the current state of the Yuk air defense that the Patriot has several simply obvious and gaping jambs, even in the extreme version. This is me, the low noise immunity of the radar one-to-all-about-everything (which cannot be proved of course) and did not write the low speed of the rocket.

            If you think that it is good, write an article about comparing it with the S-300Pkhkh and S-300V in terms of modifications by year of appearance ... I think everyone will read it with pleasure ...
            1. Bongo
              1 August 2020 16: 02 New
              +2
              Quote: 5-9
              PT in service since 78

              wassat In terms of range, the S-300PT, which appeared in 1978, was inferior even to the C-75M3 / M4. Missiles with a range of 75 km appeared in 1982, but massive deliveries to the troops began in 1985. You will study the question a little ...
              Quote: 5-9
              Our theater missile defense system was answered by S-300V, for the second time I am writing to you.

              And I ask you for the second time, when did the serial production of the S-300V begin (not to be confused with the S-300V1), how many were put into the troops and how many are in stock now? Let's compare this number with the number of air defense missile systems equipped with the Krug air defense system, which the S-300V was supposed to replace.
              Quote: 5-9
              In fact, in Iraq, the first series of Patriot was useless.

              Only in your imagination, its effectiveness was not very high, but in order to call it "useless", it must have an outstanding "patriotism". wassat
              Give the number of firing and the number of targets hit, then we can talk about how "useless" it is.
              Quote: 5-9
              What has it to do with the fact that we had a PT in service until 2013?

              Despite the fact that in the USA, PAC-1 went into the 90s.
              Quote: 5-9
              I just wrote to your article on the current state of the Yuk air defense that the Patriot has several simply obvious and gaping jambs, even in the extreme version. This is me, the low noise immunity of the radar one-to-all-about-everything (which cannot be proved of course) and did not write the low speed of the rocket.

              Forgive me, but with all due respect, you have not brought anything except unsubstantiated statements. As has already been stated here, the burden of proof lies with whoever claims something.
              How did you decide that Patriot has one radar? Do not confuse the ability to get by with one AN / MPQ-53 or AN / MPQ-65 multifunctional radar with what you usually have. For that matter, the S-300PS can also function with the 30N6 illumination and guidance radar, and the 19Zh6 and NVO 5N66M radars are optional. By the way, your passage regarding what to throw at the stationary position of the towers with 5Н66М and 30Н6 was incomparable! good
              Quote: 5-9
              write an article about comparing it with the S-300Pkhx and S-300V in terms of modifications by years of appearance ... I think everyone will read it with pleasure ...

              Those who wanted to have already read ... all this was written by me long ago.
            2. +5
              +5 1 August 2020 17: 08 New
              0
              Instead of discussing the Patriot among the Koreans, you are gushing with scattered and incoherent data, simply defaming (from your point of view) the S-300 :)
              How its range in 1978 and the "massiveness of deliveries" justifies today's Patriot's shoals, I want to ask ... it's like "and you have blacks hanging."

              If you want to show that Patriot is strong and rulezz, then I suggested that you make a comparison .. comparable things .. Those "bulk supplies" with bulk supplies, etc ... oh so worried about him, as if Raytheon shares with bought a huge shoulder
            3. KKND
              KKND 1 August 2020 18: 10 New
              +2
              Quote: 5-9
              If you want to show that Patriota is strong and rulezz, then I suggested that you make a comparison .. comparable things ..

              Do you want to compare the Patriot with 900 kg missiles and the C-300 with 1500 kg missiles? The systems are not comparable in their capabilities. You are still trying to compare with the more expensive versions. The Patriot is a very low-cost version of the air defense, which is in production at times, if not an order of magnitude less than, for example, the S-300V. That is why trailers are used there and such a long time of folding and deployment. She's just very budget-friendly.
              Of course, it is inferior to the S-300 \ 400. The Americans have assigned air defense missions to the IA.
              You would also compare with the 7-ton S-200 what is already there.
              Yes, the Americans are seriously inferior to us in the air defense system on land. Simply because they squeezed their resources into it. At sea, for example, in air defense systems of ships, they surpass us.
              There is nothing good for them in this lag, nevertheless, they saved enormous resources and redirected them somewhere.
            4. +5
              +5 1 August 2020 19: 15 New
              0
              Well, this is their only long-medium-range air defense system ... More precisely, the only one ... There is no point in even discussing any Avengers.
              And it is not very cheap, more expensive than the S-400.
              The reasons why and why they are so understandable to me. Just in response to my criticism of Patriot, the author of the article began to remember the ancient S-300 for some reason ...
              It's not about the fact that the Americans for some reason, in principle, do not know how to use the air defense system, but that the Patriot is very so-so ...
            5. KKND
              KKND 1 August 2020 19: 40 New
              +2
              Quote: 5-9
              And it is not very cheap, more expensive than the S-400.

              Yeah, just like on the paper his ranges are drawn, he is also cheaper.
              In reality, the cost price is extremely difficult to calculate. For example, now the machine-tool industry in the country is almost completely dead and foreign machines are being bought for defense plants. But they buy at the expense of bad loans from state banks such as VTB or Sberbank. It seems that depreciation is not necessary in theory, but in practice? It's funny that even American Haas machines loved to buy (they have a high price / quality ratio), German ones, and others.
              So, no one will say the real cost, but the S-400 should have more parts, there are no miracles in the world, the more complex the system, the more perfect it is, the more details.
              Quote: 5-9
              Just in response to my criticism of Patriot, the author of the article began to remember the ancient S-300 for some reason ...
              It's not about the fact that the Americans for some reason, in principle, do not know how to use the air defense system, but that the Patriot is very so-so ...

              Well, the Patriot is certainly not very good, but maybe the author thought that you belittled him too much. The system is budgetary, but thanks to the fact that they managed to sell it to a bunch of countries, there is progress (modernization).
            6. Bongo
              2 August 2020 02: 23 New
              +2
              Quote: 5-9
              Well, this is their only long-medium-range air defense system ...

              Well, in fairness, not the only one. No. In the United States, it carries a NASAMS air defense missile system, created jointly by the Norwegian Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace and Raytheon.
        2. Bongo
          2 August 2020 02: 10 New
          +3
          Quote: 5-9
          Instead of discussing the Patriot among the Koreans, you are gushing with scattered and incoherent data, simply defaming (from your point of view) the S-300 :)

          Disjointed and incoherent? Okay, you don't know the nuances, but you also refuse to admit the completely obvious facts. It was not for nothing that I asked you questions, none of which you answered. I tried to push you to study publicly available sources on your own, but it’s not destiny ... request I'm wondering why I defame the S-300PT-1 and S-300PS that have entered service in practice simultaneously with PAC-1, which was written off in the USA for a long time?
          Quote: 5-9
          How its range in 1978 and the "massiveness of supplies" justifies today's Patriot jambs
          Excuse me, but what kind of "shoals" does he have? Americans have exactly what suits them. Air defense systems in the US air defense system have played an auxiliary role since the late 60s, if a more advanced complex was needed, they would of course create it. Have you heard about the long-range air defense system MEADS from Lockheed Martin that has not been adopted?
          Quote: 5-9
          If you want to show that Patriot is strong and rulezz, then I suggested that you make a comparison .. comparable things .. Those "bulk supplies" with bulk supplies, etc ... oh so worried about him, as if Raytheon shares with bought a huge shoulder

          If you want to continue to be taken seriously and have a dialogue with you, then stop making faces. Like Lockheed Martin and Boeing, I have no shares of Raytheon, and in general I am not allowed to travel abroad. All this time, communicating with you, I was only trying to make a comparison between our and American complexes and give you the opportunity to really look at them. S-300P / S-400, thanks to the use of heavier missiles and better radar energy, have a longer range of destruction of non-maneuvering aerodynamic goals on secondary и large heights. In addition, our systems are better suited for the destruction of such complex targets as missiles flying around the terrain. But effective detection and tracking of low-altitude targets at a distance of more than 60-70 km is possible only when radar equipment is placed on towers, which you propose to quit. Without towers, our systems are at the minimum height of the defeat comparable with PAC-3. And with the towers, "Patriot" them surpasses by folding / unfolding time. In addition, it should be understood that effective counteraction to actively maneuvering aircraft of carrier-based and tactical aviation is possible only on active the flight section of the missile defense system. What will be real range shooting, I'm sure you know. The anti-missile capabilities of the S-300PM2 / S-400 are quite comparable to the PAC-3.

          As for a detailed description of the S-300P, S-300V, S-400 air defense systems, comparing their capabilities, number and deployment areas, you can find it yourself in the Air Defense subsection or in my profile.
  • KKND
    KKND 1 August 2020 13: 36 New
    +2
    Study a little the theory of rocketry, what is the moment of inertia, what are the methods of missile guidance, then you may not write your philistine nonsense.
    1. +5
      +5 1 August 2020 15: 33 New
      0
      Let's not be clever with a mysterious look, and you can explain to us, stupid couch inhabitants, how exactly the F-16 is 50 km from the launcher that the Patriot, that the S-400 evade their big missiles, ok?
      1. KKND
        KKND 1 August 2020 17: 03 New
        +2
        Quote: 5-9
        Let's not be clever with a mysterious look,

        Okay.
        Basically, in the S-300 in the Patriot, when a rocket is launched, it goes through 3 stages. 1-inertial mode. 2-radio correction. 3-semi-active / active homing. In stage 1, the rocket flies along a programmed trajectory. At stages 2 and 3, it flies not anywhere but to the lead point of the target, which is constantly calculated by the guidance radar (well, or its own). Accordingly, the pilot of the aircraft, performing even the most stupid maneuvers such as a snake or a flattened barrel, can constantly change the lead point, respectively, this causes a change in the trajectory of the rocket. The engine of a solid-propellant rocket runs for 5-10 seconds (made for maximum efficiency) after it flies by inertia. If the trajectory was close to a straight line (the rocket did not maneuver), then there would be only gravitational and aerodynamic losses (not a maneuverable target such as a large aircraft). And since, when firing at a maneuverable aircraft, which constantly changes the lead point, you have to change the trajectory itself, you have to spend energy or speed on maneuvers, and the larger and heavier the rocket, the greater its moment of inertia, the more forces are needed (and, accordingly, losses speed) to change the trajectory. Here I want to note that the inertia grows like a cube of size and the moment of inertia as the 5th degree. This is how the pilots "exhaust" missiles in an air-to-air battle that in ground-to-air. They notice the start-up mainly relying on their eyes, well, they also have an open source software. They see missile contrails.
        What we claim is that the S-400 has a range of 400 km. It may well be if you shoot at a balloon, but in reality, for example, the latest versions of Amraams are guaranteed to be shot down from 15 kilometers, although in theory they can be shot down from more than 100 km. So the S-300 \ 400 in theory is one in reality, enemies are not. ordinary people who can draw any numbers. So the F-16 does and saw the launch, the missile does not reach maneuvers.
      2. +5
        +5 1 August 2020 17: 14 New
        0
        What you wrote I understand and support .... But we were talking about 50 km ... That's why I objected ... 48N6 fly them 25 sec, why is the F-16 (or Su-57) pulling it off?
      3. KKND
        KKND 1 August 2020 17: 37 New
        +2
        Never mind, I posted a video from the simulation where they tried to shoot down with old S-300 F-18 missiles from less than 50 km and could not. Question. At the expense of which elves should the 48N6 power engineering dramatically increase if it is still the same 1-stage solid-propellant rocket? The mass has increased by about 15%.? Compare with the C-75 which is a 2-stage and 2-stage liquid-propellant engine and about the same mass. True, the C-75 had a significantly higher payload, but nevertheless, for 50 km it was not shot at the old relatively unmaneuverable Phantoms. And then what nonsense about 25 seconds? 50/25 2 kilometers per second average speed. Mach 6. And the path to the maneuvering aircraft at a distance of 50 km and only 10 km in height (I give you a discount) is much longer, since it climbs to a great height (to reduce aerodynamic losses) and then dives. And she does all this way in 25 seconds. There must be more than 10 swings. Isn't it funny yourself? wassat
        The real speed of 48N6 is classified, but there is somewhere 6 maximum 7 max, and this is not the average speed, after the engine runs out, it loses it. Before reaching this speed, it accelerates.
        And she loses it quickly if the F-16 maneuvers, the moment of inertia is not like that of MANPADS.
      4. +5
        +5 1 August 2020 19: 03 New
        -2
        As you say, the Mim-104 is about 900+ kg with a maximum of 1,7 km / s and cannot shoot down anything at 35 km .... All the air defense systems then drank a global scale and the reptilian conspiracy comes out ...
      5. KKND
        KKND 1 August 2020 19: 17 New
        +2
        .
        Quote: 5-9
        All the air defense systems then drank on a global scale and the reptilian conspiracy comes out ...

        A bomber can shoot down easily. Phantoms hung with bombs quickly dropped them when they were captured by the radar. They didn't shoot down, but voila, the task of protecting the target is solved. And heavy planes can be shot down.
        And you thought that the F-16 was flying 15 km and then it was shot down from 400 km wassat
        And of course, it is quite difficult to shoot down our MiG-29 at the Patriot.
        Then, for a long time with high overloads on fighters, you will run out of fuel. There is a whole game of "nerves" between the air defense system and the aircraft.
      6. +5
        +5 1 August 2020 19: 22 New
        +1
        I understand that 200 for 48N6 or 120 for R-77 or AIM-120 is a 1,5 M head-on and non-maneuvering lead airship ... the border where the shooting down of a maneuverable target is quite likely ... Or at least force it to drop its combat load
      7. KKND
        KKND 1 August 2020 20: 00 New
        +2
        Quote: 5-9
        But he believed that half of this murzilochny range, especially for one and a half ton fool, is already the border where the shooting down of a maneuverable target is quite likely ...

        Listen, you can count anything, the moments of inertia of aircraft and missiles only the designers know, I even doubt that the pilots are aware of. I do not work in the KB, I also judge by indirect data. In the simulation that I gave above, real pilots also noticed errors in the dynamic characteristics of the aircraft. Nevertheless, the model of interaction between missiles and aircraft described by me should be close to reality. And physics says that the larger the rocket, the farther it will fly away at the same time and the more terrible any maneuver is for it. Therefore, in aviation, they gradually moved away from large missiles. Even Amraham is much lighter than Sparrow.
        The USSR's stake on the air defense system was justified in the 60s. In Vietnam, it went really well. The USSR was so happy that it made as much as a 7-ton liquid-propellant S-200 (this is in reality the longest-range complex in the world). But perhaps the time of large air defense systems is slowly disappearing with the development of reconnaissance and air attack weapons.
        Nevertheless, it was pleasant to talk to you, you did not quite go into a hurray-patriotic tale, I was probably even mistaken hi
      8. +5
        +5 1 August 2020 20: 14 New
        0
        Now you have offended the newest 2-ton SM-6 for 6 lam wink
        Well, the S-500 and 40N6 at the same time ...
      9. Bongo
        2 August 2020 04: 31 New
        +3
        Quote: KKND
        The USSR's stake on the air defense system was justified in the 60s. In Vietnam, it went really well.

        The rate on the air defense system was largely forced. In Vietnam, for a number of reasons, the frankly outdated CA-75M 10-cm range was used and things did not go so well.
        Quote: KKND
        The USSR was so happy that it made as much as a 7-ton liquid-propellant S-200 (this is in reality the longest-range complex in the world).

        It's not a matter of "joy", the USSR air defense required an air defense system capable of dealing with carriers of the CD, reconnaissance aircraft and AWACS at over-the-horizon range. At the same time, the S-200 air defense system turned out to be very expensive and difficult to operate. The last serial modification of the 5V28M SAM weighed 8 tons. But not many such missiles were built.
      10. KKND
        KKND 2 August 2020 09: 29 New
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        The rate on the air defense system was largely forced.

        At first it was forced, when in the 50s there were no rescues from jet bombers, what then prevented such a topic from being covered up and a stake on the IA?
        Quote: Bongo
        In Vietnam, for a number of reasons, the frankly outdated CA-75M 10-cm range was used and things did not go so well.

        There, the figures can be interpreted this way and that, according to American data, 68% of aircraft losses from anti-aircraft artillery were lost, plus a large percentage of fighters. And considering how many expensive rockets went into milk, it was generally a quiet horror. Nevertheless, General William W. Momyer himself says that the air defense systems were still effective, otherwise the losses from the ZA would have been several times less.
        Quote: Bongo
        At the same time, the S-200 air defense system turned out to be very expensive and difficult to operate.

        Expensive can be as much as necessary, the USSR was not greedy about the price / effectiveness of weapons. And the weapon was not particularly effective, otherwise the USSR would have begun to build 10 tons of joy.
        Then it is easy to fight off heavy aircraft with fighters / interceptors. The same MiG-25 \ 31 F-14.
        And what, as a result, is better for the price / efficiency of the MiG-25 \ 31 or the S-200 is a very big debatable question, which has already been answered by time.
      11. Bongo
        3 August 2020 14: 52 New
        +3
        Quote: KKND
        what then prevented from covering such a topic and making a bet on the IA?

        You and I seem to have already discussed this. The USSR was surrounded by US and NATO Air Force bases; aircraft carriers and strategic bombers-carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic posed a great danger. The interceptors could not have time to take off, and they would not have time everywhere.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 3 August 2020 16: 08 New
    +2
    "All the air defense systems then drank a global scale" ///
    ---
    Not all, but about long-range ... there is something in your words.
    The manufacturers of these systems tend to exaggerate their capabilities.
    It is more reliable to release fast fighter-interceptors towards aviation
    the enemy, than tensely guessing near the radars of the complex, in which way you
    deceived today.
  • Bongo
    4 August 2020 08: 55 New
    +2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    The manufacturers of these systems tend to exaggerate their capabilities.
    It is more reliable to release fast fighter-interceptors towards aviation
    the enemy, than tensely guessing near the radars of the complex, in which way you
    deceived today.

    Do not confuse the maximum firing range at such large and low-maneuverable targets as AWACS aircraft, tankers, long-range reconnaissance aircraft and base anti-submarine missiles with an effective firing range at actively maneuvering tactical and carrier-based aircraft, as well as cruise missiles. Ideally, there should be a balance between interceptors and air defense systems. By the way, Israel is very tightly covered by ground-based air defense and missile defense systems.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 4 August 2020 09: 19 New
    +2
    Our Patriots were shot down by those who inadvertently flew into Israel
    Syrian warplanes, hefty S-200 missiles flying in by inertia
    after misses, drones. There was no practice on maneuvering targets ...
  • Bongo
    4 August 2020 12: 36 New
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Our Patriots were shot down by those who inadvertently flew into Israel
    Syrian warplanes, hefty S-200 missiles flying in by inertia
    after misses, drones. There was no practice on maneuvering targets ...

    Fortunately, there was no ... shooting at actively maneuvering targets is usually carried out during full-scale hostilities. As for the 5V28 missiles used as part of the S-200VM air defense system, in the event of a miss or failure of the escort, they must rise to the maximum height and self-destruct.