Military Review

The Ministry of Defense showed a video of the exercises on the organization of layered air defense

177
The Ministry of Defense showed a video of the exercises on the organization of layered air defense

A video of the past exercises on the organization of echeloned air defense using the latest military air defense weapons at the Kapustin Yar training ground near Astrakhan has appeared on the Web. The video was posted on its YouTube channel by the Russian Ministry of Defense.


As stated in the description for the video, anti-aircraft gunners from five air defense units took part in the exercise. The main task is to organize an echeloned air defense and repel a massive strike of ballistic and cruise missiles.

Anti-aircraft systems and complexes took part in repelling the "raid" with live firing: S-300V4, "Buk-M3", "Tor-M2", combat vehicles "Typhoon-Air Defense" with MANPADS "Verba". The "Adjutant" target complex was used as an "enemy", capable of creating a complex target environment using a wide range of simulators of air attack weapons. The targets included in the complex can simulate targets from helicopters to cruise missiles.


The exercises took place in several stages. At the first stage, the S-300V4 long-range air defense systems repelled the strike of aeroballistic missiles, performing combat launches at targets descending from an altitude of more than 200 km. At the second stage, the Buk-M3 medium-range and Tor-M2 short-range air defense systems repelled the attack of cruise missiles flying at altitudes less than 10 meters. SAM "Buk-M3" hit targets at a distance of up to 40 km, and "Tor-M2" at a range of up to 15 km.

Air defense calculations with Verba MANPADS on Typhoon-Air Defense combat vehicles ensured the interception and destruction of the remaining air attack weapons at a range of up to 6 thousand meters and an altitude of 3,5 thousand meters.

The crews participating in the firing destroyed more than 30 air single and group targets at various altitudes and distances. The exercises were recognized as successful.
177 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. MTN
    MTN 28 October 2020 14: 09
    14
    echeloned air defense is a guarantee of the safety of equipment and manpower from all patches, including UAVs. He who controls the air controls the war.
    1. nnm
      nnm 28 October 2020 14: 11
      +7
      Foreign publications (not Armenian, Hong Kong) report that as early as last week our Krasukha used and dropped 9 UAVs in Armenia in a day. So or not - everyone is silent, but such information is reported.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 28 October 2020 14: 13
        19
        Quote: nnm
        Foreign publications (not Armenian, Hong Kong) report that last week our Rubella used and dropped 9 UAVs per day in Armenia.

        Provocation.
        "Krasuha" is designed to combat aircraft radar
        In principle, the UAV cannot drop.
        1. nnm
          nnm 28 October 2020 14: 16
          +4
          I say - "for what I bought - for what I sold." As I understood from the article, it was not the interception of control that was carried out, but the suppression of communication channels and they write that a number of Turkish UAVs, if communication channels are lost, do not have a return function, etc., and therefore simply fall as a result ...
          https://inosmi.ru/military/20201028/248418741.html
          Whether it was true or not, I immediately said that I did not know.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 28 October 2020 14: 28
            +8
            Quote: nnm
            write that a number of Turkish UAVs, with the loss of communication channels, do not have a return function, etc., and therefore simply fall as a result ...

            Also a lie. Now even simple civilian drones have such functions.

            It's just that someone really wants to drag Russia into the war. Or at least denigrate it in the eyes of the population of Azerbaijan
            1. ancient
              ancient 28 October 2020 14: 37
              +7
              Quote: Spade
              Also a lie.

              And then how to understand this? recourse
              1.Quote - "..... air defense systems medium-range "Buk-M3" and short-range "Tor-M2", repelled an attack of cruise missiles flying at altitudes less than 10 meters.
              2. Quote - "..... SAM "Buk-M3" hit targets at a distance of up to 40 km, and "Tor-M2" at a distance of up to 15 km. "
              To understand the essence of the issue, he specially highlighted ... So where did the Buk have such an opportunity - to detect, capture on the AU and destroy the CD at a distance of 40 km (!!!) belay ... when flying the AKP at an altitude of .... 10 meters (!!!). belay
              Again, the "girls" of the press service ... "having fun"? wassat
              1. Herman 4223
                Herman 4223 28 October 2020 15: 02
                +2
                Maybe an over-the-horizon launch? It was not the beech itself that found the missiles, but some other means, and through the command post they gave information where to launch, the target missiles were found.
              2. Lopatov
                Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 03
                10
                Quote: ancient
                Again, the "girls" of the press service ... "having fun"?

                The main thing is not this.
                The main thing is that the system is being worked out.
                And I hope they will be ready. And not like in South Ossetia.
                1. ancient
                  ancient 28 October 2020 17: 12
                  +9
                  Quote: Spade
                  And not like in South Ossetia

                  Are you talking about the fact that when, at last, the air defense systems of the 58th Army arrived for unloading ... the 5-day war has already ended? wink
              3. alexmach
                alexmach 28 October 2020 15: 04
                +3
                So where did the Buk have such an opportunity - to detect, capture on the AU and destroy the CD at a distance of 40 km (!!!)

                And look in the video high-altitude radar just with beeches deployed.

                PS: low-altitude
                1. ancient
                  ancient 28 October 2020 16: 57
                  +6
                  Quote: alexmach
                  PS: low-altitude

                  Saw what? request
                  Even in the "school" they taught, well, in the "akamedi" the same thing .. yes, and in the troops it is used in the calculations that: line-of-sight range DPV (in kilometers) for the height of the antenna system of the HRS radar and the altitude of the target hц given in meters determined by the empirical formula:

                  It so happens that ... does not work out .. "Danila has a master of the stone flower" wink
                  1. alexmach
                    alexmach 28 October 2020 18: 15
                    +3
                    Taking the antenna height as 25 m, I counted 33 km according to your own formula. yes, it really does not reach 40.
                    1. Simargl
                      Simargl 28 October 2020 19: 04
                      +2
                      Quote: alexmach
                      Taking the antenna height as 25 m, I counted 33 km according to your own formula. yes, it really does not reach 40.
                      This formula works over the seas / akiyans. And the land - it can be of any shape on the site: both convex (mountains, hills and, oddly enough, plain), and even (intermountain, valley), and convex (the same intermountain, hollow, valley) ...
                      Let's say a cube is a ball with eight peaks, six depressions ...
                      1. alexmach
                        alexmach 28 October 2020 19: 23
                        0
                        And land - it can be of any shape on the site

                        Well, we have a land that is not abstract, but rather conservative. The video is very flat. But yes, indeed, this Kapustin Yar is a kind of depression.
                      2. Niel-le-Calais
                        Niel-le-Calais 29 October 2020 09: 05
                        0
                        Quote: alexmach
                        But yes, really, this Kapustin Yar is a kind of depression.

                        Caspian lowland
                        Absolute height from -28 to 149 m
                2. Kvazar
                  Kvazar 29 October 2020 01: 21
                  +1
                  A50U? Participated in the exercises? +) In general, you forget that our military usually generally downgrade the characteristics and give out modifications "E" to the press
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 28 October 2020 15: 14
              +3
              Quote: ancient
              To understand the essence of the issue, he specially highlighted ... So where did the Buka "come from" such an opportunity - to detect, capture on the AU and destroy the CD at a distance of 40 km (!!!) belay ... when flying the AKP at an altitude ... 10 meters (!!!).

              In theory, it is possible if you use the 9M317M SAM with ARGSN (9B-1103M). There, no illumination is needed - you only need to bring the missile defense system into the target capture area of ​​the seeker.
              1. ancient
                ancient 28 October 2020 17: 01
                +4
                Quote: Alexey RA
                In theory it is possible

                Even hypothetically, it is difficult to imagine ... when there is a flow of missiles, and even under the conditions of using RES ... and the rocket also maneuvers (after all, it is not in dense layers of the atmosphere that it flies on hypersound wink) ... to take the rocket itself and to find and capture it ...
                And in the "cinema" ... all Buki and Torah hit their targets ... well, a maximum of 2-5 kilometers ... and no more wink
            3. rocket757
              rocket757 28 October 2020 18: 27
              +1
              Quote: ancient
              Again, the "girls" of the press service ... "having fun"?

              Everything within the performance characteristics of the complex, additional means of reconnaissance, control, this is normal.
            4. Simargl
              Simargl 28 October 2020 18: 59
              -1
              Quote: ancient
              So where did the Buka get such an opportunity - to detect, capture on the AU and destroy the CD at a distance of 40 km (!!!) ... when flying the ACR at an altitude of .... 10 meters (!!!).
              40 km by 10 m in the mountains? Write more! Interesting.
              1. ancient
                ancient 29 October 2020 16: 19
                +3
                Quote: Simargl
                40 km by 10 m in the mountains? Write more! Interesting.

                Poor eyesight? .. Sometimes wassat
                "This" in the "urya-article" is written wink ... so your .. "pod..kolki" .. to the wrong address laughing
        2. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 14: 29
          -6
          The head is for that to think, and not only in it. From such messages, the myth about Krasukha and Avtobaza is created. About the interception of control of military UAVs is a myth, there is not a single proven case. There are 3 reasons for the loss of a UAV: ​​operator error, technical malfunction, physical impact of air defense.
          1. Sandor Clegane
            Sandor Clegane 28 October 2020 14: 34
            +5
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            There are 3 reasons for the loss of a UAV: ​​operator error, technical malfunction, physical impact of air defense.

            4 reasons - the physical impact of nature
          2. Lopatov
            Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 02
            +1
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            There are 3 reasons for the loss of a UAV: ​​operator error, technical malfunction, physical impact of air defense.

            Spoofing.
            Coordinate substitution.
            But military UAVs are usually immune to this. And encryption of the signal from satellites, and the presence of ANN
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 09
              -1
              Quote: Spade
              military UAVs are usually immune to this. And encryption of the signal from satellites, and the presence of ANN

              That's right, it works against civilians, and even then not against everyone.
          3. NEXUS
            NEXUS 28 October 2020 15: 32
            +1
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            About the interception of control of military UAVs is a myth, there is not a single proven case.

            And how to prove the EW effect in general? But nevertheless Krasuha is supplied to the troops for some reason. Apparently in your world this is for Schaub wasO.
            The very fact of ACCEPTANCE for ARMS Krasukha, suggests that this complex has confirmed its performance characteristics. That is, AWACS, for Krasukha, is what she "eats" with. And if she "eats" AWACS planes, then taking over control or stupidly drowning the signal of the UAV operator will not pose any problem for her.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 38
              -4
              Words words words. Not tired of doing idle talk? 3 wars in a year with UAVs, where is at least one example of the successful use of electronic warfare? Here's a thread with the destruction of air defense and electronic warfare for a couple of hours.

              Here is the reality:

              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 28 October 2020 15: 46
                +4
                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                3 wars in a year with UAVs, where is at least one example of the successful use of electronic warfare?

                And now we turn on the brains, and ask ourselves the question - who should confirm the successful use of electronic warfare systems?
                Since you have a bad ON button, I explain ... to someone who effectively used the electronic warfare complex, publicity is not profitable, since it will be clear to the specialists how a specific complex works, and accordingly these problems will be eliminated in the same UAVs, Avaks, etc. Why do we need to confirm the impact of our electronic warfare systems?
                And the one on whom it was all worked out and even more so to declare the successful interception of their aircraft there is no reason.
                And the fact that you put videos there ... watch them at night ... yeah.
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 51
                  -3
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  And now we turn on the brains, and ask ourselves the question - who should confirm the successful use of electronic warfare systems?

                  Included. Lack of UAVs in the conflict zone as confirmation. Only here in Idlib, 80 km from the Khmeimim base, Turkish "whatnot" flew from the first to the last days of the conflict.

                  Turkey showed footage of delivering a massive attack on SAA in Idlib
                  February 28 2020

                  https://topwar.ru/168446-turcija-pokazala-kadry-nanesenija-massirovannogo-udar-po-saa-v-idlibe.html

                  Turkish army hits airfield east of Aleppo and shells Kurdish cities
                  February 29 2020

                  https://topwar.ru/168467-tureckaja-armija-udarila-po-ajerodromu-k-vostoku-ot-aleppo-i-obstreljali-kurdskie-goroda.html

                  Turkish UAVs hit the airfield in Hama. Russia does not guarantee security for Turkish Air Force over Syria
                  March 2 2020

                  https://topwar.ru/168518-tureckie-bpla-nanesli-udar-po-ajerodromu-v-hame-rf-ne-garantiruet-bezopasnost-dlja-vvs-turcii-nad-siriej.html
                  1. CSKA
                    CSKA 29 October 2020 11: 22
                    0
                    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                    Only here in Idlib, 80 km from the Khmeimim base, Turkish "whatnot" flew from the first to the last days of the conflict.

                    Only here the Russian Federation did not participate in the battles against the Turks in Idlib, if you are not aware.
                    1. OgnennyiKotik
                      OgnennyiKotik 29 October 2020 11: 24
                      0
                      Quote: CSKA
                      RF did not participate in battles against the Turks

                      Aha laughing Siliputics fought well, well laughing
                    2. CSKA
                      CSKA 29 October 2020 12: 33
                      0
                      laughing Well kapets. At least start thinking with your head and look at the map. Where is Idlib and where is Palmyra. Were there any Turks in Palmyra? What can you say about this when a person has no basic knowledge of geography.
                    3. OgnennyiKotik
                      OgnennyiKotik 29 October 2020 12: 36
                      0
                      Where is the Khmeimim base located? wink
                    4. CSKA
                      CSKA 29 October 2020 12: 59
                      0
                      Oh my God. Shkolota wake up. In Palmyra, the Turks did not fight the SAR. So Cho the video that you showed has nothing to do with Idlib where the SARs really fought with the Turks. There is a base in Khmeimim, but this does not mean that the Russian Federation fought against the Turks. It's just nonsense. Give at least one proof that the RF Armed Forces fought against the Turks in Idlib, or at least used electronic warfare. And without empty chatter.
                2. CSKA
                  CSKA 29 October 2020 12: 35
                  0
                  And if you don't understand, then this is clearly a PMC.
          4. saylor1971
            saylor1971 28 October 2020 19: 53
            0
            On the face of the successful use of UAVs for ground targets. Electronic warfare systems (if any) should cover at least artillery and S-300 positions, but this is not observed. But there is footage of the destruction of Repilent. Draw your own conclusions.
        3. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 47
          0
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          3 wars in a year with UAVs, where is at least one example of the successful use of electronic warfare?

          Israel. By Iranian UAVs.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 55
            -2
            There is no confirmation that it is electronic warfare. Hitting control centers has a greater effect. What are they actually doing all the time.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 October 2020 16: 08
              +2
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              There is no confirmation that it is electronic warfare.

              Appropriately. Clairvoyants indicated the control points to the Israelis 8)))))))))))))))))))))))
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 09
                -2
                In the comment below, he clarified his words.
              2. Krasnodar
                Krasnodar 28 October 2020 16: 26
                0
                Quote: Spade
                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                There is no confirmation that it is electronic warfare.

                Appropriately. Clairvoyants indicated the control points to the Israelis 8)))))))))))))))))))))))

                Iranian, on trucks, located in the area of ​​the T4 base
            2. LifeIsGood
              LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 16: 18
              +1
              And no one will confirm to you that it was the electronic warfare that worked.
          2. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 03
            -2
            I will clarify. Electronic warfare in the sense of REB (Electronic Suppression). They cannot do without RER (Electronic Intelligence). It is simply necessary to identify the control center, but ground systems are a weak assistant in this. We need air-based, I do not know Israeli ground-based electronic warfare systems, only air.
            In any case, it is the entire complex of weapons and equipment that decides, not its component parts.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 October 2020 16: 12
              +1
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              I will clarify. Electronic warfare in the sense of REP

              laughing
              In fact, the main function of electronic warfare is just intelligence
              .
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              It is simply necessary to identify the control center, but ground systems are a weak assistant in this

              eight)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
              Of course, they work 24/7 and at the same time cover huge areas. How can such be used? Not on your nelly.
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 22
                -3
                Quote: Spade
                In fact, the main function of electronic warfare is just intelligence

                I agree. I put a minus in my diary. According to the concepts of this site, REB = REP
                Quote: Spade
                Of course, they work 24/7 and at the same time cover huge areas.

                Little problem. The RER systems based on the Gulfstream G500 / G600 and UAVs solve this problem. I just do not know anything about Israel's ground-based electronic warfare systems, if I will be glad to tell you.
          3. Krasnodar
            Krasnodar 28 October 2020 16: 25
            0
            Quote: Spade
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            3 wars in a year with UAVs, where is at least one example of the successful use of electronic warfare?

            Israel. By Iranian UAVs.

            Patriots and Apache helicopter
        4. LifeIsGood
          LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 16: 23
          0
          Examples .... how do you imagine it? Filming how the operators work? laughing
          And ... EW complexes are such an "intimate topic" repeat which no one really talks about. In all these conflicts, they could simply confirm the performance characteristics in the field and return them back. And record 2-3 of the fallen UAVs on the air defense.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 32
            -3
            Quote: LifeIsGood
            Examples .... how do you imagine it? Filming how the operators work?

            Video as an option, confirmed stories of witnesses, the absence of the UAV in the combat zone, the systemic fall of the UAV without external damage.
            1. LifeIsGood
              LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 16: 54
              -1
              https://vz.ru/news/2019/2/21/965452.html
              Will this confirmation be enough?
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 17: 00
                -1
                Quote: LifeIsGood
                https://vz.ru/news/2019/2/21/965452.html

                "Sure" laughing
                back in 2011 Iran used the Russian system Electronic warfare 1L222 "Avtobaza" to capture drone USA RQ-170
                laughing laughing laughing
                The video was published Feb 21. Dec 2019
                в 2011 and 2013... The UAVs of the Americans were landed with the help of those supplied by Russia to Iran complexes "Avtobaza".
                laughing laughing good

                1L222 "Avtobaza"
                1L222M "Avtobaza-M"

                The purpose of the reconnaissance complex is the passive detection of emitting radars, including pulsed side-view aviation radars, weapon control and low-altitude flight radars, and the issuance of angular coordinates of operating radars (azimuth, elevation angle), radar class, frequency numbers to an automated control center band according to the lettering of the jamming stations SPN-2 or SPN-4.
              2. LifeIsGood
                LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 17: 20
                0
                You find fault with words. What complex they used there is not important. An important fact is Iran has seized control and planted a US UAV. That's all ... With the help of the same "Avtobaza", which turned out to have "additional functions" or it was generally a joint operation of the Russian Federation and Iran and a completely different complex was used, it does not matter.
                I repeat, the fact is important - UAV control has been intercepted!
              3. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 17: 25
                -2
                laughing If you want it to be like this in your world, I don't mind laughing But the reality is this:

              4. LifeIsGood
                LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 17: 40
                +2
                What is reality? What are you talking about? Have you completely lost the thread of the discussion that was being conducted here? what
                And why did you put these videos here? Show what kind of shitty air defense the Armenians have? Well, everyone already knows this for so long ... or just want to crow?
  • Military77
    Military77 28 October 2020 15: 39
    +3
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    There are 3 reasons for the loss of a UAV: ​​operator error, technical malfunction, physical impact of air defense.

    Yes, it is impossible to intercept control, due to the use of encryption of communication channels with AES algorithms, if someone could crack this algorithm, they would receive a Nobel Prize in mathematics. But it is possible to "jam" the communication channel, even if the control frequencies are pseudo-random. It is possible to influence the UAV electronics with a powerful directional EMP. Another option is to burn it with a directed laser pulse.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 45
      -3
      Quote: Military77
      But it is possible to "jam" the communication channel, even if the control frequencies are pseudo-random.

      In theory, yes. But in practice, either the REB sector is narrow, or the range is not sufficient, or there are many dead zones. And usually all this together. And there are a lot of working ways to get around. Works with a bang against civilian drones.
      Quote: Military77
      It is possible to influence the UAV electronics with a powerful directional EMP. Another option is to burn it with a directed laser pulse.
      While this is in theory, there are no working systems, only in the US Navy lasers began to appear.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 32
          -4
          Is he in the army? Is there at least a video of his work?
          1. Military77
            Military77 28 October 2020 16: 39
            0
            Read the article carefully. Not a single state will show on video cases of the use of the latest technology, so as not to disclose, thereby, its characteristics.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 44
              -4
              Quote: Military77
              No state will show cases of the latest technology in the video





            2. Military77
              Military77 28 October 2020 16: 47
              +1
              So this is a commercial, not a video of his work. Cartoon for the customer.
            3. da Vinci
              da Vinci 28 October 2020 18: 39
              0
              In principle, yes, as well as the video from the air defense exercises (shown in the article).
  • Military77
    Military77 28 October 2020 16: 33
    +2
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    In theory, yes. But in practice, either the REB sector is narrow, or the range is not sufficient, or there are many dead zones. And usually all this together. And there are a lot of working ways to get around. Works with a bang against civilian drones.

    Yeah, but these factors do not affect the operator's connection with the drone. He flies behind on a broomstick and controls the joystick in the line of sight))) Sorry - this is nonsense.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 36
      -4
      These factors are leveled out without problems. Any theory is confirmed by practice. Practice shows that UAVs destroy electronic warfare systems, and not vice versa. There is a video of the destruction of Repellents in the comments.
      1. Military77
        Military77 28 October 2020 16: 43
        +2
        As practice shows, the training of drugs is 90% of the success of the technique. The Yugoslavs managed to land the Amerovsky from the ancient C-125 "super-duper" F-117.
  • saylor1971
    saylor1971 28 October 2020 20: 02
    0
    Moreover, REP funds emit a lot and therefore their positions are quickly opened.
  • LifeIsGood
    LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 16: 16
    +1
    Yes, it is impossible to intercept control, due to the use of encryption of communication channels with AES algorithms, if someone could crack this algorithm, they would receive a Nobel Prize in mathematics.

    A way has long been found. There is no encryption that cannot be cracked.
    https://www.securitylab.ru/news/406880.php - статья за 2011 год. С того времени прошло уже 9 лет...
    In general, the statement "it is impossible to take over control" is extremely controversial !!!
    1. Military77
      Military77 28 October 2020 16: 25
      +1
      We've already found a way

      In this article, it is written that the speed of obtaining keys for encryption increases by only 5 times. Those. from 10 to 32 degrees of years, using all the computing power of the world, only 5 times faster. The article also states that
      However, from a practical point of view, it is not yet possible to break the AES cipher
      1. LifeIsGood
        LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 17: 00
        0
        Did you notice that the article is for 2011 year 9 years have passed since that moment ... In 9 years it could have been hacked, repaired and hacked again 10 times. The worst thing is that no one in their right mind will talk about this. Believe it or not, 9 years in IT is such a specific period already.
        1. Military77
          Military77 28 October 2020 17: 35
          +3
          Of course I did. AES encryption is based on the uniqueness theorem for the remainder of two primes and IT is completely irrelevant here. Mathematics is a conservative science and 9 years for it is not a period at all. And the theorem is such a thing, do not break it, it will remain a theorem.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 16: 28
      -4
      Quote: LifeIsGood
      https://www.securitylab.ru/news/406880.php - статья за 2011 год.

      Have you read the article before submitting it? Extra confirmation of my words.
      “This study shook a lot of the foundations as we got the first method of breaking, a single key AES cipher, (slightly) faster than a brute force attack,” said Nate Lawson, cryptographer and head of security consulting at Root Labs. - However, from a practical point of view, it is not yet possible to break the AES cipher».
      1. LifeIsGood
        LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 17: 01
        -1
        Have you seen the year this article was written? article for 2011. During this time, anything could have happened. The most important thing is that hack is POSSIBLE!
        1. strelokmira
          strelokmira 28 October 2020 17: 58
          +1
          The most important thing is that it is POSSIBLE to hack!

          The main thing is that by the time you break the BLPA into dust from old age, it does not crumble)
    3. saylor1971
      saylor1971 28 October 2020 20: 04
      0
      Control is often carried out using satellite communications, and this interception is only possible from a similar satellite. And we should not forget the inertia system.
  • sg7s
    sg7s 29 October 2020 01: 37
    0
    In total - in the bottom line - can we counteract (change the combat mission of the drone, take it away from the trajectory, influence the control, etc.) or not? Specialists, answer, everyone is waiting for prof. Answer. The topic is important, the whole doctrine goes to hell ... S-300, shells, I understand, about nothing against the same Turkish ... how to live? Well, in the forests we will stretch, in the mountains, and in the steppes?
  • LifeIsGood
    LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 14: 52
    +1
    Well, I would not say so categorically ... All the capabilities of the complex are known only in the Moscow Region. It is quite possible that it can jam the UAV's communication channels.
    Yes, and there it is not clear what kind of complex was used. Such articles are born from the fact that 9 UAVs were dropped in Azerbaijan, and then there are pure speculations. There is no evidence that it was Krasukha who worked ... she is just the most popular complex, that's all. Another system could work there, for example, generally exclusively sharpened for countering UAVs.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 05
      +2
      Quote: LifeIsGood
      Well, I would not say so categorically

      And I will.
      If Russia gets caught on real direct assistance to the NK army, big problems await us.
      Therefore, no one will have fun, no matter what they invented in Hong Kong.
  • NEXUS
    NEXUS 28 October 2020 15: 25
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    Provocation.
    "Krasuha" is designed to combat aircraft radar
    In principle, the UAV cannot drop.

    Seriously? Are you sure that the same Krasukha-4 is not able to "drop" the UAV? And what is so difficult for this complex, if it is able to silence AWACS?
    Technical details about the complex are classified. It is argued that the capabilities of the active jamming station make it possible to effectively deal with all modern radar stations. According to some reports, the Krasukha-4 electronic warfare system is capable of jamming not only the signal of enemy radar stations, but also radio control channels for unmanned aerial vehicles.

    And what kind of Krasuha are we talking about? What do you know about the performance characteristics of Krasuha-4, and for example about Krasukha 2o?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 45
      +7
      Quote: NEXUS
      Are you sure that the same Krasukha-4 is not able to "drop" the UAV?

      It is intended.
      Quote: NEXUS
      if he is able to silence AWACS?

      But this can.
      You can dig a hole of any size with a shovel. But it will not work to change the gasket in the tap with it.
      Each tool serves a different function.
      If this is the INTERFERENCE station, then it deals with interference. Not trying to hack the "brains" of the UAV

      Quote: NEXUS
      but also radio control channels for unmanned aerial vehicles.

      Loss of communication for modern UAVs can lead, at best, to termination of the mission and return.
      But definitely not to "drop"
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 28 October 2020 15: 50
        0
        Quote: Spade
        Are you sure that the same Krasukha-4 is not able to "drop" the UAV?

        It is intended.

        It's not in vain that I asked about the performance characteristics of Krasukha. What is the range of application of this complex in general? What Krasukha can be used against UAVs?
        You, not knowing at all about this complex, in fact, nothing, categorically assert that it is not capable of intercepting or dropping the UAV. And I asked you a question, what is so difficult for Krasukha -4, in the issue of intercepting or disabling a UAV, if it "feeds" on Avaks, planes that are not easy to jam? And you tell me about the shovels and about the gaskets ... while not understanding in principle what Krasukha-4 is sharpened for.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 October 2020 16: 08
          +3
          Quote: NEXUS
          What is the range of application of this complex in general?

          You yourself indicated. "Interference"

          Quote: NEXUS
          What Krasukha can be used against UAVs?

          Any.
          But none can "drop".
          Because it already depends on the UAV, and not on the "Krasukh"

          Quote: NEXUS
          if it "feeds" on Avaks, airplanes that are not easy to jam?

          Attention question: does she drop them?
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 28 October 2020 16: 12
            0
            Quote: Spade
            Attention question: does she drop them?

            She muffles him and makes him blind. Attention, the question is, are you sure that Krasukha is ONLY capable of intercepting control, and is not capable of stupidly making a cheap flying UAV useless flying shit, over which to take control and there is no point? And if there are a lot of such UAVs? Where to put them all then?
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 October 2020 16: 18
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              She muffles him and makes him blind.

              And?
              According to the information received from the INS, it turns around and flies to the designated area. Where the operator can take control of it for landing. This is the worst case.
              Or it can fly along the designated route, collecting information autonomously. And come back with her in the beak.

              Quote: NEXUS
              Attention to the question - are you sure that Krasukha is ONLY capable of intercepting control

              I am sure that it is possible to purposefully "drop" only by taking control. And without interfering. Unless, of course, these are cheap drones from Ali Express.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 28 October 2020 16: 23
                0
                Quote: Spade
                I am sure that it is possible to purposefully "drop" only by taking control.

                And according to your statements, Krasukha is not capable of such a thing ... the question is, where are the firewoods from? I say again, if Krasukha-4 is able to make such an aircraft as AWACS blind and deaf, that a priori nichrome is not an easy task, then why is she not capable of such a target as a UAV "drop"? What are Krasuha's operating modes?
              2. Military77
                Military77 28 October 2020 17: 04
                0
                I am sure that it is possible to purposefully "drop" only by taking control. And without interfering. Unless, of course, these are cheap drones from Ali Express.

                I have another question: how can you take over control? This is possible only when using an unencrypted communication channel, or, purely theoretically, when using asymmetric encryption at the time of the key change.
          2. Military77
            Military77 28 October 2020 17: 18
            +3
            Quote: Spade
            Any.
            But none can "drop".
            Because it already depends on the UAV, and not on the "Krasukh"

            It all depends on how the UAV return algorithm is implemented. If by satellite, then the GPS signal is successfully "choking". If according to the visuals from the cameras, then there must be a good AI-based computer on board and the device will be very expensive. If the route is memorized, then weather conditions affect its successful return.
            As a result, we have the most budgetary option - this is GPS, i.e. in case of suppression of control from the operator and loss of the GPS signal, the device will fall, since it will be blind and deaf.
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 28 October 2020 17: 22
              0
              Quote: Military77
              As a result, we have the most budgetary option - this is GPS, i.e. in case of suppression of control from the operator and loss of the GPS signal, the device will fall, since it will be blind and deaf.

              That's what I'm talking about ... just for some reason, people believe that all UAVs, without exception, are so technologically advanced that they have the function of returning to base in case of loss of communication. And in case of interception of control, what prevents the Krasukha operator from indicating the place of the UAV landing in the algorithm -200 meters from the surface, for example?
  • Cananecat
    Cananecat 28 October 2020 16: 01
    0
    They are looking for experts in the wrong place ...))
  • YOUR
    YOUR 29 October 2020 07: 25
    0
    How is an airplane radar different from a ground one?
    Yes, nothing.
    And what is the difference between a radio channel and a radar radio channel? You know practically the same by nothing. Is that the modulation of the wave and its length.
    The principle of setting a hindrance is the same for everyone. The main thing is to find the source
  • rocket757
    rocket757 28 October 2020 14: 34
    +2
    It would have been beautiful, BUT, it’s not clear ... let alone dreamers in the local networks heaps of!
  • MTN
    MTN 28 October 2020 14: 36
    +2
    Quote: nnm
    So or not - everyone is silent, but such information is reported.

    In Karabakh, Azerbaijan showed the war of the 21st century and the Armenians have weapons and strategies of the 20th century. The main and only reason for the Armenians' losses is their belief in their loudness. This is where all the following jambs follow. Stealing money for the army. We bought weapons from China, then from Serbia .... and on credit to Russia. Believing in their impunity, they began to flirt with NATO before Pashinyan. 2016 April. They saw that they were breaking through the defense. 30 year old defense does not roll + UAV. They have not learned the lesson again. And when Pashinyan came, their luck was over. Now is the time to harvest. Is reading. This is also the official data. The reality is a lot deplorable. The source is Armenian.

    https://ru.armeniasputnik.am/karabah/20201028/25094290/Novyy-spisok-pogibshikh-armyanskikh-voennosluzhaschikh-v-Karabakhe--dannye-za-28-oktyabrya---.html
    1. LifeIsGood
      LifeIsGood 28 October 2020 15: 49
      +1
      What a 21st century ... I beg you. He did not show Nifiga anything new.
      The main and only reason for the Armenians' losses is shitty air defense and that's it.
      If the Armenians initially had a normal air defense system, Azerbadzhan would not be luminous. He might have tried to do something, but after a week of fighting he would have turned back.
  • Crabong
    Crabong 29 October 2020 04: 09
    0
    So they are silent or are they reporting?
  • Sandor Clegane
    Sandor Clegane 28 October 2020 14: 16
    +6
    Quote: MTN
    He who controls the air controls the war.

    who controls space - he controls the earth
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 28 October 2020 14: 36
      +1
      Quote: Sandor Clegane
      who controls space - he controls the earth

      This is, so far, in projects and plans, and even then not many.
      Over time, it will be so, but most likely our descendants will see it.
    2. MTN
      MTN 28 October 2020 15: 06
      +2
      Quote: Sandor Clegane
      who controls space - he controls the earth

      I agree! But if I'm not mistaken, Azerbaijan has 2 satellites in space. 1st civilian and 2nd for military purposes. Well, the extreme man Azerbaijan can ask for data from friends. Air defense and missile defense is number 1.
  • Same lech
    Same lech 28 October 2020 14: 28
    +5
    echeloned air defense is a guarantee of the safety of equipment and manpower from all patches, including UAVs.

    Until the enemy begins to massively use cheap missiles and bombs to fight air defense ... gutting ammunition.
    1. dragy52rus
      dragy52rus 28 October 2020 14: 37
      +2
      what will the other branches of the military do at this time? wait until the air defense is taken out?
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 28 October 2020 14: 40
        +4
        what will the other branches of the military do at this time? wait until the air defense is taken out?

        I don't even know looking at how the NKAO air defense is being demolished hi
        I remember how the Americans demolished the air defenses of Yugoslavia, Iraq ... practically nothing serious they could oppose the US air strikes with missile strikes.
        1. dragy52rus
          dragy52rus 28 October 2020 15: 24
          +2
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          I don't even know looking at how the NKAO air defense is being demolished

          and how is it demolished?

          what will the air defense aircraft do at this time? Why don't they demolish in response?
  • rocket757
    rocket757 28 October 2020 14: 32
    +6
    Quote: MTN
    layered air defense is a guarantee

    I will add - highly mobile, with a short deployment time and an effective management system, interaction, etc. etc.
    Also, as the most important element of air defense, clear interaction in aviation is necessary !!! One, even the lightest fighter, an attack helicopter, will easily clear the sky from all flying trifles !!!
    About drones, attack drone fighter, it's time too, it's time to do and learn to apply!
  • Virus-free crown
    Virus-free crown 28 October 2020 14: 41
    -3
    Quote: MTN
    echeloned air defense is a guarantee of the safety of equipment and manpower from all patches, including UAVs. He who controls the air controls the war.

    Tek-s ... on the one hand, that the exercises are taking place is good !!! soldier
    On the other hand ... I think so, at least $ 10 million was invested in the exercises (and this is at a minimum)

    So ... repeat For 10 million dollars, using the simplest developments 30+ years ago on modern components, in exercises, if I were for the "blue", from Kapustin Yar with all the equipment there was nothing left but scorched earth, where in the next 10 years not a blade of grass, no blade of grass would grow good

    "Generals are always preparing for the last war" (c) Winston Churchill
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 08
      +4
      Quote: Corona without virus
      if I was for the "blue", from Kapustin Yar with all the equipment there was nothing left but scorched earth

      Sofa ...
      laughing laughing laughing
      1. carstorm 11
        carstorm 11 28 October 2020 15: 17
        +2
        rather childish) couch even in theory know something)
        1. Virus-free crown
          Virus-free crown 28 October 2020 16: 30
          -2
          Quote: carstorm 11
          rather childish) couch even in theory know something)

          The subscription period of 15 years has already passed when I "presented to the public" my technology, so I can safely say now - at modern prices - the cost of burnt 100 square kilometers is 10 mln dollars))) and as then it was not, and now it is not technologies for intercepting wooden gliders, with a motor from the USSR on the air, where there will be half a kilo of metal in the structure, which fly, bending around the folds of the terrain, do not flicker in any ranges, and are not even controlled remotely laughing all!!! components can be purchased in modern stores and online stores absolutely legally to anyone
          1. carstorm 11
            carstorm 11 28 October 2020 17: 10
            +1
            yes for God's sake) we will assume that you are a genius and can destroy the world very cheaply)
            1. Virus-free crown
              Virus-free crown 28 October 2020 17: 14
              -3
              Quote: carstorm 11
              for God's sake) we will assume that you genius and you can destroy the world very cheaply)

              The word highlighted by me in your post in bold spelled with a capital letter Г wassat

              if it is about my abilities in chemistry and biology ... repeat hi

              well, yes - you can write with a small letter bully
              1. carstorm 11
                carstorm 11 28 October 2020 17: 18
                +2
                I write exactly as I think it is correct. you have already spoken to a meeting with a professional doctor. let's finish it better.
                1. Virus-free crown
                  Virus-free crown 28 October 2020 17: 24
                  -3
                  Quote: carstorm 11
                  I write exactly as I think it is correct. you have already spoken to a meeting with a professional doctor... let's finish it better.

                  In-in ... Academician Sakharov the same after his idea to place 100 megaton bombs near the coast of the United States, so that at the "X" hour the United States would boldly advise with a "man-made" tsunami to check with a psychiatrist - at the highest level was advised tongue

                  It took ... decades have passed ... and I don’t see a single "attack" even from the West, when Putin explicitly announced to the whole world that the idea of ​​Academician Sakharov had been implemented, but, taking into account the development of technology, not in a stationary, and in the mobile version - that Putin is advised to check with a psychiatrist)))

                  So it is with me ... Suddenly ... maybe ... even if it is in my old age ... I will find the implementation of my idea "in hardware" for the benefit of Russia !!! soldier
      2. Virus-free crown
        Virus-free crown 28 October 2020 16: 01
        -3
        Quote: Spade
        Quote: Corona without virus
        if I was for the "blue", from Kapustin Yar with all the equipment there was nothing left but scorched earth

        Sofa ...
        laughing laughing laughing

        I officially admit that you are right good
        I poked it here - an area of ​​650 square kilometers - and I counted 10 million dollars as 100 square kilometers ... then I clarify - for fidelity, 70 million dollars - and on the territory of Kapustin Yar within 10 years neither a blade of grass nor a blade of grass would have grown after the exercises ))) and it doesn't matter if they would guard it or not winked
    2. ZEMCH
      ZEMCH 28 October 2020 16: 10
      +1
      Quote: Corona without virus
      So ... For 10 million dollars, using the simplest developments of 30+ years ago on modern components, in exercises, if I were for the "blue", from Kapustin Yar with all the equipment there was nothing left but scorched earth, where in the next 10 years, not a blade of grass, not a blade of grass would have grown

      They were shooting blue targets, you would have thrown targets at the Kap Yar range, but can you even imagine its size?))) I was there 4 days ago laughing
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 28 October 2020 14: 44
    -1
    I wonder how you can work on the barrage of ammunition right now? What do we have in this regard?
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 14: 47
      -6
      You can amaze with many things. Pantsir, Tor, Osa, Strela-10, other systems based on MANPADS, ZSU / ZU. The main thing is to find out in time, this is the main problem.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 28 October 2020 16: 25
        0
        Kamikaze drones will not be able to shoot down MANPADS - they are cold for the seeker.
    2. dragy52rus
      dragy52rus 28 October 2020 15: 27
      +1
      and you need to fight against the cause, not the effect. loitering ammunition does not appear from around the corner.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 28 October 2020 14: 13
    +2
    The exercises are certainly good, but what do we see at this stage in Karabakh? As a result of this war, the structure of the air defense forces should completely change, so the movement of troops, the system of deploying units in the battle formation.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2020 14: 28
      +4
      Quote: APASUS
      Following the results of this war, the structure of the air defense forces should completely change

      ?
      What for?
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 28 October 2020 14: 40
        +2
        Quote: Spade
        What for?

        Then, that the massive use of UAVs showed the weakness of some detection systems, it will be necessary to duplicate and complete in parallel with the means of electronic warfare
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 October 2020 15: 06
          +1
          Quote: APASUS
          Then, that the massive use of UAVs showed the weakness of some detection systems

          Which ones? Those who are required to detect cruise missiles and missiles?
          1. APASUS
            APASUS 28 October 2020 16: 01
            +2
            Quote: Spade
            Which ones? Those who are required to detect cruise missiles and missiles?

            Those that must perform their function in combat conditions, inflicting a massive attack by the enemy, ranging from ICBMs and ending with kamikaze drones.
            The story with the Armenian S-300 complex seems to have passed by?
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 October 2020 16: 13
              +1
              Quote: APASUS
              The story with the Armenian S-300 complex seems to have passed by?

              No.
              And where does this "story" come from?
              Our layered air defense system consists only of sphero-window S-300?
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 28 October 2020 19: 18
              0
              Quote: APASUS
              Those that must perform their function in combat conditions, inflicting a massive attack by the enemy, ranging from ICBMs and ending with kamikaze drones.
              The story with the Armenian S-300 complex seems to have passed by?

              First, there are no all-in-one systems in air defense. Air defense is a system built on the interaction of different complexes. And if some of the links of the system fell out, then the rest of their functions will not be able to perform - and the air defense will become full of holes.
              Secondly, the story with the Armenian S-300 complex just showed that air defense needs to be built systematically. And not to pull a naked long-range complex to the border, without covering it with short-range air defense systems and air defense systems and without providing this entire economy with data from RTV. Roughly speaking, you cannot fight off bees with a club. smile
    2. VO3A
      VO3A 28 October 2020 14: 38
      +5
      No illusions! Other issues were worked out in the exercises: interception of ballistic and cruise missiles. Echeloned defense is somewhat different from organized air defense with limited capabilities, as in Karabakh. The teachings are not our topic. More precisely, not in the current topic, more ostentatious. I am generally surprised why the exercises are practicing what the troops can and are able to do, and not what is needed and relevant? Who sets the task for the exercises, how does it happen?
      1. ZEMCH
        ZEMCH 28 October 2020 16: 15
        +1
        Quote: VO3A
        The teachings are not our topic. More precisely, not in the current topic, more ostentatious. I am generally surprised why the exercises are practicing what the troops can and are able to do, and not what is needed and relevant? Who sets the task for the exercises, how does it happen?

        At these exercises, various air defense units from all over Russia passed tests in BP, this is not a scenario test, but typical tasks for which they studied for a year. They will set new tasks, work out and next time they will come to take)))
      2. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 28 October 2020 16: 18
        -1
        Quote: VO3A
        it is surprising why the exercises are practicing what the troops can do and are able to do, and not what is necessary and relevant

        And how can you practice what you don’t know how, even if it’s relevant?
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 28 October 2020 17: 40
          +4
          I answer! There is such a concept as research verification! Units armed with UAVs are tasked with finding and destroying military equipment, including mobile air defense systems, which should be located in a certain area. The "shells" are tasked with covering military equipment (targets) in a given area ... Locations and methods of camouflage are limited only by the time after arrival in a given area ... UAVs imitate shock, or actually direct artillery systems with corrected ammunition, or in virtual mode ... Based on the results of the exercises, the effectiveness and capabilities of the means and their optimal number are determined ... Interaction is being worked out .. ...
          1. Alexander Seklitsky
            Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 18: 03
            0
            Quote: VO3A
            The shells "are tasked with covering military equipment (targets) in a given area ...

            Why shells then? belay The shell is generally not military air defense and is not intended to work as part of military columns. The troops will cover beeches and tori. On the front end there are shilki and tunguska. Targeting will be given by beeches.
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 13
              +1
              I gave you an example ... Or maybe it is better to simply cover the positional area in defense? It seems to me that we have backward methods of waging war, and this is in the presence of completely modern technology!
              1. Alexander Seklitsky
                Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 18: 23
                -1
                Quote: VO3A
                I gave you an example ... Or maybe it is better to simply cover the positional area in defense? It seems to me that we have backward methods of waging war, and this is in the presence of completely modern technology!

                Are we waging a war with someone at this moment in order to judge about backwardness? There is no universal means of air defense, and you cannot sit out much in defense. Without counterstrikes and military operations, you cannot fight much.
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 28
                  0
                  Counterstrikes and military operations against partisans and terrorists, where did you fall from with your notions of modern warfare? Maybe you also have tanks ahead of you?
      3. Alexander Seklitsky
        Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 17: 49
        0
        Quote: VO3A
        I am generally surprised why the exercises are practicing what the troops can and are able to do, and not what is needed and relevant?

        Do you think the echeloned air defense will not be able to detect and shoot down an unmanned rattler? laughing Ie, a cruise missile flying at a good speed can be detected and hit, but what kind of bayraktar is not?
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 28 October 2020 17: 51
          +1
          You need to read and think better:
          Echeloned defense is somewhat different from organized air defense with limited capabilities, as in Karabakh
          1. Alexander Seklitsky
            Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 17: 57
            0
            And who's stopping you from organizing an echeloned air defense? If someone wants to fight with one shell, well, excuse me ... Why should our military be preparing for this?
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 09
              +2
              We will be left without pants, with our capabilities and the availability of funds, one can only dream of this ... And there is not always such an opportunity and need, even with the possible availability of funds ... Dream further ... We are not only in Syria, Libya, LDNR, We don't see anything in Karabakh, but on our borders too ... And you want not only to cover them, but also to organize an echeloned defense ... Have you tried to write fairy tales?
              1. Alexander Seklitsky
                Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 18: 15
                +1
                Quote: VO3A
                We see nothing not only in Syria, Libya, LDNR, Karabakh, but also on our borders.

                You may be off the couch and see nothing laughing
                Quote: VO3A
                We will be left without pants, with our capabilities and the availability of funds one can only dream of this ..

                What's wrong with our capabilities?
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 18
                  0
                  I'm not interested in uryakalka and storytellers, I'm tired of "lowering them to sinful earth" ... Live on in your pink world .... Only the consequences of 41 years do not want to !!!!
                  1. Alexander Seklitsky
                    Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 18: 27
                    -1
                    Quote: VO3A
                    Live on in your pink world ..

                    Well, then you go dig a personal bomb shelter laughing Once in a lifetime pessimist
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 28 October 2020 19: 23
                0
                Quote: VO3A
                We will be left without pants, with our capabilities and availability of funds one can only dream of it ...

                Why dream when a normal air defense system can be built from existing air defense systems of the country / military air defense?
                DD: S-400 / S-300V
                SD: S-350 / Buk
                MD and cover for firing SAMs DD and SD: "Tor" / "Pantsir".
                RTV and electronic warfare add to taste. smile
                All complexes are serial, all are available in the army and the Aerospace Forces. One of the variants of this set is deployed in Khmeimim.
    3. rocket757
      rocket757 28 October 2020 14: 39
      +3
      Generals are preparing for the previous war ... and young lieutenants, captains and other young ones, only projectiles are a lot, as those experienced generals like to say, up to their cap or hat.
      Let's see who and what learned in connection with current, different, events.
    4. dzvero
      dzvero 28 October 2020 15: 50
      +1
      In Karabakh, we see that the launch outside the range of the air defense missile system hits the installation. From a UAV or an aircraft / helicopter, it is not of principle - the carrier cannot be reached. The blow from the "funnel" is also irresistible. In general, it is a good example of how underestimating one aspect of the enemy's weapons can be critical for defense, and rejection of measures can lead to disaster.
      There is no need to completely change the air defense structure, but some things may need to be revised. Ideally, air defense should descend to the first line. Type one "Armor" and two "Wasps" per battalion plus MANPADS / MZA. Plus funds RTR / REB. But it will be oh, how expensive ... It is more realistic to create local "roofs", and all movements between them are either small groups or only "by escort under an umbrella". Which, in principle, is still the case. Rather, massive (and cheap) anti-drone means are needed, as well as means of detecting them.
      My conclusions on the Karabakh conflict: UAVs are not a wunderwaffle, but modern and effective means of their detection and destruction are needed. If not, then the losses become unacceptable and even a well-thought-out defense system collapses. Especially if there is no room for maneuver.
      1. Alexander Seklitsky
        Alexander Seklitsky 29 October 2020 03: 05
        +1
        Quote: dzvero
        In Karabakh, we see that the launch outside the range of the air defense missile system hits the installation.

        What attitude are you talking about? SAM wasp and is not intended to destroy high-altitude targets, it was mainly designed for turntables
        Quote: dzvero
        There is no need to completely change the air defense structure, but some things may need to be revised. Ideally, air defense should descend to the first line. Type one "Shell" and two "Wasps" per battalion

        And what will they do? The carapace is a close cover for the 300-400 s. It should not fight as an independent unit. You still send the beech SDU alone laughing Wasp in general against helicopters and other low-flying targets was created back in the Soviet Union.
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 29 October 2020 10: 16
          0
          About any air defense installation - if it is not able to shoot down the carrier, being in the range of its weapons, then the chances of survival are sharply reduced. Those O s were effectively knocked out by launches beyond the reach of the complex. Bayraktars would fly lower and closer, the Wasps would shoot them down.
          About Armor / Torah / Wasp, I meant that to counter the UAV, you need to protect not only the rear, but also the front edge. Waste long-range missiles on drones is ruinous. It is easier to find either ways to place air defense closer, or create something new specifically for air defense of the battalion / company level against UAVs. Especially for covering artillery, armored vehicles and vehicles. Work in this direction seems to be going on - it was on topvar about mini-air defense systems based on the Tiger. In my opinion, the optimal solution will be found pretty soon.
          1. Alexander Seklitsky
            Alexander Seklitsky 29 October 2020 12: 57
            0
            Yes, the same shells may well shoot down drones. Subject to external target designation, or with overlapping dead zones of each other
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 28 October 2020 14: 37
    0
    At the first stage, they reflected ...
    At the second stage, they reflected ...
    You just need to ask the enemy to attack "in stages, in an organized manner, not all at once ..." smile
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 28 October 2020 15: 04
      +1
      You just need to ask the enemy to attack "in stages, in an organized manner, not all at once ..."

      Late ... it was done before the teachings.
      Of course, exercises are one thing, but a real attack is something completely different ... just like that, the enemy will not rush to the embrasure with his chest.
      1. VO3A
        VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 02
        +2
        It's like that in a bad army ... But in normal ones they work out what they need without showing off for the news ...
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 28 October 2020 16: 27
      +1
      So the enemy will not enter the air defense zones by aircraft; he has tactical bombs and missiles with them and will attack.
    3. VO3A
      VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 00
      0
      Massive use must still be ensured, there is no need to immediately play for the United States ... Here, except Israel, all countries have limited the supply of components to Turkey for UAVs and the business has been covered ...
  • Prahlad
    Prahlad 28 October 2020 14: 49
    -4
    All of this is useless against drones!
    1. Garm
      Garm 28 October 2020 15: 09
      +5
      If all this is useless against drones, then how does "Khmeimim" fight off drones?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 28 October 2020 15: 16
        -1
        Khmeimim is attacked with homemade low-flying drones. Not possessing powerful video cameras and not launching missiles. With explosives or mortars tied under a drone.
        1. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 28 October 2020 15: 36
          +2
          there, in general, the attacks of the MLRS were also reflected. in 19, 27 pieces of Torah and Armor were shot down during the attack.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 October 2020 15: 42
            0
            It can easily be. Ballistic targets.
        2. Thrifty
          Thrifty 28 October 2020 15: 43
          +2
          Alexey, here you are not quite right! Somehow, in one program, a speech was brought up on this topic, and the military, who commented on the defeat of another drone, said that many of them are high-class piece products, equipped with very modern communication means, cameras and sensors, allowing even a person to see from many hundreds of meters away. It seems that they are testing and testing a new generation of drones on our air defense systems! There are almost no homemade products there, as well as products of the Chinese industry such as aliexpress!
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 28 October 2020 15: 51
            +1
            Militants from Idlib launch drones on Khmeimim. The Turks do not give them drones, because the wreckage of such a drone, shot down by Russian air defense, would cause a major scandal. There are no other suppliers there. Militants buy Chinese commercial drones for a couple thousand dollars and convert them themselves into shock military.
            The camera there may be quite good, but, in general, the product is incomparable with Turkish drones.
            The Turks do not give militants and large Smerch-class missiles.
            The base is bombarded with Grad-class missiles.
            At the extreme distance. Many volleys are short-lived.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 28 October 2020 16: 29
              +1
              In Libya and Syria, it seems like 28 shock and reconnaissance drones were shot down - made in Turkey.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 28 October 2020 16: 48
                0
                Drones in the sky, of course, can be shot down.
                But if the drones themselves (of various types) arrange a coordinated hunt for air defense systems, then the missile systems need to sweat to survive.
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 28 October 2020 18: 41
                  0
                  To survive, you need advanced tactics and training, and the existing air defense systems, especially of the lowest level, are not designed to combat UAVs and shock strikes first of all ... They need to be refined and changed techniques, and the very principles of application and design ...
            2. Thrifty
              Thrifty 28 October 2020 16: 59
              0
              Alexey, your information is again not entirely correct! Homemade products are shown down, while others - high-quality drones with excellent optics and microelectronics - are simply silently taken out to the last fragment for study after defeat! !! Stereotypical statements only play into our hands - they will not distract specialists from their work. ..
        3. ZEMCH
          ZEMCH 28 October 2020 16: 18
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          With explosives or mortars tied under a drone.

          They attack in different ways)) wink and kamikaze drones, and MLRS were also. And so the Americans are watching from afar and the Turks. We see a lot of things there, what threatens, then we shoot down)))
    2. Alexander Seklitsky
      Alexander Seklitsky 28 October 2020 17: 52
      0
      What??? belay That is, a winged missile with transonic speed, in your opinion, is an easier target? wassat
    3. Ugochaves
      Ugochaves 29 October 2020 15: 42
      0
      Make your thought more concrete, otherwise it is elusive
  • Operator
    Operator 28 October 2020 15: 14
    -6
    Those. repelling a massive raid of loitering ammunition and planning bombs (as in the Karabakh conflict) was not practiced - this means that this is nothing more than just another show-off, and not an echeloned air defense am
    1. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 28 October 2020 15: 38
      +3
      and what to reflect the attack of the CD by our air defense already unnecessarily?
      1. Operator
        Operator 28 October 2020 15: 42
        -5
        After a massive attack by BB and PB, our air defense will no longer have to repel the attack of the CD.
        1. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 28 October 2020 15: 50
          +5
          Where will they come from in a massive way?))) apparently several hundred kilometers imperceptibly massively plan)))) where to them to the CD with a range of over a thousand. do you imagine it like that?))) carriers in general will come closer under water and earth) you read and fall)))
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 28 October 2020 16: 30
      +1
      BB is essentially a CD, even if disguised as a drone.
      PB is a target for Shells / Thors. In addition, PBs are not low-flying - for 10 km of "flight", 1 km of drop height is needed. Those. for 100 km the carrier needs to climb 10 km, and then they will either get it or there will be no surprise effect.
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 28 October 2020 16: 33
      +1
      These loitering ammunition have a maximum flight range of 150 kilometers maximum, and Russia has radars that can easily detect all this trifle by the Casta Podlet Niobium radar and others.
      1. Operator
        Operator 28 October 2020 16: 45
        -5
        The minimum flight altitude of the BB is a few meters, the radio horizon is 3 km, the reaction time of the air defense system is 10 seconds, the channel of the air defense system is no more than 10 simultaneously fired air targets.

        Those. the eleventh BB is guaranteed to destroy any domestic air defense system, and MANPADS remain out of business at all.
        1. Thrifty
          Thrifty 28 October 2020 17: 01
          -1
          Operator - put AFAR on the same drone, and the dead zone at the BB
          actually won't stay! It will be just a target!
          1. Operator
            Operator 28 October 2020 18: 50
            -1
            Everything that actively radiates, incl. UAVs with radars are the primary targets on the battlefield.
    4. ZEMCH
      ZEMCH 28 October 2020 16: 49
      +1
      Quote: Operator
      Those. repelling a massive raid of loitering ammunition and planning bombs (as in the Karabakh conflict) was not practiced - this means that this is nothing more than just another show-off, and not an echeloned air defense

      I described above the goal of the exercises, this is the closure of the BP tasks by various air defense units from all over Russia, what they studied, they passed. ))
      BB and PB calmly go astray by Thor. PB carriers go astray S-400))
  • Adimius38
    Adimius38 28 October 2020 17: 53
    0
    and they learned to reflect the UAV strike ???
  • Adimius38
    Adimius38 28 October 2020 17: 55
    0
    of all this, only Thor can effectively fight the UAV
  • Alien From
    Alien From 28 October 2020 18: 23
    0
    The main thing is that it is not window dressing. Of course, there are inaccuracies, not without it.
  • Operator
    Operator 28 October 2020 18: 54
    -1
    Quote: ZEMCH
    BB and PB quietly go astray by Thor

    Thor's channel is 4 laughing
    1. Shahno
      Shahno 28 October 2020 19: 02
      0
      So I thought .... I think so, if production capacities are transferred to the highest level, this is about a dozen Harops a day or two. This is only Tsakhal, not to mention other allies. The statements about these exercises are just interesting ..
      Ps. It seems that colleagues do not represent the level of automation, the debugging of those. process and the number of components in warehouses. Here I am not revealing any secret ...
  • Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 28 October 2020 21: 06
    0
    The desert is flat as a table, the entire horizon is visible, apparently there are no invisible valleys and ravines. Deliberately greenhouse conditions. Where can you find this in a populated area? Nowhere! People do not live in deserts. And where they live, the horizon is rarely seen anywhere.
  • 123456789
    123456789 28 October 2020 23: 19
    0
    Target line-of-sight range
    Dr33.64 km 20.91 mile 18.17 nautical miles (international)
    Quote: alexmach
    Taking the antenna height as 25 m, I counted 33 km according to your own formula. yes, it really does not reach 40.

    Quote: ancient
    Quote: alexmach
    PS: low-altitude

    Saw what? request
    Even in the "school" they taught, well, in the "akamedi" the same thing .. yes, and in the troops it is used in the calculations that: line-of-sight range DPV (in kilometers) for the height of the antenna system of the HRS radar and the altitude of the target hц given in meters determined by the empirical formula:

    It so happens that ... does not work out .. "Danila has a master of the stone flower" wink

    SAM "Buk-M3" hit targets at a distance to soldier 40 km