Military Review

Chinese press: "Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield"

84
Chinese press: "Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield"

American publications about the weakness of the Russian anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems do not correspond to reality, writes the Chinese edition Zhongguo Junwang. According to the author of the article, Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield.


The Russian military has recently accelerated the development and deployment of new air defense missile systems, the author writes. The systematic tests of air defense systems already in service and planned for delivery to the troops show that the Russian missile defense shield is capable of withstanding American threats.

The author, referring to the publications of the Russian media, writes that over the past year the Russian military has modernized the air defense system in the most dangerous western and southern directions, which ultimately led to an increase in the range of defense means by half and an increase in efficiency by 20%. In the east of Russia, after the introduction of the S-300V4 air defense system in the Kuril Islands, the air defense zone tripled.

In the near future, the Russian air defense system S-500 "Prometheus" of a new generation, capable of not only combating all types of air threats, including hypersonic ones, but also repelling an attack from outer space, will enter service with the air defense.

By modernizing air defense missiles already in service, Russia is consistently expanding the range and height of destruction of enemy air attack weapons. In addition, the Russian military has deployed an early warning missile attack network capable of detecting missile launches from a potential enemy.

Russia has built a multidirectional radiation, coordinated and effective reconnaissance and early warning network on its territory, according to the report.

- the author writes.

All Russian air defense systems are integrated into a common aerospace defense system and are capable not only of working with other air defense-missile defense systems, but also receiving target designations from aviation, land and sea facilities. At the same time, the aerospace defense command and control network is fully automated and can simultaneously process more than 10 thousand targets with a full response time of about 15 minutes.

According to calculations and simulations carried out, by 2025 the Russian air defense-missile defense system, subjected to an unmassive attack of 2000 enemy missiles or during pinpoint attacks from space, will intercept about 90% of ballistic missiles, and during a massive attack - about 40% of sea-based cruise missiles. ... After 2030, the corresponding figures will reach more than 95% and 70%.

Thus, Russia already has one of the most effective anti-missile shields, which will only become stronger over time, the author sums up.
84 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Alexander Galaktionov
    Alexander Galaktionov 10 January 2021 10: 29
    +2
    Would love to see Dear Bongo's comment hi
    1. Machito
      Machito 10 January 2021 11: 18
      +12
      As a result of its withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, Russia turned out to be the most protected country from attacks from the sky. A very unexpected result for the United States. After the US withdraws from the INF Treaty and the solemn funeral of the last strategic offensive arms, I expect that the Russian Federation will turn out to be the most "attacking" country with ballistic and cruise missiles.
      The Shield cannot live without the Sword.
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 10 January 2021 12: 32
      0
      The Chinese forgot to add that their air defense-missile defense system will intercept 200 percent of all missiles, regardless of whether a massive or non-massed missile strike is delivered. ...
    3. A. Privalov
      A. Privalov 10 January 2021 14: 08
      -1
      Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
      Would love to see Dear Bongo's comment


      In Russia, without false modesty, they declare that the country's army has the most advanced air and space defense technologies. And this is perfectly true.
      However, the entire article that a certain Shi Wen posted on "Zhongguo Junwang" is nothing more than a citation of Russian open sources. In other words, by and large, respected Bongo has nothing special to comment on. hi
    4. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 10 January 2021 14: 39
      -1
      Quote: Alexander Galaktionov
      Would love to see Dear Bongo's comment

      You will hardly see.
  2. Asad
    Asad 10 January 2021 10: 30
    +1
    They all know! Better than our General Staff !!!
    1. XXXIII
      XXXIII 10 January 2021 10: 45
      +2
      Quote: ASAD
      They all know! Better than our General Staff !!!

      And what is there to be surprised, they are watching and will follow. Although Russia is not an enemy of China, China has always been interested in the potential that Russia has.
    2. bessmertniy
      bessmertniy 10 January 2021 10: 47
      -1
      It is unlikely that a Chinese analyst is downplaying the strength of our shield. But it is important that the shield is not one percent penetrable. And so - somehow restless. repeat repeat
      1. LifeIsGood
        LifeIsGood 10 January 2021 11: 12
        +10
        Alas, it is basically impossible to create an Impenetrable Shield. crying
        1. Dread
          Dread 11 January 2021 05: 24
          -2
          Quote: LifeIsGood
          Alas, it is basically impossible to create an Impenetrable Shield.

          LifeIsGood - you cannot create a completely impenetrable shield, but you must strive for it. Calculate the probability of hitting P = 0.95 for 3-missiles, then you will understand the meaning of this news. The probability of defeat will be equal to P = 2030 by 0,9999, and all this is for a global interception system, which the United States and Israel do not have!
          For the rest - everything has its time!
  3. businessv
    businessv 10 January 2021 10: 32
    0
    Thus, Russia already has one of the most effective anti-missile shields, which will only become stronger over time, the author sums up.
    I think that the author is referring to our new weapons, and not a ready-made defense complex, which is unclear when it will be fully ready, despite regular updates.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 10 January 2021 10: 36
      +3
      Quote: businessv
      ready defense complex

      What is a "ready-made defense complex"?
      What are the readiness criteria, what and with what to compare? From whom to take an example?
      1. Danila46
        Danila46 10 January 2021 11: 02
        0
        I don't know how about an example, but you only need to compare with the United States, or with China at worst. Of course, you can compare it with Israel, but the coverage area there is very small, but the effectiveness of the system itself is high. Decide for yourself ....
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 10 January 2021 11: 15
          +4
          Compare with the USA .... not comparable, there is something else.
          Compare with the PRC ..... why did they move their strategic forces to our borders, they themselves cannot defend them?
          Israel ... not an option for comparison.
          Who else to compare with?
          1. Danila46
            Danila46 10 January 2021 11: 54
            0
            What is different in the USA?
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 10 January 2021 12: 15
              +8
              Military doctrine is DIFFERENT!
              Accordingly, the formation of the Armed Forces is carried out in accordance with the military doctrine.
              1. Danila46
                Danila46 10 January 2021 12: 26
                +1
                What does doctrine have to do with it? Talk about air defense. Protection of the rear or nazenny objects from air threats. What are you talking about? Or is the US air defense imprisoned against the threat of aliens?
                1. rocket757
                  rocket757 10 January 2021 14: 15
                  +1
                  We will compare WHAT?
                  Army air defense by combat arms, defense of foreign bases or defense of mainland (home) territory?
                  Although, military doctrine, i.e. what type of warfare the Armed Forces are preparing for is important everywhere and always.
                  1. Danila46
                    Danila46 10 January 2021 15: 00
                    -1
                    You are targeting a policy with the physical properties / capabilities of the air defense system itself. And air defense is always a shield, not a sword. A complete air defense system (as far as I know), and this is protection against the Air Force, short-range, medium and extended-range missiles, so far have been created by only three countries in the world. Only Israel still has protection against short-range missiles and mines. Compare them with them. All other buyers ...
                2. nemez
                  nemez 11 January 2021 06: 27
                  -1
                  The events of 9/11 showed that there is no air defense in the United States. It is aimed at protecting against ballistic missiles and missile defense systems.
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 11: 17
          +5
          Quote: Danila46
          Of course, you can compare it with Israel, but the coverage area there is very small, but the effectiveness of the system itself is high.

          Against rockets. Still, the "iron dome" was not designed for shelling with modern ammunition
          1. Petro_tut
            Petro_tut 10 January 2021 11: 44
            +1

            Against rockets. Still, the "iron dome" was not designed for shelling with modern ammunition

            I think that it has not been calculated yet, the Israelites perfectly understand where they live and are probably constantly working towards increasing the effectiveness of their air defense and missile defense forces
          2. Danila46
            Danila46 10 January 2021 11: 51
            -5
            well yes. In your understanding, LCD was calculated against spears and stones ...
          3. rocket757
            rocket757 10 January 2021 12: 24
            +2
            We did it the way they need it, enough, economically. In their situation, all the rules.
            The system can be upgraded if necessary ... it's very expensive until they really need it.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 22: 44
              +4
              Quote: rocket757
              They did it the way they need it, enough, economically.

              The LCD perfectly meets the tasks assigned to it. It is capable of intercepting DIY rockets / missiles very well and cheaply. Nothing more is required from him until the militants have matured to something more complex, so the LCD is a very successful, but at the same time, a very niche product. Of course, it's not worth comparing it with a missile defense system designed to intercept modern cruise and ballistic missiles - it was not created for that. And so - the LCD is in its place.
  4. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 10 January 2021 10: 37
    -8
    Chinese press: "Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield"
    "Why, without fear of sin, does the cuckoo praise the rooster?" So that the vulture manages and understands "we are in the house with the Russian Federation." angry and don't touch us! And then the Russian Federation ......
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 10 January 2021 11: 00
      +2
      American publications about weakness Russian anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems do not correspond to reality, writes the Chinese edition Zhongguo Junwang. According to the author of the article, Russia has most effective anti-missile shield.
      What a run of opinions! There is a horseshoe somewhere! recourse
  5. rocket757
    rocket757 10 January 2021 10: 40
    +5
    a common aerospace defense system and are able not only to work with other air defense-missile defense systems, but also to receive target designations from aviation, land and sea assets. At the same time, the aerospace defense command and control network is fully automated and can simultaneously process more than 10 thousand targets with a full response time of about 15 minutes

    Nice statement, but ..... there is still work to do!
    In the meantime, vigorous containment arguments are the most
    the main "shield" behind which .... behind which, in short.
    And yet, the postulate - there is no ideal, insurmountable defense!
  6. Machete
    Machete 10 January 2021 10: 42
    +2
    Touches the awareness of any press in the category of "absolutely secret".
    1. Crash
      Crash 10 January 2021 10: 54
      +1
      Quote: Machete
      Touches the awareness of any press in the category of "absolutely secret".

      Yes, here from each iron they inform how many complexes and where they are installed. Why be surprised? Moreover, now all sorts of satellite images - the entire Internet is littered
      1. Crash
        Crash 10 January 2021 10: 56
        0
        As recently as yesterday:
        Russian Defense Ministry disclosed plans to re-equip the Aerospace Forces

        https://topwar.ru/178852-minoborony-rf-raskrylo-plany-po-perevooruzheniju-vks.html
      2. Machete
        Machete 10 January 2021 12: 03
        0
        They say, but not everything. And nobody knows the exact characteristics of the weapon. Therefore, all this is just speculation.
  7. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 11: 11
    +10
    In general, it is so. Our air defense ground component may not be perfect, but no one has better today.
    1. dauria
      dauria 10 January 2021 11: 28
      +2
      Our air defense ground component may not be perfect, but no one has better today.


      Hmm. It is not the strength of the "shields" that is important here, but how and with what force the enemy can hit them. Are our operational-tactical missiles and front-line aircraft reaching the United States? No. And their missiles at least from the same Poland? This is without Turkey, Afghanistan, Japan, Europe ... The states do not need our air defense "scope" and nafig. All the same, nothing but an ICBM will fly.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 11: 38
        +3
        Quote: dauria
        Hmm. It is not the strength of the "shields" that is important here, but how and with what force the enemy can hit them.

        It is the strength of the "shields" that is discussed here, and nothing else
        Quote: dauria
        Are our operational-tactical missiles and front-line aircraft reaching the United States? No. And their missiles at least from the same Poland? This is without Turkey, Afghanistan, Japan, Europe ... Air defense states of our "scope" and nafig do not need.

        Mmm, do you think they don't care about their troops in Europe? :))))
        In fact, we have a certain superiority because the Americans are dominant in the air. That is, they invest in aircraft, and not in ground-based means of their destruction, which are highly secondary in their system.
        1. dauria
          dauria 10 January 2021 11: 46
          0
          Mmm, do you think they don't care about their troops in Europe? :))))


          Yes. They don't give a damn about their firing launchers. If only they had time to shoot. And their "troops" in our understanding, the cat cried there. They will then bring them to the division of the skins. And there will be nothing. Why should they destroy what already belongs to them? They are now worried about China, not Russia.
      2. kventinasd
        kventinasd 10 January 2021 19: 52
        0
        Quote: dauria
        All the same, nothing but an ICBM will fly.

        Amer and this is enough to keep them in good shape.
        Destruction of even a third of the country carrying "crap" around the world does not fit in their heads.
  8. Sergey Valov
    Sergey Valov 10 January 2021 11: 22
    0
    Only war can show the real capabilities of air defense. In theory, the USSR also had powerful air defense troops, so what? Rust has landed in Red Square. Father told a lot about how the air defense aviation fired; he personally participated in the firing of the air defense missile system. Window dressing dominated.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 11: 26
      +7
      Quote: Sergey Valov
      Rust has landed in Red Square.

      But the air defense led him from district to district, but he did not receive an order for destruction ... But then all the dogs were hanged on him
      1. Sling cutter
        Sling cutter 10 January 2021 11: 38
        +10
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        But the air defense led him from district to district, but he did not receive an order for destruction ... But then all the dogs were hanged on him

        Andrey, in this story there are not only many strange facts, but also questions.
        For example, where did he get the map with the location of our air defense and the corridor for civilian highways. ships, why one of the stations did not work during the flight, etc. etc.
        And most importantly, after that, the entire top military leadership of the country, 260 generals and marshals, incl. Marshal Sokolov. After that, the road for the collapse of the USSR in front of Gorbachev was free.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 11: 39
          +6
          Quote: Stroporez
          After that, the road for the collapse of the USSR in front of Gorbachev was free.

          What are we talking about ...
          1. Sling cutter
            Sling cutter 10 January 2021 11: 42
            +9
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            What are we talking about ...

            In the meantime, many "hotheads" will continue to claim that the USSR was doomed for economic reasons, although in reality it was a well-planned operation.
            1. Sergey Valov
              Sergey Valov 10 January 2021 13: 31
              +2
              No conspiracy can break a strong state.
      2. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 10 January 2021 13: 24
        0
        The task of air defense is to prevent the enemy from entering its own territory. The question is - why was the unidentified plane able to fly from the border and land in front of the Kremlin? Why was it not destroyed? Why didn't the command of the air defense forces give the order to destroy it? Who appointed these generals to their posts? There are still a lot of questions, but the answer is essentially the same - the system is rotten through and through.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 10 January 2021 22: 47
          +3
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          The task of air defense is to prevent the enemy from entering their own territory. The question is - why was the unidentified plane able to fly from the border and land in front of the Kremlin?

          Because the permission to destroy the target then had to be obtained from the "center". So - no need for generals, they are military people, they received an order - they did it, they didn’t receive it - accordingly, they didn’t execute it.
          After an hour of flight - at 14.10 the plane was taken to escort the Soviet radar P-15, 14th Air Defense Division. The calculations of the air defense missile system were raised by alarm, information was constantly received at KP 6 of the OA Air Defense General G.V. Kromin, the commander of the Leningrad Air Defense Army at that time. The targets were assigned combat number 8255, but did not shoot down. The fact is that after the incident with the Korean Boeing in 1984, there was a strict order not to shoot down civilian aircraft. (Information source - Istoriya.RF portal, https://histrf.ru/biblioteka/b/niemietskii-samoliet-na-krasnoi-ploshchadi-piat-sluchainostiei-matiasa-rusta)
          1. Sergey Valov
            Sergey Valov 11 January 2021 10: 10
            -1
            "It was to receive from the" center "" - "center" - what is this? Corps headquarters? Army? Counties? The headquarters of the country's air defense forces? General base? General Secretary of the CPSU? Does it look like June 1941? I know from experience that a regiment commander can contact the district headquarters in 3 - 4 minutes. Or maybe not contact at all, if the army is a mess. And if cruise missiles flew, and not Rust, would they also be allowed to land on Red Square? I have no questions to the personnel of the level up to the regiment commander, the mess, in this case, affected the higher levels.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 January 2021 10: 19
              +3
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              "It was to receive from the" center "" - "center" - what is this?

              This decision was made at the level of the country's top leadership. Here's some recent news for you
              Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin signed a government decree, which, in particular, allows the military to shoot down civilian planes that have violated the Russian border and, without explanation, do not obey signals to land or leave the country's airspace.

              So yes, it looks like it was the level of, if not the General Secretary, then something near him, but certainly not even the Minister of Defense.
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              I have no questions to the personnel of the level up to the regiment commander, the mess, in this case, affected the higher levels.

              Yes, there was no mess ... The problem with Rust was far-fetched inside and out, the plane was found at the border and was seen later. But someone needed an excuse to cleanse the military leaders, and now ...
              Quote: Stroporez
              after that, the entire top military leadership of the country, 260 generals and marshals, incl. Marshal Sokolov.

              I would assume intent, not a mess
              1. Sergey Valov
                Sergey Valov 11 January 2021 15: 25
                0
                "But someone needed an excuse to cleanse the military leaders, and now ..."
                "I would assume intent"
                Again conspiracy theory. There were no intentions or conspiracies, all of this was subsequently invented in order to cover up the failed policy (foreign, domestic, economic) of the ruling regime in the country. And even if we assume that there was intent / conspiracy, then what kind of state was it that could not cope with it?
                “It was the level of, if not the general secretary, then something near him, but certainly not even the minister of defense” - you probably are not aware of the control structure of the USSR. There was NO ONE between the Secretary General and the Minister of Defense. There was a collegial body - the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, which for the sake of such questions was not realistic to collect in a short time.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 11 January 2021 18: 17
                  +2
                  Quote: Sergey Valov
                  Again conspiracy theory.

                  Sergei, there is a fact - the USSR Air Defense "led" Rust for quite a long time. Sheremetyevo was being prepared for his arrival ... And you ignore all this. Well, where is the logic?
                  Quote: Sergey Valov
                  There were no intentions or conspiracies, all of this was subsequently invented in order to cover up the failed policy (foreign, domestic, economic) of the ruling regime in the country.

                  You know, because of such an event, only in the first 2 weeks after landing, 30 generals just do not fly out of their posts like this. And the total number of those removed from their posts, according to some sources, is not ten more. The purge was massive and in no way corresponded to Rust's flight.
                  Quote: Sergey Valov
                  You probably are not aware of the structure of the USSR government. There was NO ONE between the Secretary General and the Minister of Defense.

                  I think it would be extremely strange for Chairman of the Council of Ministers Ryzhkov to hear this
    2. sabakina
      sabakina 10 January 2021 11: 44
      +5
      Sergey Valov, that's enough with this Rust! 1987 year, perestroika, glasnost, the fight against alcoholism and other troubles. Enemies have already taken apart the USSR by screw.
      https://topwar.ru/123998-polet-matiasa-rusta-provokaciya-s-vysokim-prikrytiem.html
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 10 January 2021 13: 25
        -1
        No enemy is capable of doing harm as much as a homebrew ... with initiative. (For some reason, the system corrects my text by changing its meaning. I wonder why?)
    3. Airdefense
      Airdefense 11 January 2021 15: 26
      0
      Rust has landed on Red Square

      A different set of circumstances overlapped there, the air defense was conducted from the very beginning, the duty fighters rose and carried out visual control.

      You can hear from Khodorenok about this incident

      https://radiovesti.ru/brand/61009/episode/2217716/
      https://radiovesti.ru/brand/61009/episode/2172775/
      1. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 11 January 2021 15: 40
        0
        Why do I need this Khodarenok when I heard the real state of affairs from the direct participants. No one wanted to take responsibility for the destruction of Rust's plane, as a result the whole country was set up. And the top leadership of the country and the army are to blame for this.
        1. Airdefense
          Airdefense 11 January 2021 15: 43
          +2
          Khodorek was a direct participant in these events, and he says about the same, the problem was not technical, but administrative.
          1. Sergey Valov
            Sergey Valov 11 January 2021 18: 23
            0
            It is very good that our information matches.
  9. Ros 56
    Ros 56 10 January 2021 11: 24
    0
    Such assessments are encouraging. Another would be to compare with real American.
  10. taiga2018
    taiga2018 10 January 2021 11: 45
    0
    The main thing is that some kind of Gorbachev-Yeltsin does not appear, who will destroy everything to hell ...
  11. Doccor18
    Doccor18 10 January 2021 11: 58
    0
    In the east of Russia, after the introduction of the S-300V4 air defense system in the Kuril Islands, the air defense defense zone tripled.

    Which is very gratifying
  12. yuriy55
    yuriy55 10 January 2021 12: 09
    0
    Chinese press: "Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield"

    I would like this statement to be recognized and confirmed by everyone who is still deploying American missiles on their territory.
  13. KCA
    KCA 10 January 2021 12: 13
    -2
    How many ineffective Syrian air defenses shot down axes and other missiles when the attack happened during the Trump's daughter's PMS? But they, by some miracle, fell, approximately 70%, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation officially showed "fallen by themselves" missiles, most likely not all, but the most damaged, the rest in Almaz-Antey
  14. Doccor18
    Doccor18 10 January 2021 12: 13
    0
    ... subjected to an unmassive attack of 2000 enemy missiles or during pinpoint attacks from space, it will intercept about 90% of ballistic missiles, and during a massive attack - about 40% of sea-based cruise missiles ...

    Is this the first strike? And the second and subsequent ones? Almost 900 rubles were used against Yugoslavia alone ...
  15. Dimide
    Dimide 10 January 2021 12: 24
    -2
    The USSR also possessed an "impenetrable" air defense system, which did not prevent the light-engine "Cessna" from landing on Red Square in 1987 under the control of Rust.
    So don't sing hosanna beforehand

  16. HAM
    HAM 10 January 2021 12: 33
    +2
    Another "small nuance": in response to the shelling of various barmaley, the Russian Aerospace Forces immediately smash the bases of these barmaley, this is only in Syria. for the enemy "... or at least their reputation ...
  17. Shopping Mall
    Shopping Mall 10 January 2021 12: 40
    0
    Well if that's the case, but there are several questions:

    1. Have we got the possibility of direct kinetic interception of warheads? This is not only a highly effective interception method, but also a testament to the perfection of guidance and control systems.

    2. Probability of indirect interception by a fragmentation field? The question arose due to the lack of information about real interceptions of targets during testing. The United States is often accused of firing at "simple" targets during missile defense tests, but most often we get information that they fired at "conventional" targets, in other words, "in the air."

    If we are betting on the use of nuclear warheads for interception, then this is obviously a dead-end path, since after the first intercepted warhead of the enemy, it will be impossible to see the rest against the background of electromagnetic interference from a nuclear explosion.
  18. Prax1
    Prax1 10 January 2021 12: 54
    -1
    Of course it's great, but you can't win a war on defense. We must rely on offensive weapons
  19. businessv
    businessv 10 January 2021 12: 59
    +1
    Quote: rocket757
    What are the readiness criteria, what and with what to compare? From whom to take an example?
    By and large, the complex is always ready, but this concept is very relative. The main criterion is the readiness to repel an attack at all levels, from long-range to short-range defense lines. Based on the fact that air defense weapons are constantly being updated, it is necessary to re-equip, re-equip, etc. measures, to train personnel for the operation of these weapons, to provide software, and given the fact that this process is not interrupted, it is very difficult to catch the moment of its final readiness. It is possible to compare the effectiveness of the defense of our air defense-missile defense only by the fact of the percentage ratio of new weapons to old ones, proceeding from the postulate that the new is always more effective than the old. Something like this. smile
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 10 January 2021 14: 25
      +1
      Everything is clear ... there is no limit to perfection!
      Strike weapons are ahead of defenses, always!
      Therefore, defense is the same complex, saturated with both purely defensive systems and strike weapons. There is no other way.
      So, both TRIUMPH and BULAVA, everything is in the subject, it is all that "shield" that makes the enemy stay at a distance from our lines, keeps him from crossing the red line.
  20. rudolff
    rudolff 10 January 2021 13: 23
    +6
    "According to calculations and simulations, by 2025 the Russian air defense-missile defense system, subjected to an unmassive attack of 2000 enemy missiles or during pinpoint attacks from space, will intercept about 90% of ballistic missiles, and during a massive attack - about 40% of sea cruise missiles. home base. "
    These figures can be considered relatively plausible only in relation to the air defense-missile defense system of Moscow. At this point in time, the only system capable of intercepting an ICBM or SLBM is the A-135 Amur located in the Moscow region. Only Amur and only near Moscow. By 2025, part of the A-135 will probably be replaced by the A-235 Nudol and the first S-500s will appear in service. Maybe. It is not even serious to talk about any air defense-missile defense shield of the whole territory of Russia. With a certain stretch, one can only speculate about a continuous radar field. With a very big stretch.
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 10 January 2021 14: 30
      +1
      Just defend, a losing option.
      Therefore, there is air defense missile defense, there is the Strategic Missile Forces, and much more, similar, shock. One complements the other. The only way.
  21. kig
    kig 10 January 2021 14: 19
    +2
    The author, referring to the publications of the Russian media, writes

    If you focus on our press, then our, for example, the Navy will easily shower anyone with Caliber and Zirconia.
  22. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 10 January 2021 14: 23
    -3
    I’m thinking, maybe Chinese authors can be invited to write a series of articles about our fleet.
    And then the local vsepropalschiki saddled the topic and do not want to get off - everything is bad for them. "Bulava" did not fly - badly, flew - and then a failure. Ships are built - not like that. And stuff like that. Defeatism is sown, in general.
    1. businessv
      businessv 10 January 2021 22: 53
      +1
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      I’m thinking, maybe Chinese authors can be invited to write a series of articles about our fleet.

      Aha, come on! We have all Chinese consumer goods, so let them also subtract our self-esteem a little!
      1. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 10 January 2021 23: 11
        0
        Quote: businessv
        Aha, come on! We have all Chinese consumer goods, so let them also subtract our self-esteem a little!

        Well, if we don't value ourselves, we have to turn to the Chinese.
  23. iouris
    iouris 10 January 2021 15: 09
    0
    Such praise does not cost them anything, but we are pleased.
  24. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 10 January 2021 15: 46
    0
    Russia has the most effective anti-missile shield

    the deflection is counted, but in my opinion the author has confusion about air defense and missile defense, with air defense everything is really good, but with missile defense it is only good in Moscow, and then the effectiveness is questionable, and in the rest of the country there is only a radar warning, but how to shoot down? S-300, S-400 ICBMs cannot be shot down, S-500 is not in the troops, and this will not be a full-fledged missile defense
    but in the states there are GBMD, Aegis, THAAD, and although their missile defense is not enough in the event of a massive ICBM attack, it is much more than ours
  25. Raven 95
    Raven 95 10 January 2021 16: 56
    +9
    Air defense of Russia at the level. That's for sure.
  26. Old26
    Old26 10 January 2021 17: 37
    +3
    iki type 51
    Quote: Machete
    Touches the awareness of any press in the category of "absolutely secret".

    This is not top secret. The bases of missile defense and early warning missile radars, the bases of interceptors, even if the United States or Russia, can be found in the public domain. Plus look at map sites

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    In general, it is so. Our air defense ground component may not be perfect, but no one has better today.

    Yes, Andrey! But the Chinese author is talking about an anti-missile shield. And here you have to look specifically "what, where, when"

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Sergey Valov
    Rust has landed in Red Square.

    But the air defense led him from district to district, but he did not receive an order for destruction ... But then all the dogs were hanged on him

    Alas, this is so. After the destruction of the Korean Boeing in the Far East, it was forbidden to open fire to kill civilian aircraft. Although, if desired, they could drive him into the ground and with a wake jet of the engine ...

    Quote: AVM
    Well if that's the case, but there are several questions:
    1. Have we got the possibility of direct kinetic interception of warheads? This is not only a highly effective interception method, but also a testament to the perfection of guidance and control systems.

    Andrei! "Enemies slander" that the 14A042 anti-missile (Nudol program) has the property of kinetic interception. In real life - we'll see when they put it into service

    Quote: AVM
    Well if that's the case, but there are several questions:
    2. Probability of indirect interception by a fragmentation field? The question arose due to the lack of information about real interceptions of targets during testing. The United States is often accused of firing at "simple" targets during missile defense tests, but most often we get information that they fired at "conventional" targets, in other words, "in the air."

    Something I have not heard that recently have been used fragmentation warheads on anti-missiles. Kinetic interceptors are used at least on the now well-known American anti-missiles "Standards" SM-3 and SM-6, THAAD and GBI. And what about the fragmentation warhead? In one of our first missile defense developments, up to 15 tungsten balls were used in a fragmentation warhead. Such a warhead, with a small miss, can damage the "head" of a ballistic missile.

    Quote: AVM
    If we are betting on the use of nuclear warheads for interception, then this is obviously a dead-end path, since after the first intercepted warhead of the enemy, it will be impossible to see the rest against the background of electromagnetic interference from a nuclear explosion.

    The question is certainly interesting, and there is no definite answer to it. It is one thing when the head of an anti-missile missile will have a power of 1-2 MT, quite another - when 3-5 kt. Interception ranges are now much higher than previously. For example, the same modernized 53T6M (it seems like it has an index now of 45T6) has a range of about 350 km and an altitude of up to 100 km, compared to a 100 km range and an altitude of 45 km for the not modernized old one.
    Experiments on Sary-Shagan at one time (program K) showed that it takes about 10 minutes to restore the operability of the AWACS radar (and this is with an explosion practically at the zenith).

    Quote: rudolff
    "According to calculations and simulations, by 2025 the Russian air defense-missile defense system, subjected to an unmassive attack of 2000 enemy missiles or during pinpoint attacks from space, will intercept about 90% of ballistic missiles, and during a massive attack - about 40% of sea cruise missiles. home base. "
    These figures can be considered relatively plausible only in relation to the air defense-missile defense system of Moscow. At this point in time, the only system capable of intercepting an ICBM or SLBM is the A-135 Amur located in the Moscow region. Only Amur and only near Moscow. By 2025, part of the A-135 will probably be replaced by the A-235 Nudol and the first S-500s will appear in service. Maybe. It is not even serious to talk about any air defense-missile defense shield of the whole territory of Russia. With a certain stretch, one can only speculate about a continuous radar field. With a very big stretch.

    Moreover, Rudolph, now even the A-135 is not a guarantee of protection. For the long-range interceptors of the system (51T6) were removed from service in 2006. Only the close, atmospheric interception remained. "Nudol" (14A042) is just being tested. Nobody knows how many S-500 complexes will be in service by 2025. And it is not clear what targets it will be able to intercept. Either everything up to the MRBM inclusive, or the ICBM ...
  27. Yuri VO
    Yuri VO 11 January 2021 08: 47
    +1
    Everything will be fine
  28. Togilen
    Togilen 11 January 2021 09: 24
    0
    It is interesting when the S-75 and S-200 complexes removed from combat duty in Kazan (Vysokaya Gora, the regiment was disbanded in 1996) or the S-75 and S-200 complexes in the ZATO Zelenogorsk will receive new air defense systems to protect such strategically important settlements and enterprises on their territory. Kazan is now not protected in any way, for example. Kazan was taken "under the hood" of the air defense only during the Universiade. Those. then they were worried about foreign athletes, now when everything is long gone, no one cares about their own residents. So all this is nonsense for people who want to read something good (Oh! China even respects it!) Close the laptop lid and be proud of whatever happens next (whether it's grades at school or a new car bought on credit)
    1. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo 11 January 2021 11: 23
      -2
      And who in Kazan to defend?
      Would you still remember Voronezh laughinglaughinglaughing
      1. Togilen
        Togilen 11 January 2021 12: 43
        0
        Whom? A city with a population of 1. Parts of the RG, FSB, police, KAPO, KMPO, Kazan helicopter plant. In Zelenogorsk, it is necessary to shut down the "EKhZ" plant for the enrichment of uranium, the production of isotopic products (200% of the world market), and hydrofluoric acid.
        Yes, I remember Voronezh, this is a millionaire city, which includes strategic enterprises - Sozvezdiye, KB Khimavtomatiki (VMZ and KBKhA in its structure), Baltimore airfield, the training ground of the FSI FGNIITS REB OESZ Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation - Voronezh is covered by the 108th anti-aircraft missile Tula regiment, staffed up to wartime staff, by the way.
        If you have a friend in your head "sawdust", you can laugh further. Or are you smarter than the officers of the RF Ministry of Defense in terms of covering Voronezh? Unlikely.
    2. Sergey Valov
      Sergey Valov 12 January 2021 13: 38
      0
      The question can be put somewhat differently - from whom should Kazan be protected from the air now? From ICBMs - senseless. From strategic bombers - meaningless. It is pointless from terrorists. Cruise missiles remain. Where can they come from? From Europe they will be intercepted by the air defense of the Moscow region, from the south they will not reach. The north remains. Air defense forces are now deploying there, apparently, and the calculation is on them.
      1. Togilen
        Togilen 15 January 2021 09: 22
        0
        That's when all your air defenses will be knocked out nafig, now around Moscow time the number of launchers can be easily counted. If at one time on the third ring where the S-25 stood, the S-300 was installed, in the 90s everything was merged, and then in the 2000s. By the number of aviation, the KR is significantly higher than that of the Russian Federation. So the air defense Moscow time and the more so the north will be demolished quickly. So this is the component of the layered air defense system, not in terms of the number of equipment and its capabilities, but in terms of the depth of deployment.
        What do you think, in the USSR all the cities of millionaires were protected, cities of 500 thousand - 1 million and cities with strategic enterprises (even Novomoskovsk, or Berezniki, for example). So, the command of the air defense of the USSR, which in the Russian Federation was significantly reduced, were you idiots? I don’t think so.
        1. Sergey Valov
          Sergey Valov 15 January 2021 13: 41
          0
          And you sir, boor.