Military Review

The orbital group of the Russian Aerospace Forces "under the gun" of the British Typhoon fighters. Are the next Whitehall dreams realizable in practice?


In light of the repeated increase in the degree of operational and strategic tension in the Baltic and Azov-Black Sea conventional theaters of military operations observed over the past several weeks, provoked by nothing more than the emergence of an even more sophisticated anti-Russian military-political vector of the administration of the 46th US President Joe Biden, Information about the first conceptual steps of a fundamentally new (in Whitehall's practice) branch of the military - the Royal Air Force of Great Britain, could not have attracted attention.

An ambitious concept of aerospace confrontation from the UK Space Force. Should the command of the Russian Aerospace Forces be puzzled?

In this case, formed a year earlier (by analogy with the US Space Force) on the basis of the 23rd aviation AWACS squadron (has radar patrol and guidance aircraft E-3D AEW Mk.1 "Sentry"), the operational command of the Space Forces of the British Air Force is working on preparations for an aerospace exercise, providing for a conditional ("digital") interception of Russian and Chinese reconnaissance satellites operating on low-earth orbits, by means of the "Typhoon FGR4 / Tranche 4/2" multi-functional fighters of the "3+" generation, which are in service with the Royal Air Force of Great Britain, as well as the advanced "Typhoons" of the transitional generation "4 ++", which are being prepared for operational readiness. airborne radars based on active HEADLIGHTS E-Scan Mk 1/2 (also known as "Captor-E Mk1 / 2").

As exoatmospheric (transatmospheric) interceptors, virtual “digital” models of which will be loaded into simulation software “add-ons” of weapons control systems of combatant “Typhoons” for conducting exercises, the British press, referring to Whitehall, presented completely abstract “anti-missiles” without clearly indicating indices , not to mention their flight performance and guidance principles.

The following questions arise: what kind of exoatmospheric interceptors can we talk about, and how feasible is the above concept of the British Air Force Space Command to counter our and Chinese orbital groupings in the aerospace sectors of real theaters of war of the XNUMXst century?

It is worth noting the fact that the concept of the above exercise involves the removal of the launch lines of conditional ("virtual") interceptor missiles outside the dense layers of the troposphere and stratosphere (by means of the exit of "Typhoons" carriers to the dynamic ceiling of 18300-19000 m near the Armstrong line) a multiple reduction in their aerodynamic drag, which ultimately should ensure a more efficient use of the energy potential of solid-propellant charges of the launch and acceleration-march stages with a total reduction in the time for the launch of kinetic interceptors to the orbital areas of the intended meeting with intercepted reconnaissance satellites.

At the same time, the possibility of detecting and capturing intercepted satellites for "precise" autotracking by means of the Captor-M / E onboard radar of Typhoon fighters (with further target designation to interceptor missiles), voiced by British experts, completely contradicts the above-described exoatmospheric interception technique.

It is well known that the energy potential of the promising Captor-E Mk 2 onboard AFAR radar (not to mention the outdated Captor-M radar based on slot antenna arrays) ensures the detection of radio contrast objects with an effective reflecting surface (EOC / EPR) 5 –10 sq. m at a distance of about 250-300 km.

Therefore, it is logical to assume that, for example, the promising Pion-NKS and Lotos-S satellites of the Liana system orbiting the Earth with a perigee of 250–270 km will be tracked by the Captor- E "only at the moment of being at an angle of 90 degrees relative to the horizon (and even then only if the upper limit of the instrumental speed of tracked targets allows, which, for example, for the Irbis-E radar is 5500 km / h).

Consequently, even if Captor-E manages to "tie the track" of the receding satellite (which is extremely unlikely) and transmit target designation to the interceptor missile, the latter will need to intercept the satellite on a catch-up course at a speed of about 9 km / s.

As you know, even the most modern ground-based ("Aegis Ashore") SM-3 Block IIA missile, which is to be equipped with advanced exoatmospheric kinetic interceptors of the Mk 142 / MKV / UKV lines, does not possess such speed parameters, the upper speed limit of which in the thermosphere reaches 5600 m / s ...

In the case of the use of interceptor missiles launched by Typhoons on advance target designation issued either by a ground-based high-potential AFAR-MRLS type AN / TPY-2 of the THAAD anti-missile system, or by the S1850M shipborne surveillance radar (installed on Type 45 destroyers of the Daring class), interception Such orbital targets on counter-intersecting courses may become quite feasible, which will require equipping our and Chinese reconnaissance satellites with appropriate laser-beam complexes for optoelectronic countermeasures to infrared seeker of endoatmospheric kinetic interceptors of the enemy.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aerodrome
    Aerodrome 1 March 2021 05: 57
    wet dreams of small shavens, no more. for starters, you need to get hold of such an aircraft as the MiG 31, at least.
    1. mssp
      mssp 1 March 2021 07: 40
      Not needed.
      The rocket is needed, the plane is secondary.
      The news is not clear about what in general, just estimates at an early stage.
      1. vik669
        vik669 1 March 2021 21: 36
        Yes, a rocket can be directly from the couch without taking off, that is, without even getting up!
    2. bayard
      bayard 1 March 2021 07: 46
      Trying to replicate the American ACAT system? But for this, in addition to the actual aircraft and the interceptor missile, a lot is needed. The USA has it.
      And England?
      So for now - dreams.
      1. dSK
        dSK 1 March 2021 09: 21
        Quote: bayard
        The USA has it

        The United States is the main "engine" for the militarization of space.
        The X-37 is an off-the-shelf space satellite fighter.
        1. bayard
          bayard 1 March 2021 10: 30
          The X-37 is a megaton-class orbital warhead. It is able to stay on duty in orbit for a long time and, on command, leave it and hit the designated target. After being on duty for 1 - 1,5 - 2 years, it descends from orbit to prevent and extend the resource.
          Satellites are exterminated by completely different devices, which do not need wings.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 1 March 2021 14: 16
            The United States does not have such warheads - all B 83 bombs with similar warheads have long been removed from service with the X 37; they are just experimental devices for testing equipment for control systems and concepts, etc.
            1. bayard
              bayard 1 March 2021 16: 40
              The X-37 is the carrier for such a warhead. It has been known for a long time that they have problems with radiochemical facilities, but they are working on this issue.
              In the late USSR, this type of vehicle for delivering warheads from orbit to a target was also developed. The "Buran" shuttles were supposed to withdraw and maintain such carriers, as well as return them to the ground for preventive maintenance and servicing. It was for these purposes that "Buran" was created. And that is why it was planned to have 10 Buranovs. , and 15 "Hogs" on board each during withdrawal.
              The program was closed by Gorbachev, who allowed only a single start of “Buran”.
              Materials on this topic came to the United States in the 90s and they had their own program.
              That is why the X-37 is on duty in orbit for SO long, and then it lands, receives maintenance and starts again, and again for an equally long period. This is a test of a nuclear weapon carrier and its delivery vehicle from orbit to the target, with the possibility of recalling from orbit, or a planned descent to perform routine maintenance.
              There is no other explanation for this program.
              And even more so, THIS cannot be a "satellite hunter". Intercepting satellites requires a large supply of fuel, thrusters for efficient maneuvering in orbit, and an instrument for destroying satellites. To carry:
              - wings,
              - chassis,
              - thermal protection,
              - tail unit,
              - equipment and mechanization to ensure aerodynamic descent and landing at the aerodrome.
              Have you noticed HOW many "extra" I have listed?
              And all THIS is useless to intercept satellites.
              Moreover, it is harmful.
              So you need to look at things with a sober look, with the awareness of WHAT a complex and specific contraption is for:
              - created,
              - performs REGULAR flights of SO long duration,
              - so classified that IN GENERAL nothing is known about its payload.
              - for so many years.
              The conclusion is a military program of a very specific and confidential nature.
    3. yehat2
      yehat2 4 March 2021 10: 58
      For several years the Americans have had a missile in the Navy that goes straight from the deck to intercept the atmosphere and the interceptor is not particularly needed. True, so far they have huge problems to get somewhere, but not only are there no problems with the rocket's energy - they plan to use it to intercept ballistic missiles.
  2. iouris
    iouris 1 March 2021 12: 18
    Interception of a satellite is the beginning of a war of mutual destruction. And how does the military doctrine of the state look at this?
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 1 March 2021 13: 13
      Interception of a satellite is the beginning of a war of mutual destruction
      a very bold assumption, while the interception of satellites is secret and not for the press, then when all the necessary methods and technologies have been worked out - eulogies, and a demonstration at arms exhibitions, in order to monetize, but then ... it takes a lot of time for the reasons to appear :
      this is the beginning of a war of mutual destruction.
  3. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 1 March 2021 12: 45
    The target is not maneuvering, from the word at all! Coordinates 51,50 N 0,12 W. But then! London Downig Street 10 if that. laughing
  4. Virus-free crown
    Virus-free crown 1 March 2021 13: 34
    Read to this:

    As exoatmospheric (transatmospheric) interceptors, virtual “digital” models of which will be loaded into simulation software “add-ons” of weapons control systems of combatant “Typhoons” for conducting exercises, the British press, referring to Whitehall, presented completely abstract “anti-missiles” without clearly indicating indices , not to mention their flight performance and guidance principles.

    I want to give advice to British warriors - "Science fiction on the floor even higher" (c) anecdote wassat tongue laughing

    First, do something similar in iron - and then dream))) And yes - "Everything is beautiful on paper - but they forgot about the ravines" lol
  5. Volder
    Volder 1 March 2021 14: 14
    A rhyme dedicated to the great text-addressee: laughing
    One sentence and ten paragraphs
    What do you want? Well this is Damantsev!
  6. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 1 March 2021 15: 10
    Taking into account financial problems, this is a theory, from the category of little scientific.
  7. l.jensen
    l.jensen 1 March 2021 17: 11
    Once again, you have defeated Britain in your comments. Congratulations. For complete pleasure, I did not have enough comments about how the insolent Saxons-shallow-shaven rob you. How to understand the project described in the article? Prosot, this is a project. Our country is ruled by taxpayers. Money is spent primarily on science. Then education, medicine (always underfunded) and the welfare of citizens (also not much). grants for science are huge. Sometimes the topics are just plain funny, but there are many grant-eaters. And this is also a project. Nobody is going to bring it to life. They can sell to the USA. "Hostile" attitude towards Russia. Yes, on the pages of the media and pumping up anti-Russian sentiments it is. In fact, Russia is giving Britain tons of gold, billions of money, in exchange for what? Yes, nothing, prosot so. Who else will give us so much? We left the EU because taxpayers did not want to feed their money to European bureaucrats. The Gamaleya Institute is quietly working closely with Ohford. Because they are smart people and they are not interested in the political circus. And how many agents of influence live with us? Even on this site there is a large advertisement for "UK CITIZENSHIP" and "Russian Brides" (probably not on your side) Why? Yes, because "England is good as far as it is good to live in it now" The bright future is not interesting, and on Nelson's column it is written "England demands from everyone to do the best that he is capable of"
    By the way, Nelson's column itself was built with the money of the Russian Tsar Alexander. (We are silent about this). In fact, there is no enmity between our countries. The treasury is replenished with Russian money, talents and brains come, They are easily assimilated, they become British. And the fact that agents of influence and the mafia run your country is not our business. You have signed some kind of non-profitable obligation with Europe, so they will put pressure on you in order to benefit. Why do you need it? Neither I nor my entourage harbor hostility towards Russia and the Russian people. On the contrary, I also like President Putin. Is it profitable for me personally that money flows from Russia to us? Yes, otherwise my taxes will increase. Is it profitable for your bosses? Yes, too. So everyone is happy.
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 1 March 2021 20: 21
      Quote: l.Jensen
      Even on this site there is a big advertisement for "UK CITIZENSHIP" and "Russian Brides" (probably not on your side) Why? Because "England is as good as it is to live in it now"

      funny .. laughing I have no such heresy. what is wrong with you?
      advertising in the browser is targeted, why is this ad from a "type" Briton and not a Russian? Are you definitely not Ukrainian? wassat
      Quote: l.Jensen
      Is it profitable for me personally that money flows from Russia to us? Yes, otherwise my taxes will increase. Is it profitable for your bosses? Yes, too.

      a very dubious thesis, especially after you suddenly Berezovsky died strangely in the bathroom. to Malta, to Switzerland, to Belgium, they may still flow, but definitely not to you. you broadcast an outdated myth wink
      instead of composing, you better get busy! your cat Skripals is still at large, which means that death from the "newbie" will continue! bully
  8. MrFox
    MrFox 1 March 2021 19: 10
    About the radar detection characteristics. These characteristics are determined on the assumption that the target's location is unknown and it maneuvers. Here the situation is different - the trajectories of the satellites are known, which means the required radiation power will be much lower
  9. Prisoner
    Prisoner 1 March 2021 20: 06
    The Englishwoman is pushing in the desire to be significant, pushing, and you get one fart and spoiled air.
  10. DLord
    DLord 3 March 2021 03: 27
    For this highly respected and all-aspect-annual author, knowledgeable in all spheres of human life, before publication, it is necessary to insert the picchu "I am not a robot." At least once to try, otherwise the robot is given his articles. It turns out that ED is a neural network :-)
  11. Bauer
    Bauer 3 March 2021 17: 00
    They would develop this system together with ukrami. Using hyperloops.
  12. nikant
    nikant 8 March 2021 15: 58
    sass orpm kbbbbbb pppmkk pp klmlbb k k
  13. Pardus
    Pardus 10 March 2021 13: 14
    Ambitious concept of aerospace confrontation from the UK Space Force

    British generals have seen enough of Star Wars.yes
  14. Pardus
    Pardus 10 March 2021 13: 15
    providing conditional ("digital") interception of Russian and Chinese reconnaissance satellites

    Directly the second coming of SDI in Naglosaki laughing