Long-range "destroyer" S-400 or ordinary modernization of HARM with mediocre updates. What's hidden in the AGM-88G


Information on the implementation of successful flight tests at the Pacific range near Avb Point Mugu of a prototype of a promising long-range anti-radar missile AGM-88G AARGM-ER from the suspension unit of the carrier-based multi-functional fighter F / A-18F of the US Navy in the blink of an eye turned into an unpaved field of activity for numerous domestic military experts and observers who went all out - in predicting the effectiveness of these products in the event of their probable combat use against the Kaliningrad and Crimean anti-aircraft zones of restriction and denial of access and A2 / AD maneuvers built by mixed anti-aircraft missile groups based on the S-300PM2 air defense missile system / 400, as well as self-propelled military air defense systems of medium and long range "Buk-M2" and S-300V4.

It poses a threat only with massive use from ultra-low altitudes, but it is still subject to interception even by far from new military air defense systems "Buk-M2"

This modification of the well-known family of anti-radar missiles HARM owes an increased interest from expert and observer circles to nothing more than the nickname "S-400 destroyer", given to it by employees of state information publications and regularly appearing in the American and Western European media spaces since June 2021.

Meanwhile, a completely logical question arises: to what extent do the true tactical and technical parameters of this line of anti-radar missiles correspond to this nickname?

After all, it is well known that the tradition of multiple overestimation of the characteristics and pretentious promotion of their military equipment is an integral component of the positioning of American military-industrial corporations on the world arms market.

Indeed, the updated AGM-88G AARGM-ER ("Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile - Extended Range") has a number of tactical and technical advantages in comparison with the early modification of the AGM-88E AARGM.

In particular, the aerodynamic layout and power plant of the new product have undergone dramatic changes, providing (in comparison with the AGM-88E) an increase in the range from 130 to 190-220 km and the flight speed in the initial section of the trajectory from 2,2 to 3,5-4M respectively.

To implement these parameters, the specialists of the military-industrial company "Northrop Grumman"

firstly, for the AARGM-ER we have designed a more “high-torque” dual-mode solid propellant rocket engine with a longer burnout period for solid propellant charges,

secondly, we have moved away from the classical aerodynamic scheme with front planes of aerodynamic control surfaces of a large area (which significantly increase aerodynamic resistance),

thirdly, we endowed the hull of the new PRLR with developed aerodynamic influxes of high aspect ratio, ensuring the implementation of the effect of the so-called "subplanning" on the stratospheric trajectory to increase the flight range.

In the future, the above features will allow the crews of carrier aircraft (EA-18G "Growler", F / A-18E / F "Super Hornet", and in the future, and F-35A / B / C) to launch anti-radar AARGM-ER missiles using radars illumination and guidance of the C-300PM2 / 400 and HQ-9 air defense systems from low and medium altitudes at launch ranges of 130-150 km, which will significantly reduce the likelihood of interception of carriers due to the inevitable decrease in the flight performance of anti-aircraft guided missiles HQ-9 (FD-2000 ) and 48H6E2 / 3.

This fact is due to the need to operate the latter in the dense layers of the troposphere at the terminal sections of the trajectories, where the high density of the atmosphere will contribute to an increase in aerodynamic drag and accelerated deceleration with the resulting loss of proper maneuverability, giving the pilots of the Growlers and Super Hornets a chance to perform an effective anti-zenith maneuver.

The early modification of the PRLR - AGM-88E provided the possibility of low- / medium-altitude launch from a much shorter distance (about 90-100 km), at which the above-mentioned anti-aircraft missiles still retain high speed and maneuverable potentials even when intercepting low-altitude targets in dense layers of the troposphere.

In the case of massive use of AGM-88G against the S-300PM2 and S-400 Triumph air defense systems from ultra-low altitudes and an over-the-horizon position at a distance of 55-60 km semi-active radar seeker), at the disposal of combat crews "Three hundred" and "Four hundred" will remain almost 48-6 times less time (about 2-1,5 seconds before entering the "dead zone") to detect, "tie" routes and "Capture" of dozens of AARGM-ERs in an approaching anti-radar outfit, rather than in the case of 2-mahova HARMs.

Therefore, if the enemy implements the above tactics of a sudden anti-radar strike, the combat stability of a single regiment of two S-300PM2 / 400 air defense missile systems, which has two 6-channel radars for illumination and guidance 30 / 92N6E, will be a big question.

For timely and effective suppression of such attacks, the element base of combat control points and illumination / guidance radars of all combatants S-300PM2 and S-400 should be subjected to software and hardware adaptation to the use of 9M96DM missiles equipped with active radar seeker and capable of intercepting the approaching Hornets / Growlers "before they reach the AGM-88G launch line beyond the radio horizon.

Moreover, each S-300/400 regiment should be covered with a battery of self-propelled military air defense missile systems "Tor-M2U" or ZRPK "Pantsir-SM", covering the "dead zone" of long-range complexes and capable of intercepting the AARGM-ER arrays that have escaped from ranging radars 30 / 92N6E and destruction by anti-aircraft missiles 48N6E2 / DM.

As for the electrodynamic parameters and flight performance of the AGM-88G PRLR, they practically do not differ from the earlier AGM-88E AARGM.

Having an active-passive radar seeker of the WGU-48 / B line with the same diameter and area of ​​the radio-contrast slotted antenna array, the promising anti-radar missile AARGM-ER retained an effective reflecting surface at the level of 0,07 sq. m, providing the possibility of its detection by means of the 96L6 all-altitude detector and 92N6E illumination radar at a distance of about 120 and 170 km, respectively.

No less significant nuance is also the absence of the AARGM-ER gas-jet system of thrust vector deviation and developed aerodynamic control surfaces, which excludes the possibility of performing intensive anti-aircraft maneuvers on the cruise and terminal sections of the trajectory by the PRLR data.

As a result, the interception of such low-maneuverable targets can be carried out even by means of the 9M317 missiles of the Buk-M2 complexes, not to mention the S-350 Vityaz and Buk-M3 with the super-maneuverable 9M96DM and 9M317MA.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    14 September 2021 06: 16
    nickname "S-400 destroyer", given to her staff of state news publications
    That's exactly what the media is. Journalists, because of their "patriotic" impulse, which is based solely on financial interest, can call it whatever they want ("eraser", "deactivator", "thunderstorm", etc.) if only it sounded loud and gave the layman a reason to read the article ... Well, our author is recognized from the first lines by his style.
    1. +1
      14 September 2021 06: 43
      The same technique is used by the USA when giving its "bad" names to our technology.
    2. +3
      14 September 2021 07: 26
      the author is recognized from the first lines by his style.

      well, not a bad style, technical details can be interesting too
      1. +4
        14 September 2021 08: 29
        well, not a bad style
        Did I say (wrote) that I was bad? But I want to note that Damantsev's articles are often overloaded with abbreviations and unnecessary technical details. At the same time, I pay tribute to the author for the work done.
  2. -3
    14 September 2021 08: 43
    Poses a threat only when massively used from ⁴ ultra low heights

    I agree with the author - it poses a threat precisely with a massive application. Because the price of this missile is relatively low, and the NATO aircraft fleet significantly exceeds the number of our aircraft.
    In case of massive use, they will push through our air defense, only the presence of nuclear weapons stops.
    1. +9
      14 September 2021 10: 28
      When used on a massive scale, they will be awaited. Hiding a large number of aircraft before an attack is not the same as hiding one flight. The same use of the terrain during a massive air raid is not so effective, because a large number of aircraft may simply not "fit" into the fold of the terrain and unmask themselves. And there will be a noticeable concentration of dozens of aircraft around our airspace.
      And there, under the pressure of electronic warfare systems, with air defense raised on alarm, waiting for an attack, with our fighters rising, not so numerous, but able to fend for themselves ... The risk of failure, even if it is equal to 30%, is considered unreasonably high.
      1. +10
        14 September 2021 10: 51
        All that you say is not fair on this is not considered .. Light elves, if they attack, then their opponents are obliged to expect them exclusively with a bare bottom dead drunk and sleeping. And of course, there can be no analytics and intelligence and an enemy of the elves .. This is where the bright Valinor land with a white temple on the hill stands ..
      2. -3
        14 September 2021 13: 33
        the range of the brand new Kharma is up to 200 km, when launched from an altitude of 15 km.
        and a launch from a height of 100 meters is a range of 100 km.
        and + YES (!), we will cover the concentration of 100 fighters per hour X with the help of OTRK cluster warheads
        1. +10
          14 September 2021 15: 36
          The brand new HARM will not be able to be used with strong countermeasures from electronic warfare from the maximum distance, it needs to aim at the target, so they will have to strike from a closer range for confident aiming at the target and excluding cases of missile diversion to false targets.
          These performance characteristics in laboratory conditions without negative factors. Up to 200 km, that is, in ideal conditions (against countries of 3 worlds) you will have your 200 km.
          I also ask you to take into account that to prevent strikes from such a distance, it will be necessary to have a power reserve for the same HARMs for evading anti-aircraft missiles. Otherwise, after all the dodges, which, as I understand it (I'm a layman, based on the articles read here), require a lot of fuel, it can lose all fuel and collapse, short of flying.
          The missiles are cool, but against a country that is distinguished by its advanced air defense and other means of countering threats from the sky, it is not such an ultimatum. We are lagging behind a lot, but in terms of air defense we are the most formidable opponent in the world.
          1. -1
            1 October 2021 00: 27
            The brand new HARM will not be able to be used with strong countermeasures from electronic warfare from the maximum distance

            The stronger the counteraction (radiation) of the electronic warfare means, the more accurate the HARM!
            The new HARM will be launched by a pack (Golden Horde). Provides information exchange with the carrier and other missiles (retargeting). The missile is capable of hitting moving radars even with the radar turned off.
            The Russians have no chance of resisting PRRs flying head-on at supersonic speed.
            1. 0
              1 October 2021 11: 03
              Well, I'm not saying that the missile is useless and won't hit the target anyway. I say that it is impossible to achieve such a concentration of missiles in order to penetrate our air defense without revealing your intentions in advance. And this is already a direct disagreement with the doctrine of instant disarming strike.
              Any defense can be broken.
              But I do not share your belief that we have no chance. It's still supersonic - the main thing against which our air defense is trained. And it will be possible to judge the effectiveness of air defense against these missiles only after the precedents of the meeting on the territory of third countries, and sooner or later they will
        2. 0
          1 October 2021 00: 24
          And where did you get the idea that HARMs will be launched only from fighters? They can also be launched from UAVs placed on Ryder.
      3. 0
        1 October 2021 00: 17
        And why did you decide that the PRR will be launched from aircraft, and not from UAVs? It's still the 21st century in the yard.
        1. 0
          1 October 2021 11: 19
          I will answer both questions at once in one. I decided this because the UAV has a smaller combat radius and a significantly lower combat load. Accordingly, in order to release such a horde of missiles that will break through the air defense umbrella, a lot of UAVs are needed and, moreover, much closer to our border. Which, again, will reveal all intentions in advance - well, you cannot hide now hundreds and hundreds of drone UAVs without finding yourself. They are also not small.
          Therefore, although the 21st century is in the yard, the same USA and Israel are focusing on aircraft, while UAVs are used for pinpoint strikes or as a means of support. They do not yet pull according to their characteristics up to the main impact force.
          Therefore, a massive strike is easier and more effective to deliver from aircraft.
          I repeat, we are not Armenia, we have a well-trained layered air defense system with a bunch of overlapping zones and complementary systems. Like the Soviets, we are focusing on air defense in the development of weapons, since they are not fools to try to compete on an equal footing with the United States in the air, where their fiefdom is.
          Do not reassure yourself, the same advertised and, admittedly, not in vain, bayraktars rained down in Syria when we began to coordinate the Syrian calculations with our C300. And this is not the only and not the most top-end that we have.
          1. -2
            12 October 2021 19: 40
            to release such a horde of missiles that will break through the air defense umbrella, you need a lot of UAVs

            If the Russian air defense does not see the Ryder bomber, then why would it suddenly see the UAV? Therefore, "a hell of a tablet is enough."
            we have a well-trained layered air defense with a bunch of overlapping zones and complementary systems.

            The Izriltians destroyed this myth about the inaccessibility of the Soviet air defense system back in 1983 (Operation Medvedka19, Y. Levan).
            For THREE !!! day was destroyed "the best in the world" air defense system, "the best in the world" electronic warfare and 80 !!! "the best in the world" Soviet aircraft. The Israelis have not lost ANYONE !!!
    2. -1
      14 September 2021 10: 54
      so in case of a massive strike by NATO aviation, nuclear ICBMs will fly in response, and it will no longer matter what the fleet of NATO aviation is and whether the air defense will be pushed through or not,
    3. +5
      14 September 2021 12: 24
      With massive use - they will push our air defense

      our Defense consists of air defense systems of different ranges, radars of different ranges and different ranges
      and the most not discussed fighter aircraft
      raisins, in a combat radius, or rather generally in range + bomb load up to 8 tons
      on average 6 medium-range air-to-air missiles, up to 150 km., + 2 short-range missiles
      Su-30 / Su-35 have a range of 3500 km.
      the range from the AB to the patrol zone is about 200 km. - range of 48N6 SAM S-400
      patrol front 250 km x 2 = ~ 600 km circle. = 30 minutes
      in 3 hours at a speed of 1200 km / h this is 6 laps (elongated ovals - paper clips)
      2 flights x 2 Su-30/35 = 4 Su-30/35 x 6 missiles = 24 SD, 4 x 2 = 8. A total of 32 V-V missiles
      + 1 link ready 2 minutes = 16 V-V
      Standard for the RF Air Force - 2 overlapping patrol zones 400 km each = 8 Dryers
      = 64 V-V missiles + 2 Dryings 16 V-V missiles = 80 missiles
      + ZRP S-400 (2 ZRD spaced 20 km - we exclude everyone's favorite dead funnels)
      = 64 SAM
      + cover in the near zone up to 20 km = 6 ZRPK Pantsir x 12 missiles = 72 missiles
      + 12 more Sushki x 8 = 96 V-V missiles on AB
      Total: 312 rockets to the front 400 km.
      with overlapping range: 150 km + 200 km (incl. 20 km)
      the US Air Force does not have an armada of 50 fighters in Europe x 6 = 300 - not enough
      100 x 6 = 600 and this is already a target for OTRK Iskander
      * by the way, the low-altitude detectors of the cm-range for the S-400 have a tower of 40 meters, an angle of minus 4 degrees, are placed on the hills of 50 meters, radio horizon = 120 - 160 km
      * by the way, the zone of the 20th and 8th armies is covered by 5 AB
      1. +4
        14 September 2021 15: 54
        Add more electronic warfare, which will interfere with guidance, jamming the signals of GPS and other satellites, creating a lot of interference and blinding the seeker of missiles.

        No, in order to break through the air defense right away, they need to either add massive launches of tomahawks from the sea, or pull off all the aviation in the region and stuff it with missiles.
        In the first case, taking into account the dull speed of the axes, we will know about the attack in half an hour. And taking into account the fact that for such a massive blow with axes at least a couple of AUGs must gather, we will notice them at least a few hours in advance and everything that is possible and impossible will be alerted.
        In the second case, we also will not ignore the fact that the Americans have pulled all the aircraft from the region at one point, we will be ready and will multiply the number of aviation patrols, having transferred at least several links from the main part of the country.
        With American surprise disarming strike tactics, both options look wild and uncharacteristic. They do not know how and they have never done such a thing to throw everything, everything, everything forward. Too risky.
        1. +2
          16 September 2021 22: 13
          ... and taking into account the fact that it is simply impossible to assemble a couple of AUG in the Black Sea, in the northern latitudes - it is possible, but they cannot work there, then in theory there remains only the Pacific Ocean, from which along the western and central parts of the Russian Federation (where basically all the "nishtyaks" are concentrated) it is generally impossible to work ... In short, against the Russian Federation, AUGs are useless and merciless in the current situation (which cannot be said about the same China - it is not in vain that they rivet their fleet so shock - they just need it)
      2. +1
        19 September 2021 09: 58
        Did you take into account that they will massively use false targets, electronic warfare and so on? Any air defense is really hard. There are simply not enough rockets for everyone. Hundreds of tomoghawks will also fly. Yes, we have the best air defense in the world. But not enough for everyone.
        "The US Air Force does not have an armada in Europe of 50 fighters x 6 = 300 - not enough" - but don't you think of allies? And who says that the Americans will attack (hypothetically, in reality, it is clear that they will not) with fifty fighters?))) They even attracted more to Iraq. Or can't they fly?
      3. -2
        12 October 2021 19: 51
        Total: 312 missiles to the front 400 km

        Feel free to divide it in half. Two missiles will be fired to confidently hit the target.
        are placed on the hills of 50 meters

        What hills are there in the Arctic? ALL Russian air defense will be destroyed FROM THE REAR! The Arctic is one big hole where Putin has allowed NATO ships to enter.
    4. 0
      24 September 2021 23: 32
      - Not only.
      The Navy's budget for fiscal 2016 included funding for an extended-range AARGM-ER, which uses an existing guidance system and an AGM-88E solid-state integrated jet ramjet engine to double the range.
      In September 2016, Orbital ATK unveiled its extended range AARGM-ER, which includes an upgraded control section and an 11,5mm (290mm) rocket engine that doubles the range and internal suspension on the Lockheed Martin F-35A and F -35C Lightning II; internal suspension on the F-35B is not possible due to internal space constraints. The new missile uses the AARGM warhead and guidance system in a new airframe that replaces the mid-airfoil wings with side aerodynamic surfaces, with relocated control surfaces to a low drag tail and a more powerful propulsion system for greater speed and range. This is reported to be twice the range and speed of the AGM-88E, resulting in a range of about 88 km for the AGM-300G and a speed of Mach 4..
      The US Navy awarded Orbital ATK a contract for the AARGM-ER in January 2018. The United States Air Force later joined the AARGM-ER program, participating in the internal work of integrating the F-35A / F-35C, and selected AARGM-ER as the base for its service.
  3. +3
    14 September 2021 11: 58
    Evgeny Damantsev is not imitated and is determined from the first phrase.
  4. +1
    14 September 2021 17: 52
    Quote: rotmistr60
    our author is recognized from the first lines by his style.

    Our author is a great fellow.
    The article is interesting, not overloaded with terms unfamiliar to the average reader.
    Keep it up!
  5. -4
    14 September 2021 18: 05
    Quote: Janerobot
    strike by NATO aircraft, nuclear ICBMs will fly in response,

    Where will they fly?
    Yes, there are relatives!
    Many officials have state secrets with children, grandchildren and sons-in-law in Israel and Western Europe.
    Even the laziest and most corrupt journalists-henchmen, such as London resident Brilyov and the owner of real estate on the shores of his beloved lake, Com- zionist Solovyov, prepared a way of escape.

    If something does fly, in response, it will be the sleek fifths of our powers that be, on their own or rented business jets.
    Perhaps this is just that "cunning plan with a deep multi-pass", and in the suitcases of the sailing ghouls there will be not gold and securities, but compact nuclear bombs?
    After all, the elite business jets will land in the capitals of our enemies.
  6. +2
    14 September 2021 21: 26
    Knight's move for such prs. Short-range air defense systems are carried forward, under the cover of longer-range air defense systems (in their affected area) in threatened directions.
  7. +2
    14 September 2021 22: 27
    I respect the author, but how dry he writes .... thirsty.
  8. -1
    15 September 2021 10: 07
    thirdly, we endowed the hull of the new PRLR with developed aerodynamic influxes of high aspect ratio, ensuring the implementation of the effect of the so-called "subplanning" on the stratospheric trajectory to increase the flight range.
    What would have flown must be released in the stratosphere, and to hit, in the troposphere. Those. if one rocket hits something, then all other carriers will be destroyed within 400 km.
    Rocket for American Taxpayers
  9. +1
    15 September 2021 12: 32
    Air defense is a complicated matter ..... but in the absence of fighters and means of defeating the carriers of these F18s (and the determination to hit them), air defense is gouged ..... it's just a matter of forces and means involved in one S-400 complex.
  10. +3
    15 September 2021 14: 36
    but in general the article is not about anything
    RNP 36N6 SAM S-400 has 36 channels for 72 missiles per division - regiment 72 channels for 144 missiles
    and not 12 channels for 24 missiles on air defense systems
    cm-76H6 low-altitude detector with an elevation angle of minus 4 degrees is placed on the 40V6M tower
    = 40 meters, at a height of 50-60 meters
    radio horizon for brand new Harm missiles with EPR 0,05 sq.m. flying at an altitude of 20 meters = 200 km.
    the range of the 48N6 SAM is just 200 km.
    ZRP 16 PU x 4 = 64 missiles
    on the edge 200 km. air patrols of the circle of 8 Su-30 / Su-35 = 16
    8 Air-to-Air missiles with a range of another 150 km = 128 missiles
    a total of at least 192 missiles: 128 missiles at a range of 350 km, 64 by 200 km.
    at a distance of 20 km 6 ZRPK Pantsir = 24 channels and 72 missiles
    + on AB in minute readiness another 16 Su-30 / Su-35 x 8 missiles = 128
    Total: 392 potential targets
  11. 0
    16 September 2021 10: 05
    SAM 9M317 complexes "Cub-M2"

    eyelet - Buk-M2
  12. PPD
    16 September 2021 10: 20
    Eh, Damantsev, why are you upsetting the Americans, and even with a tsyfir in your hands. laughing
    The whole dream was destroyed in one fell swoop.
    They will read it and get upset.
    Only superwaffle was created, and here.
  13. 0
    16 September 2021 22: 08
    Heh, our X-58 has long had a range of 250 km, which allows it to be launched by aircraft generally outside the range of American air defense systems. And as the author correctly pointed out, one in an open field C300 \ 400 is not worth it. At least there is always a short-range air defense system, and if there are some other military units nearby, there is a medium air defense system. Considering that with real databases, electronic warfare will also work ... fuck them and not destroy the C400
  14. +2
    18 September 2021 21: 03
    A very dangerous missile.

    The Achilles heel of previous HARM models was that their guidance system was extremely dependent on whether the radar was shining. The built-in inertial reference did not provide sufficient guidance accuracy. There is also a mm radar, which has a chance to pick out a target in the final section.

    If the calculations of the "large" air defense systems are not fools, and if they notice the launch (do not forget: serious electronic warfare means are not at all a monopoly of the Russian Federation), then they will rather focus on survival and turn off the radiation. The approaching missiles can try to engage the means of the close air defense echelon.

    Well, of course, first of all, its own aviation should work, not allowing the enemy aircraft to reach the launch line. Although in the European theater of operations this will be quite problematic. In the event of a mess, everyone will hit from all sides. The Russian Federation has no friends in Europe.

    In addition, the question remains quite open about how often and for what purposes, comparable in parameters to HARM, SAM calculations work on exercises. Naturally, there is no information about this, so it is difficult to talk about something. But the fact that the Air Forces of NATO countries, especially America and Great Britain, regularly train to work against "high digit SAMs" is not hidden.
  15. 0
    19 September 2021 09: 51
    Quote: lucul
    Poses a threat only when massively used from ⁴ ultra low heights

    I agree with the author - it poses a threat precisely with a massive application. Because the price of this missile is relatively low, and the NATO aircraft fleet significantly exceeds the number of our aircraft.
    In case of massive use, they will push through our air defense, only the presence of nuclear weapons stops.

    I wonder what they are minus for? It's obvious. Or is it stupid urapatriotism minus? I noticed that if they write, for example, what poses a threat or they outnumber us, then they immediately minus. I would like to hear for what, from those who minus. What's wrong? Or is it not patriotic for the urapatriots? What's wrong then? Argument.
  16. 0
    28 September 2021 01: 30
    Calling any missile an S-400 destroyer is stupid. This is pure propaganda and misinformation. The S-400 has such a good reputation in the world that it is bought by any country that needs the best anti-aircraft system in the world. This has become a real problem for the American Patriot and our ability to sell weapons. Therefore, in order to try to bring down arrogance from the S-400 in the eyes of the world community, we came up with a missile and called it a stupid name, for example, the destroyer S-400. No serious military man who knows anything about these systems would believe such a name. This is propaganda for domestic American use and for external use to reinforce the declining opinion of U.S. anti-aircraft systems. There is no real news here, just junk propaganda.
  17. 0
    8 October 2021 12: 28
    A very harmful thing. Do not underestimate this product like death.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"