THAAD complexes on Ukrainian territory. Potential and Challenges

The THAAD complex launches an anti-missile

The other day it became known about the desire of Ukraine to deploy American missile defense systems on its territory. THAAD systems could strengthen the defense of Ukrainian territory, as well as provide new opportunities in the field of situational illumination. However, such steps may have a negative impact on the overall situation in the region.

Plans and desires

On February 7, the TASS news agency reported on the possible deployment of American weapons in Ukraine. The information was obtained from an unnamed diplomatic source; her country of origin is also unknown. Official confirmations or denials have not yet been received either.

A TASS source said that Kiev has turned to Washington with a request to deploy THAAD complexes on its territory. Several divisions of such equipment are proposed to be deployed in the Kharkov region - tens of kilometers from the Russian border. The complexes should work in full force and, together with other means, include AN / TPY-2 radar stations.

The full-time radar of the complex will give the American and Ukrainian military special opportunities. The AN / TPY-2 product will be able to illuminate the situation in the air and in space over Russian territory. The possibility of tracking objects at a depth of about 1000 km is indicated. At the same time, the combat qualities of the THAAD complex in the context of interception in news not considered.

The news about the possible transfer of missile defense systems has already received due appreciation. On February 7, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the appearance of THAAD near our borders "would be another step towards destabilizing the situation."

American officials have not yet acknowledged receipt of the Ukrainian proposal. Accordingly, it is not reported about the fundamental possibility of transferring equipment or about preparations for this. Whether the United States will agree to deploy its complexes on foreign territory is a big question.

Features and Features

THAAD is a mobile ground-based missile defense system. The standard composition of the battery of such a complex includes a radar and a command post, as well as three launchers with 24 anti-missiles ready for launch.

All facilities of the complex are placed on self-propelled chassis or trailers. It is possible to transfer by air and independent movement on roads. After deploying to the position, the complex can carry out continuous duty for a long time.

The AN / TPY-2 type radar is responsible for the coverage of the air and space situation as part of THAAD. This is an X-band station with an active phased array antenna. The detection range, according to various sources, reaches 1000 or 4500 km, depending on the parameters of the target. The station has modes for detecting and tracking ballistic missiles in ascending and descending flight segments with determining the trajectory and issuing target designation to fire weapons. There is a function of selection of real targets.

Radar station AN / TPY-2 in working position

Depending on the tactical situation and the nature of the built defense, the AN / TPY-2 radar can operate independently or in conjunction with other radio equipment. In particular, it is possible to use additional stations with different parameters with THAAD, thereby increasing the accuracy of target detection and tracking.

Targets are hit by an interceptor missile designed specifically for THAAD. This is a single-stage ammunition with a solid propellant engine and an infrared homing head. There is no warhead - the target is hit by a direct hit. The rocket is approx. 6,2 and with a diameter of 370 mm. Starting weight - 900 kg. Due to the small diameter, one launcher accommodates eight products in containers.

In flight, the anti-missile develops a speed of at least 2800 m / s. The launch range exceeds 200 km; according to some sources, it can be thousands of kilometers. Reach in height - at least 150 km. The THAAD missile is designed to intercept missiles of various classes, from operational-tactical to medium-range products. The maximum target speed, according to various sources, is at least 4-4,5 km / s.

Mutual benefits

The prospects for the request for the transfer of THAAD complexes to Ukraine are unknown. However, it has already received a proper political assessment from the Russian authorities. In addition, even now it is possible to consider and evaluate the military potential of such ideas and measures.

Depending on the conditions of international cooperation, the transfer of missile defense systems to Kharkov will be unambiguously beneficial for Ukraine. The state of its air defense leaves much to be desired, and there is virtually no missile defense system. Under such conditions, any military technical assistance or deployment of ready-made systems will make a significant contribution to the defense capability.

Exhibition layouts of anti-missiles

It is the transfer of complexes from the US armed forces, and not their purchase, that will give certain advantages. Thanks to this, the Ukrainian side will be able to receive protection without wasting time waiting for supplies, training personnel, etc. In addition, ensuring the duty of foreign complexes will be simpler and cheaper than a full-fledged purchase of equipment.

Probably, the US is also interested in deploying THAAD systems on Ukrainian territory. Such interest may be related to the possibility of deploying powerful and efficient radar stations near the Russian border. Products AN / TPY-2 or other stations will allow you to monitor the airspace of Russia and collect the desired information.

The anti-missile capabilities of the THAAD complex fade into the background. However, the Pentagon is unlikely to turn down the chance to bring antimissiles closer to Russian borders. With all the limitations and difficulties, such opportunities will not be superfluous and will help the implementation of general plans for the construction of a global missile defense system.

Objective difficulties

However, the deployment of THAAD complexes on Ukrainian territory has several characteristic problems and may lead to new risks. Due to these factors, the US may refuse Kiev's offer and not send the desired missile defense systems.

First of all, the deployment of THAAD is hampered by military risks. As rightly noted in Moscow, the appearance of these complexes near Kharkov will worsen the overall situation and will not contribute to the preservation of peace. In a situation where Kiev and Washington are expecting a Russian attack literally from day to day, the situation should not be further aggravated.

THAAD Deployment Process in Position

In addition, in the conditions of a full-scale conflict, which supposedly will begin at any moment, missile defense systems will become one of the priority targets for the enemy in the face of "dangerous and aggressive" Russia. It is hardly worth risking valuable equipment and personnel in such a situation.

Questions are raised by the proposed size of the grouping. According to the news, Ukraine is asking to send several divisions of THAAD complexes to its territory. As far as is known, in most cases these systems are deployed with batteries, and this is enough to solve the main tasks. Why Kiev needed larger units, and several at once, is a big question. Perhaps there is a common error.

If there is no error, then there are problems with the proposed transfer. It is unlikely that the United States will find free THAAD batteries that can be reduced to “several divisions” and sent to protect Ukraine. However, the American side can make them to order and sell them, but the price and timing of the transfer of new units will definitely not suit Kiev.

Anti-missile prospects

Whether the latest news is true, and whether Ukraine offered its American allies to strengthen its defense with its missile defense systems, is unknown. Any official statements and real steps in this direction have so far been heard and have not been observed. However, the situation may change at any moment, and one of the American airfields will begin loading equipment for transportation to Kharkov.

The implementation of the new Ukrainian proposal is associated with certain difficulties and problems, but will provide advantages and benefits to both parties. This means that, if there is a real "invitation", the US will assess all the risks and benefits, draw conclusions and start real actions. If the benefits can outweigh the problems, the transfer of equipment will begin. However, another outcome is also possible - and Ukraine will still have to rely only on its air defense.

Comments

[75 Sergey]

These fools have already shot down how many passenger planes and this is only over their territory, and give them a large range, then they will turn around.

[knn54]

-about Ukraine's desire to deploy American missile defense systems on its territory.
ANOTHER stuffing, not without the prompting of the Anglo-Saxons, to force Russia to send troops to Ukraine.
There were already "leaks" from Pakistani intelligence that the Yankees were planning to deploy missiles in Afghanistan. The Politburo then "swallowed" ...
The CIA and Co. are repeating themselves.

[Dart2027]

The launch range exceeds 200 km; according to some data, it can be thousand kilometers. height reach - not less than 150 km.

Am I the only one who thinks that there are some strange numbers here?

[Motorist]

Quote: Dart2027

Am I the only one who thinks that there are some strange numbers here?

This, probably, if strictly vertically fired, then at an altitude of 150 km it will turn back due to lack of fuel and under the influence of gravity. The wiki refers to this:

http://www.astronautix.com/t/thaad.html

PS And thousands of kilometers - this is a super-economical move (there is such a definition in the Navy now), most likely.

[28st region]

It means only one thing. There are no complete data on the complex.
BUT! If this is true, then it is understandable why the Americans are in no hurry to deploy this complex.
They have only 2 batteries, they still managed to sell the UAE and the Koreans.

[Roman Efremov]

What is THAAD in Ukraine? Yes, even with American servants (no other options)? On the territory that could potentially go to Russia in the near future? Along with the secret THAAD?

[Alexandr bogun]

What is THAAD in Ukraine? Yes, even with American servants (no other options)? On the territory that could potentially go to Russia in the near future? Along with the secret THAAD?

Well, we thought the same about the Jevelins 2-3 years ago, last year we didn’t believe that they would give the sharavarniks something more serious than patrol boats and rubber boats, but here for a month and a half it’s not clear what they just didn’t bring. You are so sure that they will not say again “Russia is the aggressor, there are again gathering thousands at the border” and under this pretext we won’t have time to rub our eyes when it turns out that somewhere in Poland on the border in warehouses for half a year there was a division of these THAAD. And from the border to the place where they decide they will transport this division during the day. It will be possible to speak as much concern as you like, but if there really is an official appeal from Ukraine, then what is the problem for them to drag their iron, like us, to Syria? Moreover, understanding the reality that we are not going to attack anywhere, and on their part this performance is clearly not for the purpose of bringing cartridges that were already fussing, and obviously not only for missiles under the Jevelins, which were also supplied without this theater. Such gestures were clearly started for something serious, and why is it not THAAD or a full-fledged military base? No need to think that everything is so simple and spontaneous, such a conservative state as Britain would never have made such a quick decision about the supply of thousands of its modern grenade launchers and anti-ship missiles. They clearly planned this and planned for something more significant, maybe we are looking at this "significant" now (

[Roman Efremov]

Well, you compared - Javelins and THAAD! Grenade launchers - and THAAD! And what anti-ship missiles did Britain send?

[Alexandr bogun]

I'm not so much comparing, of course, but rather I pay attention to the trend. As we remember, it all started with helmets and as they said "non-lethal protective equipment", and then everything went up. I don’t know whether it was sent or not, but I read the news here that the British have already announced that they will supply Brimstone anti-ship missiles in the near future.

[hagen]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

the British have already stated that they will supply Brimstone anti-ship missiles in the near future.

Do not thicken the colors. What kind of anti-ship missiles are there in 49 kg? ... A high-precision air-to-ground missile, an analogue of the AGM-114 Hellfire is just. The price is not more expensive than Javelin. Despite the fact that they are unlikely to make a gift to Ukraine. And THAAD, nevertheless, a whole billion for the complex. And it is unlikely that even a loan will be given into the hands of the Ukrainians. This means that it is necessary to put our own (in the sense of American) unit near Kharkov. In general, I think that this statement is akin to the same about space, a floating spaceport, etc. Dreams Dreams...

[Alexandr bogun]

Do not exaggerate.

I am not exaggerating, but simply getting out of the logical possibilities of how the situation has been moving for the last 5 years. And there it is only growing in terms of the seriousness and number of weapons.
With regards to Brimstone, this is a short-range anti-ship missile, but this was not even a couple of months ago, and now there are statements not by the press, but by the highest representatives of the British authorities.

Despite the fact that they are unlikely to make a gift to Ukraine.

And NLAW more than 2000 pieces. they put it for free that a couple of hundred of them would prevent them from transferring these missiles? Here they have a clear goal, in the event of a war with the hands of Ukraine, we will inflict more damage, I don’t think that this is a big cost for them.

And THAAD, nevertheless, a whole billion for the complex. And it is unlikely that even a loan will be given into the hands of the Ukrainians.

They won’t give it to them directly, and judging from the statement, as I understand it, they don’t ask for themselves, they say that the Americans would put themselves with their personnel to protect themselves from a missile strike, so that they would be given 2 divisions, it’s clear that it’s nonsense and you need to train at least year staff.

In general, I think that this statement is akin to the same about space, a floating spaceport, etc. Dreams Dreams...

It’s also hard for me to believe, but if in a month or two it turns out there are not 2 divisions, but a couple of batteries, then I won’t be surprised.

[hagen]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

but if in a month or two it turns out there are not 2 divisions, but a couple of batteries, then I won’t be surprised

On the whole, you are right. Especially if you have in mind the end goal. And she is just not peaceful at all. The United States + Britain have the main goal of creating an informational occasion for the introduction of "super-duper" sanctions. To do this, they will create all the conditions for "inviting" us to this "holiday". There are trillions of dollars in the bank. For the sake of this, THAAD may not be sorry .... Judging by the behavior of Scholz visiting Biden, he was broken with predilection, and he almost agrees to the loss not only of SP-2, but in general to the remnants of gas supplies from Russia. Of course, on the way home, maybe he will come to his senses, at least partially... We'll see.

[Alexandr bogun]

The United States + Britain have the main goal of creating an informational occasion for the introduction of "super-duper" sanctions. To do this, they will create all the conditions for "inviting" us to this "holiday". There are trillions of dollars in the bank.

Here I am about it, but only from the other side I went. For them, the main reason for delivering weapons is more serious for some reason, and they can come up with a reason themselves, especially if we also play along with them at the border.

Judging by Scholz's behavior on a visit to Biden, he was broken with predilection, and he almost agrees to the loss not only of SP-2, but in general to the remnants of gas supplies from Russia.

It may be, but in the next 15 years, I think they will definitely not give up gas, although clearly judging from their programs, every year it will be our deliveries that will be tried to be reduced. But it’s more difficult for us with oil, here it’s easier for the Americans themselves and their Arab allies to advise (so to speak) to increase supplies to Europe, and with this, if we wish, we may have problems much faster than with gas. But the Germans are pragmatic, this is not the USA, Ukraine, Poland or Britain, these will not willingly go at a loss because of principles or policies, they will buy our gas and oil as long as it is more profitable than problems with the rest of the EU members and America. As soon as the losses from conflicts with other EU countries and America begin to exceed the profits from trade with us, then they will immediately be in line with the rest. This must be understood and not thought that if the Germans now hold on to SP2, then it will always be so.

[hagen]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

For them, the main reason for delivering weapons is more serious for some reason, and they can come up with a reason themselves, especially if we also play along with them at the border.

For the supply of weapons to them, hysterical articles from the media are enough as a pretext. The delivery itself is intended to instill confidence and determination in Ukrainians to carry out provocative actions to really lure Russia into war.

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

Germans are pragmatic

When Biden said that he would close the SP-2 project if there was a reason to do so, Scholz did not say a word. Nobody cared about his opinion. What kind of pragmatism is there?! With oil, the issue is more complicated. There are so many uncertainties that it is impossible to predict something at the level of information from the media. In any case, the withdrawal from the market of volumes of oil and gas supplied by Russia will lead to a catastrophic destabilization of this market. Especially in the short term. I don't want to believe it, but judging by the latest political trends from the West, the Anglo-Saxon lobby is hard at work pushing Europe into a war with Russia, trying to hide behind Europe. Or, at least, to a more severe crisis than the "Great Depression" of the 30s in the United States.

[Alexandr bogun]

For the supply of weapons to them, hysterical articles from the media are enough as a pretext. The delivery itself is intended to instill confidence and determination in Ukrainians to carry out provocative actions to really lure Russia into war.

I agree with everything except the thesis regarding "provocations". If we wanted provocations, then it was possible to send a dozen Jevelins and arrange some kind of semblance of offensive operations, for this you don’t need to drive weapons worth 2 billion dollars in a month and a half. Their goal is to create a constant threat on our border and not imaginary, but really dangerous, which will not attack us, but being not friendly to us and acting radically against our interests. It will bind us to itself in terms of politics and military maneuvers. And the Americans at that time will be able, with their NATO members already mobilized like against us, but to concentrate on the fight against China.
It is also clear to an amateur that Ukraine is not a rival to us militarily, but they want to do it. And if this continues and the Americans still connect the rest of NATO to the active supply of weapons in acceptable quantities to Ukraine, then at this pace in 3-5 years it will already be a real military rival.

In any case, the withdrawal from the market of volumes of oil and gas supplied by Russia will lead to a catastrophic destabilization of this market.

And how do you remove the gas in one moment? There are contracts under which we are obliged to supply specific volumes at a specific time. They are not going to immediately turn off the valve and that’s it, it’s done gradually, but this has gradually led to the fact that since the beginning of this year, the volume of gas supplied to the EU markets from a non-our country has exceeded Gazprom’s supplies, although two years ago we were tied 70% of the EU gas market. It won’t work to turn off the valve, the gas needs to be put somewhere, and we don’t have enough storage facilities to send all the capacities that go to Europe there. As a result, these deposits will have to be sealed, and this is a very expensive and very laborious process. Watch or read about this process, very interesting.

I don’t want to believe it, but judging by the latest political trends from the West, the Anglo-Saxon lobby is hard at work pushing Europe into a war with Russia

I do not believe in this, if there is anyone from the Europeans who is ready or able to fight, it is the Turks, Poles, the Baltic states and the British, the rest do not even move in relation to us, or in relation to Ukraine. And America, on the contrary, needs a strong and united Europe, not a crisis. In Europe, huge finances are tied to the United States; they need a powerful Europe and NATO against China. We act more as an irritant that distracts and calls into question the hegemony of the United States on the European continent.

[hagen]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

I do not believe in this

The issue is not faith. You just need to look closely at the actions and by their deeds you will recognize them. And things are like this, if SP-2 had not slowed down in 2019, then the gas crisis would not have happened in Europe. And then, when analysts already suspected the approach of a fluffy animal, back in the spring, the United States had every opportunity to loosen its grip on the neck of the EU and quickly launch the pipe by October, but they did the opposite. Do you think from the desire to see Europe strong? No matter how. They need a Europe that is losing competition in the manufacturing sector in the European market. In this they see the solution to their problem with public debt. And in the issue with China, they are deploying a different structure, where Europe is far from being in the first roles. Otherwise they would not have humiliated France so. Germany, although plasticine, will not climb China with its people, and the United States understands this from the experience of operations in BV. Therefore, they do not rely on it in Chinese issues. And we are a lifelong permanent enemy for the Anglo-Saxons. And on occasion, they will no longer make a mistake, as in the 90s, they will bring the matter to the end if we stumble again on liberalism. This, it seems to me, is very enlarged and schematic.

[Alexandr bogun]

And things are like this, if SP-2 had not slowed down in 2019, then the gas crisis would not have happened in Europe.

Well, let's speak objectively, there are more than enough opportunities to deliver our requested gas to Europe even without SP2. Here, as it were, only Germany wins and we are from SP2. And most European countries do not really like it, to strengthen the largest economic player like Germany. And you also need to understand that many Eastern and Central European states used to feed on the old transit lines, and now, because of SP2, they are out of work and because of Germany they receive losses and become more dependent on Germany, as it becomes a hub. The result was that before many people in Eastern and Central Europe did not like us, but they were tolerant because it was beneficial. But now, when there is no leverage for transit through their territories or it has significantly decreased, now we are starting to see how many countries that until recently could only vote in the European Parliament for the extension of sanctions, now do not sell weapons to Ukraine, but give.

And then, when analysts already suspected the approach of a fluffy animal, back in the spring, the United States had every opportunity to loosen its grip on the neck of the EU and quickly launch the pipe by October, but they did the opposite.

Again, I don't fully agree. There is part of the blame for not launching on the Americans, of course, with their hysteria, but if this project is so important for us and we really are not going to bring the shaharavarniks to life by military means, then why keep such groupings of troops and extraordinary exercises carried out, giving the Americans a trump card in arms? It’s either about business and European diplomatic pressure by us through Germany and SP2, or large-scale military maneuvers, but then it’s clear that there won’t be any significant economic projects with the EU, but rather the opposite.

They need a Europe that is losing competition in the manufacturing sector in the European market.

Well, think for yourself, why? Will they mobilize NATO allies to confront Russia and China and, according to your logic, to the place of strengthening the allies, which means themselves, they take and weaken their own by strengthening their enemies? This is insanity) They have been traveling with the State Debt for more than a dozen years and will continue to travel for as long, the basis of their external loans is China, and what about the weakening of their main trade and military partner? America trades more with the EU, the more it receives, NATO is the main buyer of their weapons, the better the economy in the EU and the more hysteria, the more they will sell. You are in place of the usual pragmatism and understandable goals, you are still trying to look out for cunning Masons, great plans for domination, etc.

And in the issue with China, they are deploying a different structure, where Europe is far from being in the first roles. Otherwise they would not have humiliated France so. Germany, although plasticine, will not climb China with its people, and the United States understands this from the experience of operations in BV.

The fact of the matter is that France and Germany are already not destiny, France has problems not with China, but with Africa. In Germany, in general, there are no problems in terms of the economy with anyone. But America has a lever, like the first and second, to tighten American affairs. America does not bet on Germany and France, America bets on the main markets of Germany and France, and these are the smaller EU countries. And it is through them that it puts pressure on Germany mainly, in Poland and the Czech Republic, the main factories of Germany, other countries like Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and Britain are the main buyers of products manufactured at the factories of the above countries. The European market is almost 500 million buyers, of which the Germans are only 80 million, France 68 million, and everything else is a market where you need to adapt to competition, and overseas is also the US market for 330 million. As a result, neither Germany nor France will be able to lose and replace this for themselves if they start a separate course in non-US policy. And besides, Germany's main competitors in the economy in the EU are precisely France, and therefore they cannot become some kind of general US opposition to their satellites to the rest of the EU countries. The Americans do not need German soldiers for the war with China, they need regular payments for the duties of a NATO member and military orders for this money, and for the war both the Poles and the British, the Turks with their ambitions, and now the 35 millionth Ukraine, where much cheaper and much more motivated and most importantly prepared for war recruits. Why do they need Germans who do not know and are afraid of the last 70 years of the war and even this word? Why do they need France not as having not resolved its Colonial issues in Africa and with weak leadership and unstable (politically) people? Only the population of the above countries is 550 million people, do you think this will not be enough people to recruit the required number? Enough, and the Germans and French who will not fight, but will manufacture weapons and equipment and invest financially, this is the calculation.

[hagen]

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

Here, as it were, only Germany wins and we are from SP2.

And who else should share the profits from a commercial project?

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

many Eastern and Central European states used to feed on the old transit lines

Many are Ukraine and Slovakia? So you need to make your GTS competitive. This is the market in which all of them and we were in such a hurry. Who said that we have to feed someone else? They became dissatisfied, so be it. What do we get from this? And what is their weight so that we look back at them?

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

now we are starting to see how many countries that until recently, at most in the European Parliament, could vote for the extension of sanctions, now they don’t sell weapons to Ukraine, but give them.

They would have done it anyway. And not from a great "love" for Russia, but because the "senior" ordered them to do so. There were enough lucrative offers from Russia for many of them, which they rejected under pressure from the United States. Didn't you know?

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

why then keep such groupings of troops and conduct extraordinary exercises, giving the Americans a trump card in their hands?

Here is a game with many uncertainties. The United States is pushing Ukraine into the "Croatian" scenario. Our grouping on the border shows that we are determined to respond to the aggravation not only through Zakharova. And it works, given that this is not the first time such a trick has been performed. I don't see any confusion here. Moreover, this is confirmed by the cavalcade of various visitors to Moscow, seeking to push back these troops. To the Ukrainian side, which has concentrated more than half of its troops on the line of contact (note, not along the border of the Kharkov

[hagen]

There are no questions to the Ukrainian side, which has concentrated more than half of its troops on the line of contact with the LDNR (mind you, not along the border of the Kharkiv and Sumy regions). This means that all Western curators of Ukraine are interested in conducting a military operation against the Donetsk-Luhansk civilians.

Quote: Alexandr Bogun

They will mobilize NATO allies to confront Russia

No one will be mobilized. The United States is not going to fight with Russia. All these dances around Ukraine for only one purpose - to officially name us the aggressor and break Russia's ties with the EU markets. Today, the main strategic goal of the United States is to create conditions for the sole development of all available budgets with its industrial power, be it NATO, the EU or some other. War with the nuclear powers will be diligently handled.

[28st region]

Yeah. The news is getting weirder and weirder.

The information was obtained from an unnamed diplomatic source; her country of origin is also unknown.

Forgot to add from an unnamed trustworthy source. Then it would be vaaaasche cool.

[Roman Efremov]

What kind of Brimstone is RCC?

[vadim dok]

Britain sent anti-ship missiles,

[Dkuznecov]

[THAAD appearance]

will worsen the overall situation and will not contribute to the preservation of peace

As I understand it, this is a defensive weapon, it cannot be used for attack.

[viktortarianik]

Isn't it possible to shoot down aircraft, including passenger ones, with these "defensive" missiles?

[Dkuznecov]

Can. But for downing passenger planes
and even more so military aircraft - they will be given to the tribunal.

[viktortarianik]

In general, there are no purely "defensive" or "offensive" weapons. Depending on the situation, one smoothly flows into the other. And in the hands of a bandit, any weapon serves to attack, and no tribunal will stop him. Ukraine in Donbas behaves worse than a bandit.

[businessv]

Quote: viktortarianik

In general, there are no purely "defensive" or "offensive" weapons.

This is a missile defense system, not offensive or defensive, but missile defense. It can be used both against missiles and against aircraft and everything that flies. In the event of a database, it will greatly complicate our situation - it has a good radar.

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

This is a missile defense system, not offensive or defensive, but missile defense.

The Americans have a single launcher for both missile defense and air defense and for Tomahawks. What they charge and shoot.

[businessv]

Quote: Dart2027

The Americans have a single launcher for both missile defense and air defense and for Tomahawks. What they charge and shoot.

Do you mean PU MK41? Do you believe that mattresses will attack? I wrote that there will be complete control over the airspace to a depth of 1000 km! This is exactly what needs to be avoided in the event of a conflict with an independent.

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

Do you mean PU MK41? Do you believe that mattresses will attack?

Well, whether they attack or not is a separate question, I mean that these defensive weapons can easily turn into offensive ones.

[businessv]

Quote: Dart2027

Well, whether they attack or not is a separate question, I mean that these defensive weapons can easily turn into offensive ones.

Do you think that having loaded axes into the launcher, you can immediately launch them? The modular launch system allows you to work both with different types of missiles and with different target designation systems, but this does not mean that you can load anything into it and shoot it right away, and preparations for changing the purpose of launchers and loading other missiles will always be noticed!

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

and preparations for changing the purpose of launchers and loading other missiles will always be noticed

What is the preparation? Unload some rockets and load others?

[businessv]

Quote: Dart2027

What is the preparation? Unload some rockets and load others?

So I thought you were off topic. Read at your leisure about the ship (!) Launchers MK41, then answer if you have any questions.

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

Read at your leisure

What is it?

[businessv]

Quote: Dart2027

What is it?

Start with this https://topwar.ru/162959-zapadnyj-jekspert-raskryl-sposobnost-pu-mk-41-ssha-nanosit-udary-raketami.html
Continue here and don't forget to follow the links https://missilery.info/missile/bgm109c-d/mk41
More questions, don't be shy!

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

https://topwar.ru/162959-zapadnyj-jekspert-raskryl-sposobnost-pu-mk-41-ssha-nanosit-udary-raketami.html

It:

Earlier it was reported that two weeks after leaving the INF Treaty, the United States tested a new missile from a ground installation similar to the MK-41 launchers deployed in Romania. At the same time, the United States rejected the accusations of Russia, saying that the tests were carried out with a completely different setup, and that the MK-41 have purely defensive functions.

Have you read it yourself?

[businessv]

Quote: Dart2027

Have you read it yourself?

Are there any other questions?
If not, goodbye, I can't help you. When you read, it is also desirable to think and analyze, especially where it is written about attempts to adapt the ship's launcher.

[Dart2027]

Quote: businessv

If not, goodbye, I can't help you.

That is, they didn't read it.

[Dkuznecov]

Judging by the explanations below, for which thanks people,
this hat is never anti-aircraft.
It turns out that NATO is hiding behind in this direction
from Iranian ballistic missiles (crossed out),
from U.S.

[businessv]

Quote: DKuznecov

Judging by the explanations below, for which thanks people,
this hat is never anti-aircraft.

Missiles are not against aircraft, but the radar is able to see targets at a depth of 1000 km, give target designation to smaller attack systems, including air defense systems, and this is what we absolutely do not need!

[Tenet]

Quote: viktortarianik

In general, there are no purely "defensive" or "offensive" weapons. Depending on the situation, one smoothly flows into the other. And in the hands of a bandit, any weapon serves to attack, and no tribunal will stop him. Ukraine in Donbas behaves worse than a bandit.

by likes and dims on your comment, you can understand how many people in VO came from "neighboring yards"

[Avior]

THAAD - these are systems for the atmospheric interception of ballistic missiles - above 50 km.

THAAD (eng. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense [θæd], read. "Ted", [1] early name of the English Theater High Altitude Area Defense) is a mobile ground-based anti-missile system for high-altitude exoatmospheric interception of medium-range missiles [2].. ...
interception above the stratosphere, the warhead is inert [27][28][29][30][31], there are no data on the interception capabilities in the stratosphere (below 50 km above the Earth's surface) and the troposphere (below 12 km above the Earth's surface).

In fact, it is capable of hitting targets in the atmosphere at high altitude - there were such tests, it is not designed against aerodynamic targets.

[Observer2014]

vior (Sergey)
Today, 18: 57

it is forbidden. THAAD - these are systems for the atmospheric interception of ballistic missiles - above 50 km.
THAAD (eng. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense [θæd], read. "Ted", [1] early name of the English Theater High Altitude Area Defense) is a mobile ground-based anti-missile system for high-altitude exoatmospheric interception of medium-range missiles [2].. ...
interception above the stratosphere, the warhead is inert [27][28][29][30][31], there are no data on the interception capabilities in the stratosphere (below 50 km above the Earth's surface) and the troposphere (below 12 km above the Earth's surface).

Come on. It's not a system that knocks down everything that flies, but an angel incarnate? Directly purely only on missiles. Aircraft are not able to ... Especially civilian Nu-nu ...

[businessv]

Quote: Avior

it is not designed against aerodynamic targets.

not intended. but the radar is capable of tracking them and giving target designations to air defense systems, including, as well as monitoring airspace.

[Avior]

the manufacturer positions its radar only as a means against ballistic missiles, there is not a word about aerodynamic targets.
https://www.raytheonmissilesanddefense.com/capabilities/products/antpy-2

[businessv]

Quote: Avior

the manufacturer positions its radar only as a means against ballistic missiles, there is not a word about aerodynamic targets.

Those. Do you think that this radar only sees ICBMs, ignoring other moving air targets? This is possible only if this function is programmed into the selector (SSDC)!

[Vissarion Golubov]

Yes, this radar detects aerodynamic targets, whether it resets or not is another matter. Although it can certainly transfer the parameters of the target to the air defense system.

[businessv]

Quote: Vissarion Golubov

Although it can certainly transfer the parameters of the target to the air defense system.

I talked about this.

[Observer2014]

Isn't it possible to shoot down aircraft, including passenger ones, with these "defensive" missiles?

For what purpose are you interested? Literally.

[viktortarianik]

From practical. A couple of Javelins have already been dragged into the basement. I want something new.

[Bradley]

From practical. A couple of Javelins have already been dragged into the basement. I want something new.

THAAD was promised to me, so alas. But I can let you climb it, for free, for only a few thousand rubles.)

[Repellent]

Quote: viktortarianik

Isn't it possible to shoot down aircraft, including passenger ones, with these "defensive" missiles?

If you can find a plane (including a passenger one) at an altitude of more than 50 km, you can try to shoot it down.

THAAD "works" at least 50 km, judging by open data.

[Roman Efremov]

It is impossible - they are for OUTSIDE-ATMOSPHERIC interception.

[Tomcat_Tomcat]

Quote: viktortarianik

Isn't it possible to shoot down aircraft, including passenger ones, with these "defensive" missiles?

it is forbidden. THAAD is an anti-missile system for exoatmospheric interception, it is not designed to intercept aerodynamic targets. Even the interception of an Iskander-type ballistic missile, which is flying at an altitude of 40-50 km, has not been confirmed. THAAD missiles are more high-altitude, operate at altitudes much more than 50 km (actually they shot down a target somewhere at 80 km). Of the whole complex, as I understand it, only the radar is of interest. But it will not be given to Ukraine either - not to mention that the system is very expensive and in short supply for the US itself, it will have to be given with American calculations, i.e. organize, in fact, an American military unit on the territory of Ukraine (with command, support, supply, security). No one will go for it, this is a completely different level than Javelins and MANPADS
It's easier to put a radar in the Baltics. Fit AWACS planes there. Moreover, there are plenty of ways to "hang" at least 15 "Global Hawks" in the sky. THAAD in Ukraine is from the realm of non-science fiction, this "news" is not even worth discussing)

[rocket757]

Anti-missile prospects

What are the prospects ... the question is not whether they will give it or not, the question is that they can be drawn into a conflict that they hardly need.
It is unlikely that they forgot how they begged for their equipment back, which the tie-eater had thrown away.

[Barberry25]

well, I usually don’t like to give an ultimatum, but in this case we can say that they won’t, because here it’s not even about capturing, although it’s difficult, it’s possible, but that if they put the complexes “a couple of tens of kilometers from the border "then they are gouged by cannon artillery, not to mention rocket artillery .. If they are placed, say, near Kiev, then the result is the same - they will cover with numerous strikes of cruise missiles, from which Tkhaad does not protect, which means you need to bring Patriots there, which means drive more American soldiers whose corpses will not fit well in this year's by-election to the US Senate ..

[rocket757]

Solid assumptions and from that misunderstanding.
Guessing, it makes no sense, events, past our sofas, will not float!

[Alexandr bogun]

What are the prospects ... the question is not whether they will give it or not, the question is what can be pulled into a conflict that they hardly need.

The prospects are quite understandable, they know that we are not going to attack anyone, this is their own idea, and under this noise to place AN / TPY-2 and shine our entire South in the flesh to Moscow, and then trade with the fact that "we will withdraw if. ..", why not perspective?

It is unlikely that they forgot how they begged for their equipment back, which the tie-eater had thrown away.

There is no need to compare Georgia and Ukraine, the scales are different and the introduction of NATO into Georgia and already into Ukraine are different orders. I don’t know the Georgians, did they pass these Jevelins? And according to official data, more than a thousand have already been delivered to sharavarniks, grenade launchers, machine guns, ammunition, anti-artillery radars, and it’s not yet clear what else was transferred, there are already thousands of their instructors from the USA alone. They also understand that we ourselves will not attack just because of the supply of weapons, because this is nonsense. And the deployment of any weapons or troops will go under the guise of an official appeal from the Ukrainian authorities. Are we saying it's not legal? So they will immediately begin to push us about Syria. Everything is much more serious than your examples with ties and Georgia ... there, Saakashvili, who was sick in the head with artillery, covered the legal base of our Peacekeepers and put the boys, but here everything is much more cunning, no one is going to shoot at our territory and give a reason, but yell about the threat to send an appeal from us and under these cries, it’s easy and from the point of view of the law we can’t answer with anything other than concerns. (

[rocket757]

Never say never .... it can turn out quite unexpectedly.

[storm]

GRU special forces will have something to practice on to destroy enemy THAAD complexes as well as their infrastructure facilities.
Any brazen trick of NATO must be responded to appropriately harshly.
It is even better to capture this complex and overtake it through the DPR / LPR to Russia.

[Alexandr bogun]

If everything was as easy as you say, then why buy anything at all if you can send the GRU and they will seize everything and bring it to us. Maybe a little reality is needed, and not once again to tear the vest. If this product is put there, then either the Americans themselves, or definitely not some villagers, but from the same structures, will deal with its protection.

[Amateur]

Ukraine's desire to deploy American missile defense systems on its territory

And at one time I wished 'that' for Angelina Jolie herself.
But he gave up alcohol in time. And all desires are gone.

[Roman Efremov]

I see - there are a lot of supporters of the supply of THAAD to Ukraine in this topic !!!
This is not what you need to worry about, gentlemen, but about not putting Tomahawks near Kharkov 600 km from Moscow - this is a more realistic scenario.

[Repellent]

Quote: Roman Efremov

This is not what you need to worry about, gentlemen, but about the fact that Tomahawks near Kharkov are not placed 600 km from Moscow

In Tribaltika (which has long been in NATO, and not much further in mileage) has not yet been delivered.

And they won't put it here. And THAAD will not be installed either. For Expensive and Stupid (c).

[Clear]

Quote: Repellent

For Expensive and Stupid (c).

For them, the key word is expensive.

[Knell wardenheart]

Discussing the deployment of THAAD in Ukraine is simply ridiculous. The US prefers not to supply major weapons technology or designs to states with such high volatility. The potential benefits of such dry supplies are offset by the associated problems.

[Roman Efremov]

And for me, for the same meaning, the post has already been given 5 minuses !!!

[Knell wardenheart]

Maybe you got under the friendly assist of Ukrainian patriots :(

[sagitovich]

Are you writing comments on the site because of the advantages? A dozen more or less, purple. Everything here is not real. .

[engineer74]

It's time to learn to play their games:
1. Declare THAAD as a strike system with a nuclear warhead.
2. In case of deployment, with money and intelligence forces, provoke an accidental / non-random launch towards the border.
3. Blame Ukraine for the attack, destroy or capture the complexes.
IMHO.

[Amateur]

In 1969 Israel stole a secret Soviet radar in Egypt. Americans certainly remember this. Therefore, they may suspect that if THAAD is placed on a non-detached site, it will not even need to be stolen. The ukrovoyaks themselves will steal it and sell it to Russia.

[Kerensky]

The information was obtained from an unnamed diplomatic source; her country of origin is also unknown. Official confirmations or denials have not yet been received either.

But what scope for comments!

[Usher]

I had doubts about the performance characteristics of missiles. Painfully cosmic numbers. The rocket is small 6m by 370mm, weighs only 900kg, and flies to a distance of 200km and 150km in height at a speed faster than a tank BOPS 2800m/s. What kind of prodigy is this? And on the layouts where is the IR seeker?

[Keyser soze]

Some idiot wanted THAAD and went and went to a madhouse ...
1. Why amers need THAAD in Ukraine, if one already exists in Deveselu?
2. And if you need it, you can stick it in the Baltic States ...
3. Shooting a THAAD installation with Tomahawk missiles (8 missiles) is even more nonsense if you can shoot and with the order of a cheaper installation or from a destroyer, fire 90+ missiles like that.
4. This TNAAD costs a hell of a lot of money. It's easier to buy a Death Star, with Darth Vader at the head, than THAAD. And if you buy it, then it will take about 2 years to integrate it into the NATO air defense structure ...
Complete nonsense UTB discussion.

[IRA1777]

You can learn about the effectiveness of THAAD in the United Arab Emirates. It doesn't seem to work well against Yemeni missiles.

[Avior]

Works well against Houthi missiles. On January 17 of this year, THAAD successfully intercepted an incoming Houthi ballistic missile in the UAE.

[IRA1777]

One of many, as far as I know.

[Roman Efremov]

I missed this news. What kind of IRBM do the Houthis have - Iranian or what?

[Avior]

they have been firing these missiles periodically for five years

[Victor Tsenin]

The best option - if it appears, smash it to smithereens. Israel regularly does this, danger is danger.

[Roman Efremov]

It is high time for us to smash the state of Ukraine to smithereens. The disease should be treated, not its symptoms.

[Roman Efremov]

How many Ukrainians are on the forum - 4 minuses at once! And you don't mind here, lads? Russian-speaking forum - do we communicate in the language of the ahressor?
However....................... Like it, don't like it - be patient, my beauty!

[Voenoboz]

The miners are digging and this balalaika in Putin's hands is about to howl, but laughter is laughter.

[Alber alber]

Of course, I’m not the GDP, he knows better, but this particular toy needs to be destroyed in any way, better than the drg, but if not, then in any explicit way. There are no options for us here.

[Jacket in stock]

And also the Kiev "iron dome" asked for a hundred F35s and an American aircraft carrier to Odessa.
And not an "unnamed source", but quite uncles with briefcases.
So what?
Such toys are not given to the natives.

[Kostadinov]

If TAAD has an infrared homing system and an interceptor speed of 2,8 km / s, the interception of aeroballistic missiles on a lower trajectory (below 40-45 km) raises big doubts.