Modern air defense systems of medium and long range for Ukraine

NATO countries have managed to saturate the armed forces of Ukraine with a significant number of modern MANPADS and are transferring short-range mobile air defense systems to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But these low-altitude air defense systems of the near zone are not capable of protecting troop concentrations and strategically important objects from strikes by ballistic operational-tactical and cruise missiles and attacks by bombers operating at medium and high altitudes. For reliable interception of such targets, air defense systems are needed with a firing range of several tens of kilometers, which have their own radar detection tools.

Prior to the start of the NMD, Ukraine had a significant number of medium and long-range anti-aircraft systems inherited from the USSR: Buk-M1, S-125, S-300PT/PS. Although the age of all these complexes has exceeded thirty years, thanks to repairs and partial modernization, they have retained their performance. Despite repeated statements by the press service of the Russian Defense Ministry about the complete suppression of the air defense system of Ukraine, a significant part of the air defense systems is still functioning.

However, the “natural decline” of Ukrainian long-range air defense systems used in the site air defense, and the inability to provide effective protection against Russian missiles, leads to the fact that the Ukrainian military-political leadership insistently requires Western allies to provide modern anti-aircraft systems with a range of several tens of kilometers.

German air defense systems IRIS-T SLM

In May 2022, a number of media outlets published information that Germany intends to transfer IRIS-T SLS to Ukraine. However, there were no ready-made complexes of this type in service with the Bundeswehr at that time, and they had to be hastily manufactured.

Elements of the IRIS-T SLS air defense system

Initially, a short range system (SLS) was designed, and then a medium range system (SLM). Late variant can use two types of missiles. To destroy air targets as part of the IRIS-T SLS complex, a modified missile with an IR seeker was used, which was originally intended for arming combat aircraft.

The IRIS-T air-to-air missile was designed to replace the widely used AIM-9 Sidewinder family of missiles. To create and promote the rocket on the market, a consortium was created, which included six European countries: Germany, Greece, Norway, Italy, Spain and Sweden. The main contractor in the program was the German concern Diehl BGT Defense. Other major companies participating in the program are MBDA, Hellenic Aerospace, Nammo Raufoss, Internacional de Composites and Saab Bofors Dynamics. Successful tests of the IRIS-T took place in 2002, and a serial production contract worth more than 1 billion euros was awarded to Diehl BGT Defense in 2004.

In the West, air defense systems have already been created in the past, which use air-to-air missiles. An example is the American military complex MIM-72A Chaparral, the US-Norwegian NASAMS air defense system, the US-Swiss Skyguard-Sparrow and the Spanish Spada. This approach makes it possible to significantly save on the creation of missiles and significantly reduce the cost of designing, manufacturing and operating a ground-based air defense system.

The IRIS-T rocket has a length of 2,94 m, a diameter of 127 mm, and a weight without an additional booster of 89 kg. It is possible to capture a target before launch, as well as after launch already in flight. Maximum speed - up to 3 M. Firing range - up to 25 km. The firing range of the heavier missile in the medium-range version has been increased to 40 km. Ceiling - 20 km.

IRIS-T SLS and IRIS-T SLM layouts

Work on the IRIS-T SLM air defense system began in 2007, and two years later the complex was tested. The modified surface-to-air missiles are equipped with a combined targeting system that uses an inertial control system, radio command guidance, and a thermal homing head and can be used in the “fire and forget” mode. The missiles are launched vertically from a mobile launcher.

The launcher accommodates eight transport and launch containers. After the launch of the missile defense system, it is displayed in the target area by inertial or radio command systems, after which the noise-protected highly sensitive IR seeker is activated. Fireable heat traps are usually used against heat-seeking missiles. However, an attack of a target flying at high or medium altitude outside the coverage area of ​​​​MANPADS, in the absence of irradiation by the illumination and guidance station, with a high probability, may be unexpected for the pilot, and countermeasures will not be used, which increases the likelihood of being hit when attacking combat aircraft with IRIS-anti-aircraft missiles. T SLM.

The complex includes: a command post, a multifunctional radar and launchers with anti-aircraft missiles. All elements of the air defense system are placed on mobile chassis. The customer, depending on his preferences, has the opportunity to choose the type of base vehicle, the model of the radar and the control center, made according to NATO standards. So, in 2014, during the tests of the improved IRIS-T SLM, the Australian-made CEA Technologies CEAFAR multifunctional radar with a range of up to 240 km was involved. The control was carried out by the Oerlikon Skymaster system from Rheinmetall. The elements of the air defense system were paired through the BMD-Flex communication system of the Danish company Terma A / S.

Sweden became the first buyer of the IRIS-T SLS air defense system in a simplified version with short-range missiles. The contract worth $41,9 million for 8 air defense systems was signed in 2007, and the delivery took place in 2018. Egypt acquired seven IRIS-T SLM air defense systems in 2021. It is stated that the first IRIS-T SLM air defense system will be transferred to Ukraine in October 2022.

US-Norwegian NASAMS SAM

In July 2022, it became known that the US administration authorized the transfer of NASAMS II air defense systems to Kyiv. The media got information that Ukraine will receive three anti-aircraft batteries. The handover of the first complex is expected in November.

Elements of the NASAMS II air defense system

The battery consists of three firing platoons, in which there are a total of 12 launchers, three optoelectronic aiming and search systems, a radar and a control post.

That is, in total we are talking about the supply of 36 launchers, each of which is equipped with six missiles in the TPK.

Initially, the NASAMS air defense system (National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System - National Advanced Anti-Aircraft Missile System) was created by the American company Raytheon and the Norwegian Kongsberg to replace the aging MIM-23B I-Hawk complex. The American AIM-120 AMRAAM missile (Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile - an advanced medium-range air-to-air missile) was used to destroy air targets.

The AIM-120 AMRAAM missile is 3 mm long and 066 mm in diameter. Starting weight - about 178 kg. The firing range of the AIM-160C-120 UR when launched from an air carrier reaches 7 km. But when starting from a ground installation, this figure is significantly less.

The NASAMS air defense system includes the Sentinel AN / MPQ-64F1 multifunctional three-coordinate radar, the MSP500 passive optoelectronic station, the FDC control center and the GBADOC mobile communications center, which allows you to integrate into the upper echelon network for information exchange. Various radars and their associated command posts are networked via radio channels, which makes it possible to display the air situation in real time. The Sentinel AN/MPQ-64F1 radar and the MSP500 OLS are made on the basis of an off-road army vehicle, and the command post and mobile communications center are mounted in standard cargo containers.

The AN / MPQ-64F1 radar, launchers and optoelectronic stations can be deployed at a distance of up to 2,5 km from the control center. One NASAMS battery is capable of simultaneously tracking 72 targets. Heavy trucks of various types can be used to transport launchers, a control center and a mobile communications center.

NASAMS II SAM control points (adopted in 2007) are capable of exchanging and processing information in Link 16, Link 11 and JREAP formats.

Operational console of the FDC control point

Sentinel AN/MPQ-64F1 high-resolution multifunctional radar, in addition to target detection, is used for illumination and guidance. Has a range of up to 120 km.

Radar Sentinel AN/MPQ-64F1

The firing range for the NASAMS II air defense system is 30 km, the reach in height is 20 km. After the introduction of AMRAAM-ER missiles into the ammunition load, the affected area and the ceiling increase by about 1,5 times.

Experts note that NASAMS II is a fairly advanced and effective air defense system that poses a great danger to any air enemy. During the development of this air defense system, much attention was paid to increasing stealth, noise immunity and survivability in modern combat conditions. To do this, the AN / MPQ-64F1 radar has a mode with a highly directional beam and an advanced radiation control function that minimizes the risk of revealing the position of the complex.

Passive optoelectronic station MSP500

A passive optoelectronic station MSP500, which incorporates a high-resolution television camera, can also be used to search for a target. A thermal imager and a laser rangefinder ensure the use of missiles without turning on the AN / MPQ-64F1 radar. In this case, the target is captured by an active radar homing missile still on the ground or after launch, but the firing range in this case is less than when working together with a multifunctional radar.

Three generations of NASAMS air defense systems are in service in Norway, the Netherlands, Spain, the USA, Finland, Oman, Lithuania and Indonesia. In October 2022, it became known that 2023 NASAMS II anti-aircraft systems could be delivered to Ukraine by the end of 8.

American SAM Patriot

Representatives of the Ukrainian leadership have repeatedly stated their desire to receive American Patriot air defense systems, which, in addition to fighting aerodynamic targets, have some anti-missile capabilities.

More recently, the probability of delivering Patriots to Ukraine seemed zero. But in the light of recent events in the United States, voices are growing louder about the need to provide Kyiv with the most modern anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems as part of the Lend-Lease.

If such a decision is made, then Ukraine will most likely be given modern Patriot PAC-3+ systems. This configuration of the air defense system allows you to deal with aerodynamic targets at a distance of up to 100 km and intercept operational-tactical ballistic missiles at a distance of about 25 km. The manufacturers of the main elements of the Patriot air defense system are Raytheon and Lockheed Martin corporations.

This air defense system includes: AN / MPQ-65A radar, AN / MSQ-132 command post (with a set of equipment of the Link 16 standard), M903 towed launchers, MIM-104E Guidance Enhanced Missile-TBM anti-aircraft guided missiles (mainly to destroy air targets), Missile Segment Enhancement anti-missiles (improved MIM-104F), EPP III mobile power generators and mast-lifting devices.

Multifunctional radar AN / MPQ-65A

To expand the ability to independently search for targets, Patriot divisions can be given various types of mobile surveillance radars. For example, radar AN / TPS-59 or AN / FPS-117.

Radar AN / FPS-117

Currently, Raytheon Corporation is offering potential buyers a new generation of LTAMDS radar, which significantly expands the battery's ability to independently detect targets.

LTAMDS radar

This radar is designed to increase the combat effectiveness of the Patriot PAC 3+ air defense system and should replace the AN / MPQ-65 radar. The characteristics of the station were not disclosed, but the manufacturer's website says that the LTAMDS radar was designed to counteract hypersonic arms and has three antenna arrays: primary - on the front panel, and two secondary - on the back. They work together to detect and eliminate multiple threats from any direction at the same time.

At present, the air defense forces of Ukraine are almost unable to deal with Iskander operational-tactical ballistic missiles. The S-300PT / PS air defense systems with the 5V55R air defense system could never do this and were initially sharpened only to combat aerodynamic targets. The two brigades inherited by Ukraine after the division of the Soviet military legacy, armed with a simplified military modification of the S-300V1 with 9M83 missiles, had very limited anti-missile capabilities. As of February 24, 2022, the Armed Forces of Ukraine had one division armed with the S-300V1 anti-aircraft system with a range of more than 70 km against air targets. The Buk-M1 air defense system has a chance to shoot down OTR in a very narrow sector and with a relatively low probability.

Now the air defense system of Ukraine is very battered, and out of the approximately 25 S-300PT/PS air defense systems available in mid-February, one restored S-300V1 division, four to five modernized S-125 air defense systems, and ten Buk-M1 air defense systems are now in working condition remained at best half, and there is a shortage of anti-aircraft missiles. In this regard, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are experiencing a very urgent need for modern long-range air defense / missile defense systems capable of covering the rear areas of the country from attacks by operational-tactical and cruise missiles. It is quite obvious that the medium-range air defense systems supplied by NASAMS II and IRIS-T SLM solve this problem only partially and can only successfully counteract relatively slow aerodynamic objects.

Soviet and Russian air defense systems S-300PMU/PMU-1/S-400

Another way to increase the potential of Ukrainian air defense could be the transfer by NATO countries of long-range anti-aircraft systems of Soviet and Russian production, available in Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey.

In April 2022, Slovakia has already transferred to Ukraine one S-300PMU division (export version of the S-300PS). Oddly enough, after the delivery of the S-300PMU, Slovakia's security against air strikes only increased. Instead of the delivered S-300PMU, NATO allies deployed three batteries of Patriot air defense systems from the German and Dutch air forces on Slovak territory. In fact, the supply of the Slovak S-300PMU to Ukraine was a very profitable disposal of an outdated anti-aircraft system, which brought dividends in relations with NATO partners.

Transportation of the division of the S-300PMU anti-aircraft missile system, transferred from the Slovak armed forces

Another S-300PMU division is on combat duty in Bulgaria. However, the issue of its transfer to Ukraine was up in the air. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the Bulgarian S-300PMU air defense system is in need of refurbishment, and the 5V55R anti-aircraft missiles are beyond their service life.

Satellite image of Google Earth: the position of the Bulgarian S-300PMU air defense system 15 km west of Sofia

In 1999, two divisions of the S-300PMU-1 (export version of the S-300PM) were acquired by Greece. In terms of its capabilities, the S-300PMU-1 significantly exceeds the S-300PMU in the number of simultaneously tracked and fired targets. The 48N6 missiles used in the S-300PMU-1 are capable of hitting targets at twice the range of the 5V55R SAM.

Currently, elements of the S-300PMU-1 are stored on the island of Crete in hangars at the Kazantzakis airfield. There is no permanent combat duty.

During the joint exercises, American and Israeli pilots repeatedly trained on Russian-made anti-aircraft systems. The first and last combat firing of the Greek S-300PMU-1 took place in 2013 during the Lefkos Aetos 2013 exercise. In 2015, Greece and Russia negotiated an interest-free loan for the purchase of new missiles and spare parts for anti-aircraft systems, but the deal never came to fruition. took place.

For more than 20 years that have passed since the purchase of Russian air defense systems by Greece, they are in need of repair and modernization. Taking into account the fact that the S-300PMU-1 is now a "suitcase without a handle" for Greece, and significant investments are required to maintain these systems in working order, Athens, being a member of NATO, is interested in exchanging aging Russian air defense systems for new American Patriot.

Approximately the same situation may arise with the S-400 air defense systems delivered to Turkey. It is known that Turkey received from Russia two regimental sets (4 zrdn) of S-400 air defense systems in the amount of $ 2,5 billion. At the same time, only 45% of the total contract value was paid in hard currency, and the rest was covered by a loan allocated by Russia. In addition to providing a loan, one of the conditions put forward by the Turkish side was the provision of detailed technical documentation and assistance to Turkish companies in mastering the production of S-400 elements of interest to them.

So far, the Turkish leadership has not voiced its position regarding the possibility of transferring the S-400 to Ukraine. But known for his "multi-vector", unpredictability and authoritarianism, Recep Tayyip Erdogan can make any decision for his own benefit. The likelihood of such an event increases significantly if the situation at the front changes dramatically and the Americans provide guarantees for the supply of the Patriot PAC-3+ air defense system with PAC-3 MSE anti-missiles, which the Turkish military-political leadership has long sought.

To be continued ...

Comments

[paul3390]

And again - the classic question about the railway that has already become numb .. Well, are they going to deliver all this wealth on their own?

[Toucan]

Quote: paul3390

And again - the classic question about the railway that has already become numb .. Well, are they going to deliver all this wealth on their own?

If necessary, all the air defense systems listed in the article can move on their own. In general, with the help of only cruise missiles, a significant part of which are the ancient X-22s with a CEP of more than 300 m, it is not possible to disable the railway infrastructure. And again, our aviation is not allowed to fly over the rear areas of Ukraine by air defense systems.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Tucan

a significant part of which are the ancient X-22s with a CEP of more than 300 m

Are they transmitting data directly from the RF Ministry of Defense to you? Or mined from the finger? Rather the second...

In 2015, Greece and Russia negotiated an interest-free loan for the purchase of new missiles and spare parts for anti-aircraft systems, but the deal never took place.

It's just wonderful!

[Bongo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Are they transmitting data directly from the RF Ministry of Defense to you? Or mined from the finger? Rather the second...

Hello!
In vain you are yelling! It is absolutely certain that only Soviet-made X-22 missiles are launched from the Tu-3M22. These missiles, fueled with an aggressive oxidizer and toxic liquid fuel, are very crap in operation, but they fly much faster than the Caliber and Kh-555, and therefore are more difficult to intercept. KR X-22 designed for strikes against ground targets have an inertial guidance system, and therefore their accuracy leaves much to be desired. However, for the destruction of area objects, they are quite suitable even with a conventional warhead.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bongo

It is absolutely certain that only Soviet-made X-22 missiles are launched from the Tu-3M22.

Is it necessary to understand that the Tu-22M3 are the only aircraft carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic?
Is it necessary to understand that the X-22s form the basis of the missile armament of bomber aircraft?

Quote: Tucan

using only cruise missiles, a significant part of which are the ancient Kh-22

You have completely failed to understand the essence of my claim to Tukan's comment.

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Is it necessary to understand that the Tu-22M3 are the only aircraft carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic?

It must be understood that we have much fewer new missiles than on February 23rd.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: zyablik.olga

It must be understood that we have much fewer new missiles than on February 23rd.

As I understand it, you are also directly informed of the number and types of missiles in service with bomber aircraft?

[bayard]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Is it necessary to understand that the X-22s form the basis of the missile armament of bomber aircraft?

Kh-22 is the main missile armament of Tu-22M3 bombers.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: bayard

Kh-22 is the main missile armament of Tu-22M3 bombers.

So what? The main, but not the only one (the Kh-32 has been in service since 18) and the Tu22 is NOT the ONLY bomber with missile weapons.

[Bongo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

So what? The main, but not the only one (the Kh-32 has been in service since 18) and the Tu22 is NOT the ONLY bomber with missile weapons.

The problem is that there are clearly not enough conventional new KR X-555s, and therefore the old X-22s are used, of which there are still a lot in warehouses. It is very strange that you rest on this issue.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bongo

The problem is that there are clearly not enough conventional new KR X-555s, and therefore the old X-22s are used, of which there are still a lot in warehouses. It is very strange that you rest on this issue.

What do you think, should I believe this?

Quote: Tucan

a significant part of which are the ancient X-22s with a CEP of more than 300 m

Knowing, moreover, that there are Kh-32s, and the same Kh-555s, not to mention modifications of the Kh-22 with many times greater accuracy ...

[bayard]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: Tucan
a significant part of which are the ancient X-22s with a CEP of more than 300 m


Knowing, moreover, that there are Kh-32s, and the same Kh-555s, not to mention modifications of the Kh-22 with many times greater accuracy ...

Those X-22s that are used on targets on the territory of fascist Ukraine have very decent accuracy - they hit point targets in urban areas. And the numbers "300 m." apparently remained from the characteristics of the missiles of the 60s. And even if such missiles remained in storage, their guidance system is significantly updated before combat use. To do this, it is enough to install a GLONAS guidance unit.
The X-22 has a much more powerful warhead - from 700 to 1000 kg. , and kinetics - at a speed of 2,5 - 4,5 M.

[Bongo]

Quote: bayard

And the numbers "300 m." apparently remained from the characteristics of the missiles of the 60s. And even if such missiles remained in storage, their guidance system is significantly updated before combat use. To do this, it is enough to install a GLONAS guidance unit.

Do you have information that the Kh-22 with LRE, which were until recently equipped with GLONAS, is very problematic in operation? Can you please share the source?
As for the accuracy of the Kh-22NA, which fire at ground targets, the KVO of 300 m is a very decent result for an inertial guidance system when launched from an air carrier.

[bayard]

Quote: Bongo

very problematic in operation X-22 with rocket engines,

Yes, these are very problematic liquid CRs with very toxic fuel and oxidizer components. But this is not a reason to simply write them off without use and spend money on disposal. Disposal must be beneficial. Especially during the course, albeit strange, but of the war, nicknamed the "special operation".

Quote: Bongo

Do you have information that the very problematic X-22s were equipped with GLONAS?

No , I do not have such information . But I think that if the GLONAS guidance system is installed on tiny drones and missiles weighing only 105 kg. , then it will not be difficult to integrate such a guidance system into the X-22 during modernization. For with the accuracy you declared, in no case should a rocket be used on point targets, especially in urban areas. Such accuracy in the 60s was excusable for nuclear warheads with a capacity of hundreds of kilotons, but not for a conventional warhead (albeit weighing 700 - 1000 kg.). In addition, its GOS is capable of being aimed at radio-contrast targets, such as bridges, port facilities, and even more so - to work on ships on the high seas. I hope you will not dispute that getting into a moving ship is hundreds of kilometers away. from the start, this accuracy is slightly higher than the CVO of 300 m. And if the UAVs assembled on the knee with barmaley are capable of being guided along the coordinates of the GP-ES, then somehow the KR weighing like the MiG-21 can be equipped with such an available option.
Or do you still think that our Aerospace Forces are hitting with old poisonous missiles "on whom will Satan send"?
And about the "disposal of existing weapons with benefit", I will say that it's time to get the good old "Points-U" out of the stash, of which we have about 10 pieces in storage. and 000 brigade sets of launchers and everything needed for them. It is enough to return to service one brigade set - the one that was withdrawn from service (the last) a couple of years ago, consisting of 10-4 divisions, and organize the "useful utilization" of all the available ammunition of these wonderful high-precision missiles by the forces of these 6-4 divisions. With their warheads weighing 6 kg. and all the variety of these warheads, the massive use of these fuel dispensers will literally plow the enemy’s operational rear, destroy their strongholds and fortified areas, crossings and columns on the march. This will save us a large number of scarce OTRK missiles Iskander-M, Imkander-K, other missiles, heavy MLRS missiles and will save military aircraft from unnecessary risk.

[Bongo]

Thanks for the answer! But the key phrase in it is:

Quote: bayard

No, I don't have that information.

Let's talk about what is, and not about what could be, or about what we would like.
No one has been involved in a radical refinement of the old X-22s that have lain for about 40 years in warehouses, and they are used exclusively by force. It is precisely because of the possibility of hitting only large area targets that these old missiles were not used in Syria. Although it would seem, why should they be protected if these dinosaurs have sufficient accuracy? By and large, the only benefit of the Kh-22 is the saturation of the air defense system with high-speed targets. But the costs of their use can be very serious.

Quote: bayard

I hope you will not dispute that getting into a moving ship is hundreds of kilometers away. from the start, this accuracy is slightly higher than the KVO at 300 m.

I hope you will not dispute that the guidance accuracy of anti-ship missiles with an active radar seeker is somewhat different from a missile with an inertial guidance system?

[Crimean partisan 1974]

No one was engaged in a cardinal refinement of the old X-22s that had lain for about 40 years in warehouses,

... Vladimirovich .. hello from the other side of the ball .. you stunned me .... in the course of the X-22, they were originally developed for tactical nuclear weapons with a capacity of 40 thousand tons in equivalent ... about the fact that they installed the usual OF me I haven’t seen such information anywhere ... well, of course, test blanks .. and what would be in service .. well ... live and learn for a century .... the article is wonderful as always .. read in one breath

[Bongo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Knowing, moreover, that there is X-32

X-32 is an anti-ship missile, produced in a very limited series.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

and the same X-555

How many were there, and how many are left? These are very expensive items.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

about modifications of the X-22 with many times greater accuracy ...

I respect other people's opinions, but only as long as it is competent and based on facts. I see that in this case you do not own the topic very well. All the best!

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bongo

I respect other people's opinions, but only as long as it is competent and based on facts.

- Kh-22NA, adopted in 1976, inertial control system with terrain correction, pointing accuracy up to several meters. Developed for a new carrier - the Tu-22M3 missile carrier in three versions. Kh-22N missiles - "active" with a new homing head (ARGSN type PMG), "passive" Kh-22NP - with anti-radio - location RGSN and "autonomous" Kh-22NA - with an inertial guidance system that provides correction according to the terrain, pointing accuracy up to several meters.


In addition, the capabilities of the Kh-32 to defeat large ground targets turn Tu-22M3M bombers

[Bongo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

X-22HA - with an inertial guidance system that provides correction for the terrain, guidance accuracy up to several meters.

Vladimir, if you want to be taken seriously, you still shouldn’t voice it frankly unreliable information. However, it's up to you. All the best!

[Vladimir_2U]

How am I supposed to trust you? I understand a little, and I understand that with a spread of three hundred meters and a conventional warhead, a rocket is meaningless! And that by the 80s, such a spread had already been completely eliminated.

[Toucan]

X-22 missiles with an inertial guidance system were originally intended for the delivery of nuclear warheads. Did you not know this?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Tucan

X-22 missiles with an inertial guidance system were originally intended for the delivery of nuclear warheads. Did you not know this?

Those. you ignore at least the anti-ship and anti-radar modifications of this missile, can you argue that these missiles have been driven since 1962, without modernization?

[Toucan]

Probably something I don't know. Please explain to me how. RCC with an active head and PRR with a passive one can be used on land? Hope you can share the source.

[Vladimir_2U]

What I mean is that you are all writing about 300 meters of KVO.

The guidance system of the "autonomous" X-22MA received a terrain correction system, due to which the CVO was reduced to a value of the order of magnitude comparable to the size of a warship.

But the noise immunity of the Kh-22N remained insufficient, since all the equipment operated at single fixed frequencies, and there was no equipment for identifying a target against the background of interference. The resolution of the active seeker was only sufficient to detect a target such as a large ship, of the bridge etc.

And what, do you still directly bring the quantity in the warehouses X-32, X-555?
And how do you explain the large number of videos with low-speed cruise missiles from Khikhlov?

[Toucan]

Are you raving? How is terrain correction implemented on a rocket flying at high altitude with a speed of more than 3M? X-32 is pure anti-ship missiles. About the General Staff and the rest is generally a masterpiece.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Tucan

How is terrain correction implemented on a rocket flying at high altitude with a speed of more than 3M?

Correction of the BG of ballistic missiles.

Correction of guided warheads using terrain maps [9.6]. Systems for correcting the trajectory of guided warheads based on information about the earth's surface, obtained using various types of radio devices, can be used on guided warheads before entering the atmosphere, as well as when flying in the atmosphere after passing through the plasma formation site.

The operation of these systems is based on a comparison of maps of terrain sections obtained in flight and reference maps of the same sections prepared in advance. This is possible due to the geophysical properties of the earth's surface, which means that any area of ​​the terrain is uniquely described by the distribution of the intensity of the reflected signals or the relief profile.

https://bstudy.net/805886/tehnika/kombinirovannye_sistemy_upravleniya?ysclid=l985wnt81768928121
Keep rubbing that from a height of 22 km and a speed of 3M, terrain correction is impossible.

Quote: Tucan

X-32 is pure anti-ship missiles

Well, repeat that the missiles of the coastal missile defense system Bastion, for example, cannot hit ground targets.

Quote: Tucan

About the General Staff and the rest is generally a masterpiece. fool

Have you personally counted missiles in warehouses? Did you define their types?

Quote: Tucan

a significant part of which is the ancient X-22 with a CEP of more than 300 m, it is not possible to disable the railway infrastructure.

[Toucan]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Correction of the BG of ballistic missiles.

How does it work for a rocket flying in the atmosphere?
It seemed to me that I was communicating with a sane person who was mistaken. Turns out I was wrong about you!

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Tucan

How does it work for a rocket flying in the atmosphere?

Very simple!

Quote: Vladimir_2U

as well as during flight in the atmosphere after passing through the plasma formation section.

Maybe 3M plasma speed, huh?

Quote: Tucan

Turns out I was wrong about you!

Well, the fact that some people juggle only in their own words without the slightest confirmation, it became clear to me almost immediately.

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Tucan

Turns out I was wrong about you!

This is just the case!

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: zyablik.olga

This is just the case!

A wonderful example of non-demagogy ...

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And what, do you still directly bring the quantity in the warehouses X-32, X-555?

This is not an argument, this is demagogy.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And how to explain a large number of videos with slow cruise missiles

The fact that in hospitals there are more people with limb injuries than with head injuries does not mean that bullets do not hit the head. It's just rare to survive with such wounds. So here, you can shoot a slow low-flying cruise missile on your phone, but not a high-altitude supersonic one.

Quote: Tucan

How is terrain correction implemented on a rocket flying at high altitude with a speed of more than 3M?

Really, how?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: zyablik.olga

And what, do you still directly bring the quantity in the warehouses X-32, X-555?
This is not an argument, this is demagogy.

Demagogy in its purest form is this:

Quote: Tucan

a significant part of which are the ancient X-22s with a CEP of more than 300 m

Did he personally count the number and types of missiles in the warehouses?

Quote: zyablik.olga

How is terrain correction implemented on a rocket flying at high altitude with a speed of more than 3M?

Really, how?

Correction of the BG of ballistic missiles.
Correction of guided warheads using terrain maps [9.6]. Systems for correcting the trajectory of guided warheads based on information about the earth's surface, obtained using various types of radio devices, can be used on guided warheads before entering the atmosphere, as well as when flying in the atmosphere after passing through the plasma formation site.

The operation of these systems is based on a comparison of maps of terrain sections obtained in flight and reference maps of the same sections prepared in advance. This is possible due to the geophysical properties of the earth's surface, which means that any area of ​​the terrain is uniquely described by the distribution of the intensity of the reflected signals or the relief profile.

https://bstudy.net/805886/tehnika/kombinirovannye_sistemy_upravleniya?ysclid=l985wnt81768928121
Keep believing that from a height of 22 km and a speed of 3M, terrain correction is impossible.

[Korax71]

It is necessary to shove something like an avionics from instant 31 into the guidance head, with the corresponding power consumption. There will be no room for a warhead

[Bongo]

Quote: Korax71

It is necessary to shove something like an avionics from instant 31 into the guidance head, with the corresponding power consumption. There will be no room for a warhead

Unfortunately, faith is sometimes stronger than knowledge, reason and numerous arguments that different people bring. Well, if someone wants to believe that the X-22 is a "high-precision missile" with astro correction , so be it.

[Korax71]

Sergei to be honest, my knowledge in this area is not very extensive, due to the military specialty, I am closer to the ground and the front line but still I try to expand my horizons, in which your articles really help, plus comments, plus a number of some resources that Wikipedia does not include. By the way, as I understand it, the comrade above most likely took the information from there

[Bongo]

Quote: Korax71

Sergey hi, to be honest, my knowledge in this area is not very extensive, due to the military specialty, I am closer to the ground and the front line

This is also not my profile, but I dare to hope that I still have some basic knowledge and common sense.
In order to get to the bottom of the truth, yesterday I talked with a specialist who worked for many years in the KnAAPO aviation weapons laboratory. This man laughed for a long time when he heard about astro correction on the X-22. In order not to offend our opponent, I will not reproduce what was said. As for the radar seeker on the anti-ship modification, it is frankly poor, has low noise immunity against sea targets and is completely inoperable along the coast. Ground targets can only be fired at with inertial missiles. The newest modification of the early 1980s.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bongo

This man laughed for a long time when he heard about astro correction on the X-22. In order not to offend our opponent

Reproduce what's wrong, I'll laugh too. After all, I didn’t write a word about astrocorrection.

[Bongo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Reproduce what's wrong, I'll laugh too. After all, I didn’t write a word about astrocorrection.

ICBMs and SLBMs use exclusively astro-rectification, in OTR it is mainly inertial + satellite navigation. Radio correction has not been used for a long time due to low noise immunity. Previously, they tried to use radar and optical seekers on OTR, but this did not justify itself.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bongo

ICBMs and SLBMs use exclusively astro-rectification, in OTR it is mainly inertial + satellite navigation. Radio correction has not been used for a long time due to low noise immunity.

Before entering the upper atmosphere, the on-board computer calculates the necessary orientation of the combat unit and executes it. Approximately in the same period, sessions of determining the actual location with the help of radar are held, for which a number of maneuvers must also be done. Then the locator antenna is shot off, and an atmospheric section of movement begins for the combat unit.

https://topwar.ru/36683-ob-upravlyaemyh-samonavodyaschihsya-boevyh-blokah-raket.html
That's all, all arguments about the exclusivity of astro-correction are insignificant ... As well as statements about the CEP of 1964 meters unchanged since 300.

[Korax71]

Well, then our data on argsn are the same a comrade directly connected with these missiles is approximately the same. as they explained to me initially, it was sharpened for a massive launch by almost an MRA regiment, something would hit, although it was probably considered quite normal for its time By the way, the passive head, which is induced by radiation, was never tormented, they fought with it for a very long time, but as I was told, it did not enter the troops.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Korax71

It is necessary to shove something like an avionics from instant 31 into the guidance head, with the corresponding power consumption. There will be no room for a warhead

What's behind these conclusions? It is not required to search for a target the size of the CD on the underlying background, the terrain is simply compared with the reference image, for this neither power nor high resolution is needed.
If such equipment was placed in the warhead, a very compact, ballistic missile, for operation from a height of 150-180 km, then from 20 km then any more compact radar is needed, besides, it already exists on the X-22N, as part of the GOS,

[Korax71]

In 91, Tomahawk cruise missile strikes at targets in Iraq were of little effectiveness only due to the fact that the missile routes lay over a monotonous desert area, so it was very difficult to tie to reference points. Therefore, in order to correct the flight direction, all routes were tied to such contrasting points like roads, structures, which made it possible to shoot them down knowing the flight route in advance. Here is approximately the same problem, in order to correct the flight according to the radar readings, you will either have to be tied to contrasting targets or set a high-resolution radar. As for x-22: x missiles -22 nor its ability to independently detect targets - a theory that has never been proven in practice. The main mode of operation is to capture and hold a target using radar and other carrier systems. About your favorite inertial guidance system at x22, except for diss and a trigger range counter in it there is nothing else, roughly speaking, this is an autopilot. The error of this system is about the drift angle +/-0.1⁰, you can arm yourself with a calculator and calculate how much it will be depending on the launch range.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Korax71

In 91, Tomahawk cruise missile strikes on targets in Iraq were of little effectiveness only due to the fact that the missile routes lay over a monotonous desert area

Because the radio altimeter method of course correction according to the terrain profile, and not the radar method according to contrasting objects.

Quote: Korax71

x-22 nor its ability to independently detect targets is a theory that has never been confirmed in practice. The main mode of operation is to capture and hold a target using a radar

And which of these contradicts my assertion that the X-22 is capable of working on a bridge-type target? Approximate exit to the target, with known coordinates, capture of the radio-contrast target of the GOS and pointing at it.
And in general, in the first place, they pointed out to me the impossibility of correcting the terrain from a height of 20 km, but it turned out to be possible from higher altitudes, and secondly and most importantly: I argue with the fact that the X-22 missiles form the basis of the arsenal, and even incapable to accuracy above 300 m KVO.

- Kh-22NA, adopted in 1976, inertial control system with terrain correction, pointing accuracy up to several meters. Developed for a new carrier - the Tu-22M3 missile carrier in three versions. Kh-22N missiles - "active" with a new homing head (ARGSN type PMG), "passive" Kh-22NP - with anti-radio - location RGSN and "autonomous" Kh-22NA - with an inertial guidance system that provides terrain correction, accuracy guidance up to several meters.

In general, I’m amazed, it’s written in black and white, but they tell me now about the impossibility, then about something else ... You might think that since 1967 the rocket has been riveted without modifications and modifications ...

[Korax71]

It will be hard, but I’ll try, sometimes different things are written on the fence, but the firewood is there. x 22n with argsn had very vague abilities to independently search for targets, so it was used only in connection with the carrier’s avionics. x22np-was only on paper, they couldn’t bring it to mind. x22 on the same x22n only with the possibility of a low-altitude launch. what is the inertial on these missiles, I wrote to you above. why without modifications? I won't say if it was actually implemented or not.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Korax71

22n with argsn had very vague abilities for independent search for targets, therefore it was used only in connection with the carrier's avionics

And now I will try to explain to you. Since when did a bridge or a thermal power plant require an independent search for a target? They maneuver, leave the area, what do they do to avoid the capture of the GOS? They don’t do ANYTHING like that, they launch a rocket towards the target, taking into account the inaccuracy of the ANN at 300 m, then the GOS captures the target, that’s all, 300 meters is practically on a silver platter.
So "it is written on the fence" is about your comment.

[vvvjak]

Good afternoon. I liked the article and most importantly on time. Just yesterday I was rummaging through the "net" in search of a similar one, but I only came across the "urya" reports of Ukrainian bloggers, I had to delve into the archives of VO. Only here is the question - who will manage this "magnificence" or will the Vushniks be admitted to the Link 16 protocol?

[Negro]

Quote: vvvjak

Vushnikov will be allowed to the Link 16 protocol?

Not yet. But one of the options, of course. If we are talking about the air defense of large cities, then it is not so difficult to ensure control over the safety of equipment.

Moreover, not a single modern system has been captured during these months, except for broken towed artillery and infantry weapons.

[vvvjak]

Quote: Negro

then ensuring the safety of equipment is not so difficult.

What about information? What happens if you "hack" Link 16? Then, "accidentally", the F-35 flocks will land at the Voronezh airfield, for example.

[Bongo]

Quote: vvvjak

What about information? What happens if you "hack" Link 16? Then, "accidentally", the F-35 flocks will land at the Voronezh airfield, for example.

Do you know how Link 16 works? And how can you "hack" a crypto tunnel?

[vvvjak]

Quote: Bongo

Do you know how Link 16 works?

And what about me? I meant that if not quite prepared (especially mentally and financially) military personnel (for example, the Armed Forces of Ukraine) are allowed to access this equipment, then information is likely to leak and there is no need to sell blocks for this - it is enough to provide remote access or launch Troyan into the system (for a couple of million "green" money). In the place of the leadership of NATO, I would not risk it. This implies the tactics of using air defense systems, NATO operators (such as former military personnel) are one thing, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are another, but the third is that Link 16 equipment will not be there at all. That's what my question was.

Quote: Bongo

And how can you "hack" a crypto tunnel? what

As hackers say: to say that the protection is not hacked is incorrect. It is correct to say that protection is hacked after a certain amount of time, by a certain resource.

[filibuster]

As hackers say: to say that the protection is not hacked is incorrect. It is correct to say that protection is hacked after a certain amount of time, by a certain resource.

In general, yes, there is almost always a “working” method, brute force is called, but only hackers kept silent about how much time and energy it would take to carry out such a hack.

[xGhost]

Well, hack, what's the problem. In the same place, everyone is "well, stupid" and does not know anything about hacking methods.

[russ71]

Like who??? "Fired" NATO military ... volunteers in short ...

[Bongo]

Quote: vvvjak

Good afternoon. I liked the article and most importantly on time. Just yesterday I was rummaging through the "net" in search of a similar one, but I only came across the "urya" reports of Ukrainian bloggers, I had to delve into the archives of VO. Only here is the question - who will manage this "magnificence" or will the Vushniks be admitted to the Link 16 protocol?

Hello!
As far as we know, the mobile communication center and the control center of the NASAMS II air defense system are equipped with Link 16 standard equipment.

[Korax71]

Sergey, excellent article, as always. I could be wrong, but they didn’t guess at x22. It seems like a simplified analogue of the inertial-software pathfinder and, yes, yes, the quo of these missiles leaves much to be desired

[Bongo]

Quote: Korax71

I could be wrong, but they didn’t guess at x22. It seems like a simplified analogue of the inertial-software pathfinder and, yes, yes, the quo of these missiles leaves much to be desired

Hello! And there is! It is these missiles that are used on land. This modification with a "special" head was also intended to destroy the AUG in conditions of strong electronic countermeasures.

[rocket757]

Everything is interconnected!!!
Radically destroy the infrastructure of railway transport, only aviation can, with massive strikes, moreover, REGULAR !!!
And air defense systems are also transported along the railway, which then cover it, like many other things.
The initial moment was "missed", and now everything is complicated and can become even more difficult.
Now, either create again, a convenient moment, with various means of suppression ... with which, it’s kind of complicated.
Or in the old fashioned way ... our "tanks" forward, crush everything in a row, including enemy air defense !!! But this is also difficult, at the moment.

[cold wind]

Quote: rocket757

The initial moment was "missed", and now everything is complicated and can become even more difficult.
Now, either create again, a convenient moment, with various means of suppression ... with which, it’s kind of complicated.

Oh… what happened yesterday and the day before yesterday? About 150-200 missiles (beyond this, Shahids 136) were fired at various civilian structures.
Did the armed forces of Ukraine suffer from this? No.
Will they get new weapons and motivation for the fighters? Yes.
If there was this massive strike on warehouses, headquarters, air defense systems, it would become easier to fight. And since hundreds of missiles and kamikaze drones have gone nowhere, or rather, they will strengthen the Ukrainian Armed Forces, we need a couple of months to restore the supply of these missiles. In the meantime, the air defense is working, the headquarters are intact, the weapons reach the front without any problems.

[rocket757]

Let's assume that such shelling is not in vain, although ....
There MUST ALWAYS BE A CLEAR PLAN!
Arrange a big badaboom, just to show the "patriotic public" that there are some red lines for them, someone will answer ... in general, everything should be done according to plan, solve strategic and common tasks ... only So!

[cold wind]

For the sake of interest, I analyzed data from open sources.
Data from the TG of the Rybar channel Struck on October 10 21 objects + October 11 11 objects in total 32 Ukrainian object. Link: https://t.me/rybar/40091
According to information from Ukraine, on October 10, the Russian Federation fired 83 missiles, 43 shot down (40 hit somewhere) + 13 Shahids, 7 shot down (6 hit somewhere). Total: 21 objects hit by 46 missiles + drones. Downed 50.
By October 11th. 28 missiles fired 18 shot down (10 hit somewhere) +14 Martyrs 8 shot down (6 hit somewhere). Total: 11 objects hit by 16 missiles + drones. Downed 26.

Overall result: 111 missiles fired, 50 hit, 61 shot down. 27 Shahids fired, 12 hit, 15 shot down. Accordingly, 62 missiles + shahids hit 32 targets. On average, 2 missiles / drones per target.

Everything converges, there are no contradictions, the error is no more than 5-10%. Air defense efficiency at least 55%.

[rocket757]

There is always the question of who is lying more and more interestingly.
On our part, with the control of missile strikes, it’s somehow not very clear, accessible, for understanding, although those who are interested ...
However, NOBODY can boast that everything launched flies and strikes!
As well as those that manage to bring down everything that the enemy has launched.
The fog of war, the curtain of information ... whatever you call it, we don't know, and that's it.

[Pilat2009]

Quote from cold wind

For the sake of interest, I analyzed data from open sources.
Data from the TG of the Rybar channel Struck on October 10 21 objects + October 11 11 objects in total 32 Ukrainian object. Link: https://t.me/rybar/40091
According to information from Ukraine, on October 10, the Russian Federation fired 83 missiles, 43 shot down (40 hit somewhere) + 13 Shahids, 7 shot down (6 hit somewhere). Total: 21 objects hit by 46 missiles + drones. Downed 50.
By October 11th. 28 missiles fired 18 shot down (10 hit somewhere) +14 Martyrs 8 shot down (6 hit somewhere). Total: 11 objects hit by 16 missiles + drones. Downed 26.

Overall result: 111 missiles fired, 50 hit, 61 shot down. 27 Shahids fired, 12 hit, 15 shot down. Accordingly, 62 missiles + shahids hit 32 targets. On average, 2 missiles / drones per target.

Everything converges, there are no contradictions, the error is no more than 5-10%. Air defense efficiency at least 55%.

That is, the data of Ukraine can be trusted 100%?

[rocket757]

To believe, inside and out, no one has to.
But the level of silence, distortion of facts ... is different for everyone.
However, here the fog of war also affects, distorts the objective picture, alas.

[xGhost]

Well, Ukraine's data - 60000 drug losses, Shoigu's data - 6000. Whose figure is closer to reality, in your opinion, if mobilization was required?

[LastPS]

I can’t talk about the downed KRs, but it’s extremely hard to believe in the loss of martyrs 50/50 by downing, maybe for technical reasons some part fell, but not 50+ percent.

[xGhost]

The Kremlin thought otherwise. The main thing is to give the public what it asked for.

[rocket757]

Do not tell my horseshoes ... EVERYONE and EVERYWHERE do this!
Some difference in the level ... of the veracity of the material. But this value is subjective, there is no point in even arguing about it.

[xGhost]

For such comments, they gave me minuses and explained that I "nisegonipanimayu". Putin had an urgent need for a PR action and he led it. And all failures can always be attributed to the military and replace one general with another.

[rocket757]

And look, all the "critics" are "awarded" the same way ... it didn't fit into someone's very correct line, and then it flew off.
Although, minus, this is also an assessment, this zero hints at the fact that no one is interested at all.

[neworange88]

. The initial moment was "missed", and now everything is complicated and can become even more difficult.

Here it is. The original goal of negotiating was basically absurd. And Kyiv was just playing for time, deceiving at the expense of negotiations in order to gain time and he won it and as a result we have what we have. But if the original goal was to suppress all air defense and destroy the railway and bridges, then now everything would be different. They put themselves in an uncomfortable position with the wrong goals and wrong decisions.

[rocket757]

Quote from: neworange88

They put themselves in an uncomfortable position with the wrong goals and wrong decisions.

Decisions, plans, were made / understood where, by whom and why exactly???
An additional question ... but no one tried to tell, show, prove that IT IS IMPOSSIBLE ???
Oh how interesting it would be to know! Not speculation, but the TRUTH!
The situation right now... is not very good.
The situation later ... and FIG knows how it will turn out, but it is necessary to prepare for the WORST !!!

[neworange88]

Quote: rocket757

Quote from: neworange88

They put themselves in an uncomfortable position with the wrong goals and wrong decisions.

Decisions, plans, were made / understood where, by whom and why exactly???
An additional question ... but no one tried to tell, show, prove that IT IS IMPOSSIBLE ???
Oh how interesting it would be to know! Not speculation, but the TRUTH!
The situation right now... is not very good.
The situation later ... and FIG knows how it will turn out, but it is necessary to prepare for the WORST !!!

It is necessary. Especially in the light of recent events.

Over the past two days, a plan has been prepared in the United States for a possible military invasion of Russian territory, brought to the attention of the head of the US European Command, the commander-in-chief of NATO's combined forces in Europe, as well as lower-ranking officers of the North Atlantic Alliance.

First of all, attention is drawn to the increase in the stage of combat readiness of US forces on the European continent to the level of DEFCON 2. This level was activated only twice - during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 and on the eve of the operation of US troops in Iraq "Desert Storm" in January-February 1991. At the same time, in the last month, increased activity of American reconnaissance satellites over Russia has been recorded. Over settlements of military importance, surveillance by the Pentagon has tripled. At the same time, a large number of air defense facilities and strategic missile forces in the depths of Russian territory fell into the circle of interests of the Western bloc. Along with this, the NATO navy is concentrating forces in the Baltic, Barents and Black Seas near the territorial waters of the Russian Federation. According to the DEFCON 2 directive, these three factions of the alliance have been transferred to combat formation. Additional NATO air forces from the United States are also expected to arrive at the Rhine-Main and Ramstein air bases in Germany. According to intelligence, the plan for a “disarming operation” against Russia contains data on the likely actions of NATO forces during the first 88 hours and involves missile and air strikes on the centers special communications, anti-nuclear fortifications of the Ministry of Defense, submarine bases and storage of nuclear warheads, missile defense and air defense systems, as well as support for sabotage groups in the Moscow, Tver and Tula regions.

https://topcor.ru/28609-v-nato-podgotovlen-plan-obezoruzhivajuschej-operacii-protiv-rossii.html

[rocket757]

So Uncle Joe "said / assured" that stripes, by themselves, would not get into conflict in any way! Or did he not understand something, did not know, FORGET?

[dauria]

and no one tried to tell, show, prove that IT IS IMPOSSIBLE???

The career of such ends in the modern "vertical of power" either as an eternal company commander, or as a shift foreman, at most as a shop power engineer.
As Khazanov's parrot said: "Who wants to listen to the truth about oneself, and even pay money for it?"

[rocket757]

The situation is ... standard, in general. Few places, few when, it can be different.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: rocket757

Radically destroy the infrastructure of railway transport, only aviation can, with massive strikes, moreover, REGULAR !!!

And what specific infrastructure to beat?
Bridges? So they, infections, are durable - here you need an accurate hit of a warhead weighing at least a ton into a support.
Tunnels are the same problem.
So it turns out that it is better to disable the railway by indirect actions - turning off the power supply. And if traction can still be replaced by diesel locomotives, then the traffic control system will stop without power. And the road will return a century ago - to wands, hand arrows, and most importantly - to speeds and throughput. And most importantly - where to get personnel (the same switchmen) to replace automation with manual labor - in a system that, in the pursuit of profit, was optimized almost to zero.

[rocket757]

Opinions, proposals are different, but the truth ... maybe somewhere in the middle !!!
I always remember/remind that the most effective approach is COMPLEX! To solve specific problems, it is possible / necessary to apply the method that will be more efficient ... if there are options to choose from, of course.
Now, there are no options to choose from.
There is nothing to argue about.

[Negro]

Quote: Alexey RA

motion control system without power will rise

Yes, I have already seen these regular bloody fantasies. Didn't expect to see them in your performance.

How do you completely de-energize the road so that there are not enough opportunities to power the signaling system? A nearby supernova explosion?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Negro

How do you completely de-energize the road so that there are not enough opportunities to power the signaling system? A nearby supernova explosion?

Yes, about the same as now - to knock out the main generating capacities and substations. Yugoslavia-99 in a new version.
Enough emergency generators to power the systems?

[Toucan]

Quote: Alexey RA

Yes, about the same as now - to knock out the main generating capacities and substations. Yugoslavia-99 in a new version.
Enough emergency generators to power the systems?

Is it enough for us
of this modern RR with the necessary accuracy. And it seems to me that Ukraine does not capitulate from this. On the contrary, the fighting will become more violent.

[Negro]

For signaling and dispatchers, of course, enough, even if the thrust is turned off.

[insafufa]

The Turks bought the S400 in order to master the production of long-range air defense systems capable of operating without the help of satellites and AWACS, which is why they looked at the leader in this area, Almaz Antey. The S-350 was originally designed for South Korea. The Turks have short and medium range air defense systems, they have big problems with long range. So, deliveries are unlikely from Turkey for the S-400, but they can deliver short and medium range.

[xGhost]

It can drive itself, it has wheels.

[Victor Chernenko]

The author of the article is an optimist, in reality everything will be somewhat different, if there is a transfer of air defense systems, then in outdated and truncated versions and in a minimum amount for testing and expressing "unshakable support"

[Bongo]

Quote: Viktor Chernenko

The author of the article is an optimist, in reality everything will be somewhat different

How it will be, we will soon see. As for my "optimism", you are deeply mistaken. On the contrary, I am very reserved in my assessments.

Quote: Viktor Chernenko

if there is a transfer of air defense systems, then in outdated and truncated versions and in a minimum amount for testing and expressing "unshakable support"

I respect people who can confirm your words the facts. Are you sure you can do it?
Please tell me what the "restriction" of the NASAMS and IRIS-T SLM air defense systems supplied to Ukraine is expressed, or at least what is the difference between the S-75M3 Volkhov air defense system and the export S-75M3 Volga. Can you also compare S-200VM and S-200E or S-300PS and S-300PMU? Can you do it?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Bongo

Please tell me what the "cutdown" of the NASAMS and IRIS-T SLM air defense systems supplied to Ukraine is expressed

You still ask where to find an outdated air defense system with IRIS-T SL, if the system was tested only in 2015, and it was adopted by the Bundeswehr in 2017.

[xGhost]

Yes, do not hesitate, all Western weapons are bad, there are few of them and instructions in English, which no one knows. Hymars here is one comrade "clicks like nuts."

[Armen Sologyan]

Can they detect Russian hypersonic missiles instead of bombers? I think no! If the United States supplies such funds, then two or three aircraft carriers can be easily sunk. After all, the right of the United States and its NATO is already participating in the war! And then we need to polish them on the water surface !!! So that service does not seem like honey to them. Just one Dagger is enough for everyone!

[Negro]

Quote: Armen Sologyan

Can they detect Russian hypersonic missiles instead of bombers? I think no!

Of course yes. There is a problem with shooting down such high-speed targets, there are no problems with detection.

Quote: Armen Sologyan

If the United States supplies such funds, then two or three aircraft carriers can be easily sunk.

Good idea. Good luck.

Quote: Armen Sologyan

Just one dagger is enough for everyone

Anti-ship dagger, yes, very good.

[Armen Sologyan]

As experience has shown, not only anti-ship!

[demiurg]

The front line is now more than a thousand kilometers. Deliveries of 3-5-10 air defense systems will not make any weather.

[Toucan]

Quote: demiurg

The front line is now more than a thousand kilometers. Deliveries of 3-5-10 air defense systems will not make any weather.

.

Explain this to the wives and children of the dead Russian pilots.

[solar]

They will cover the most important objects, for example, large cities. For this they are enough.

[Bongo]

Quote from solar

They will cover the most important objects, for example, large cities. For this they are enough.

For this object anti-aircraft systems are intended. But the "patriots" have their own view on the purpose of long-range systems.

[Bongo]

Quote: demiurg

The front line is now more than a thousand kilometers. Deliveries of 3-5-10 air defense systems will not make any weather.

Do I understand correctly, you want to say that the object air defense systems are stretched along the front line? Also take an interest in the number of medium and long-range complexes available in Ukraine as of February 23.

[DrVintorez]

How much better is an article than Ryabov's graphomania! My heart is happy, thank you!

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: DrVintorez

How much better is an article than Ryabov's graphomania! My heart is happy, thank you!

For Seryozha, this is a hobby, and for Ryabov, it is the main income. Hence the different results.

[DrVintorez]

It is necessary to return the cons and start fining Ryabov!

[rocket757]

NATO countries have managed to saturate the armed forces of Ukraine with a significant number of modern MANPADS and are transferring short-range mobile air defense systems to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But these low-altitude air defense systems of the near zone are not capable of protecting troop concentrations and strategically important objects from strikes by ballistic operational-tactical and cruise missiles and attacks by bombers operating at medium and high altitudes.

. Obviously, our aviation over the territory of Ukraine, to a great depth, cannot operate. There are enough problems in the frontline ....
What other questions can be???
Further it may be worse, foreign guardians can contribute to this, alas.
Whereas???
Missiles and drones until they can effectively deal with them ??? And as always, the best remedy against their air defenses is their "tanks" in their positions.

[ramzay21]

The most terrible thing in this article is that the S-400s were sold to the Turks along with the technology. This is not even sabotage and wrecking, this is real treason to the Motherland. How could you sell the secret technologies of the systems in service to a potential enemy?

[Suslik_2]

There is nothing terrible in this, export versions of weapons are simplified and incompatible with the weapons of the RF Ministry of Defense. According to the export version, it is not possible to determine the real maximum characteristics of the complexes in service with the RF Ministry of Defense, naturally, before the start of the conflict ...

[Toucan]

Quote: Suslik_2

There is nothing terrible in this, export versions of weapons are simplified and incompatible with the weapons of the RF Ministry of Defense. According to the export version, it is not possible to determine the real maximum characteristics of the complexes in service with the RF Ministry of Defense, naturally, before the start of the conflict ...

Do you seriously think that the Turks would buy air defense systems with "trimmed characteristics"?

[Suslik_2]

No one else will sell them to them, because. factories for the RF Ministry of Defense develop and produce equipment according to the internal order of the RF Ministry of Defense, and RosOboronExport orders the development of equipment and production for export - these are different offices. Moreover, their incompatibility is checked ... An example is Eskander, there is a modification for the RF Ministry of Defense and an export one - which is truncated.

[Suslik_2]

By the way, it's the same in the USA. A country that does not produce a certain type of equipment is forced to buy degraded versions ...

[Bongo]

Quote: Suslik_2

By the way, it's the same in the USA. A country that does not produce a certain type of equipment is forced to buy degraded versions ...

Can you give an example? For this, the Patriot air defense system supplied to Poland is perfect.

[Bongo]

Quote: Suslik_2

No one else will sell them to them, because. factories for the RF Ministry of Defense develop and produce equipment according to the internal order of the RF Ministry of Defense, and RosOboronExport orders the development of equipment and production for export - these are different offices. Moreover, their incompatibility is checked ... An example is Eskander, there is a modification for the RF Ministry of Defense and an export one - which is truncated.

I see that you are a competent person and certainly deeply studied this issue.
Please tell us how the S-400 systems delivered to Turkey differ from those carried by the database in the Russian Aerospace Forces? Maybe the detection range of radar facilities, the number of targets tracked and fired upon, or the firing range? Thanks in advance!

[solar]

The author's articles are pleasant to read, especially in contrast with other modern ones :(

It is stated that the first IRIS-T SLM air defense system will be transferred to Ukraine in October 2022.

There were reports that the complex had already been handed over to Ukraine.

Sentinel AN/MPQ-64F1 high-resolution multifunctional radar, in addition to target detection, is used for illumination and guidance. Has a range of up to 120 km.

of the improved IRIS-T SLM, an Australian-made CEA Technologies CEAFAR multifunctional radar with a range of up to 240 km was involved.

A significant increase in the capabilities of the radar in relation to launchers is striking. The conclusion suggests itself - either it is planned to use more long-range missiles in the near future, or to use a significant dispersion of launchers from the radar, which in general expands the range of the complex much more than the range of the missiles themselves installed on the launchers.

[Negro]

Quote from solar

The conclusion begs

There's a slightly different idea as far as I'm into the material. Standard data interfaces. You can connect any certified radar, including those from older systems.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from solar

A significant increase in the capabilities of the radar in relation to launchers is striking.

So in these complexes, divisional radars are also assigned the functions of target detection.
And for the OVTs radar, the range should be a multiple of the range of the missile defense system - so that the guidance officers have time to detect the target, classify, assess the air situation, prioritize the targets and issue the control center.

[solar]

So in these complexes, divisional radars are also assigned the functions of target detection.

You are right, the detection range should be greater than the destruction range. But for these radars, the range is not exceeded by 2-2,5 times, as is usually envisaged in such cases, but by 4-6 times. This suggests that either the possibility of using longer-range missiles or a significant separation of launchers is being laid. Thus, the real range of destruction of the complex may exceed the formal range of missiles on launchers. The question is in the data transmission channels from the command post and radar to a specific launcher. If they are provided, then the launchers can be moved out to 30-40 km, which will double the range capabilities of the complexes.

[zyablik.olga]

Quote from solar

There were reports that the complex had already been handed over to Ukraine.

Today I saw information in the news that an acceptance certificate for the first IRIS-T air defense system was signed. But it is not known whether he was delivered to Ukraine.

[Negro]

There were photos of trailers at the border. But unofficially.

[solar]

The transfer was on the border of Poland and Ukraine. There have already been reports that the complex is already in Ukraine.

[xGhost]

There's the whole "trick" in open architecture. The manufacturer's website states that the radar tracks 1500 targets. That is, he can distribute target designations to dozens of launchers and not only his own.

[Knell wardenheart]

Doubts that the Greeks will hand over the S-300. More precisely, there is a doubt that the Americans will exchange them Patriots for the S-300 for Ukraine. Because the relationship between Greece and Turkey is at the bottom of the bottom. Transferring the latest or even new air defense systems to it means harshly aggroing Turkey, which is already "full" of undermining by the United States. Now is not the time for the Americans to go for it - and Athens will not give up the air defense-missile defense element for beautiful promises, they also understand the specifics of their situation. For the United States, Turkey is more important than Greece, but the alignment "in fact" suits them because it has been dragging on for more than a dozen years.

As for any air defense systems, the key element for their functioning is a powerful and modern radar with good resolution. This is a very bulky toy, detected by means of electronic intelligence. The radar is much less mobile than other elements. The possibilities of network-centrics or external target designation for this entire diverse and scattered "zoo" will be very limited. Thus, by mowing down radars, we will significantly reduce the effectiveness of these deliveries, in addition to bringing our own anti-radar weapons. We will have to do this anyway.

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Knell Wardenheart

The radar is much less mobile than other elements.

Serezha, within the framework of this cycle, already clearly wrote about Ukrainian radars, even I understood everything. So it's not quite the way you describe it.

[Knell wardenheart]

about Ukrainian radars

And it’s not about the “Ukrainian”, but about the newest supplied ones. Of all the parts supplied, it is the radars that are most detected and hit, we can hit the launchers like the heads of a hydra.

[Toucan]

Quote: Knell Wardenheart

it’s as if not about “Ukrainian”, but about the latest supplied. Of all the parts supplied, it is the radars that are most detected and hit, we can hit the launchers like the heads of a hydra.

If the Ukrainian 36D6M radars are worse than Western ones, then only in terms of interfacing with data transmission systems. Or do you want to say that the Russian Aerospace Forces managed to disable most of them?

[solar]

This is a very bulky toy, detected by means of electronic intelligence. The radar is much less mobile than other elements.

Judging by the photographs in the article, the radars are just very mobile, unlike launchers. And by no means bulky, many in the photo are more than compact.

[Negro]

Hm. By way of constructive criticism.

It seems that at the beginning of the cycle, the author outlined the structure of the future work: SAM veterans of the Cold War, children of the Cold War, young and early. In relation to the same average Americans, it looks like: Hawk, Patriot, NASAMS/MEADS.

However, along the way, the temporal classification and the range classification somehow overlapped. So we have already arrived at the new NASAMS, but did not mention, say, SAMM (Britain, Italy, Poland) or Italian SAMP/T. Perhaps it will be further, but the structure is somewhat lost.

[Wildcat]

IMHO, the series of articles is still about what will be passed on, and not what is.

NASAMS and IRIST promised and, IMHO, delivered.
The rest - even IMHO, is not seriously discussed.

Regarding Sleepy Joe: IMHO, probably if it comes to the Patriots, then it will be PAK2.
No one plans to build a missile defense system for the whole of Ukraine, and it is hardly possible. Making normal air defense (well "sharpened" against missile defense) with very limited missile defense capabilities is real.

For us, IMHO, mobile military air defense is much worse, which could reliably cover the Armed Forces of Ukraine everywhere and always. With elements of long-range air defense systems against aircraft behind the database line and something "cheap in large quantities and mobile against drones, like Mantis." But this is not yet.

[Toucan]

Quote: Wildcat

Regarding Sleepy Joe: IMHO, probably if it comes to the Patriots, then it will be PAK2.

Today it was already announced that Ukraine will receive "Patriots". Most of the long-range air defense systems available in NATO are PAC-3 converted from PAC-2 and new PAC-3 +.

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

"cheap in bulk and mobile against drones like the Mantis." But this is not yet.

Against drones, and by the way, against subsonic CDs, L3Harris VAMPIRE should drive up. The question is how it will show itself, and if it’s good, how quickly they can saturate air defense with such systems.

Quote: Wildcat

No one plans to build a missile defense system for the whole of Ukraine, and it is hardly possible

It is enough to create several nodes where you can safely accumulate resources. The cardinal solution to the missile defense problem can only be strikes deep into the territory of the Russian Federation.

Quote: Wildcat

The rest - even IMHO, is not seriously discussed.

Who knows what is discussed there and what is not. Crotals and rapiers are also, as it were, not discussed.

[Wildcat]

and by the way, L3Harris VAMPIRE should drive up against subsonic missiles

IMHO, this KR thing is "too tough". Drones, helicopters - this is the limit, then the GOS is needed ...

It is enough to create several nodes where you can safely accumulate resources. The cardinal solution to the missile defense problem can only be strikes deep into the territory of the Russian Federation.

Ukraine is big like France, only closer There is where to hide from BR. And at the expense of "deep territory" - this is only after "Ramstein 120", IMHO, and even then - you will have to observe this from paradise, corresponding through "paradise VO" ...

Who knows what is discussed there and what is not. Korotali and rapiers are also, as it were, not discussed.

IMHO, Rapiers have been "tortured" this year and no one will supply this thing with a contact fuse, even on the latest versions.
And Crotali and their clones are possible, the same Finns in the "low start" position and Korean options are also very possible. But now it is not discussed and is not even declared at the "Wishlist" level.

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

this thing KR is "too tough"

Why? There is a laser path, it does not matter where to fly. The speed of the Hydra is quite decent, there are enough warheads for the KR.

Quote: Wildcat

There is where to hide from BR.

This is if the dad was not in business. And from the territory of the Republic of Belarus, Iskander gets it everywhere. Moreover, an air defense bush above the rear logistics base is needed not in Uzhgorod, but in the Dnieper, for example.

Quote: Wildcat

And at the expense of "deep territory" - this is only after "Ramstein 120", IMHO, and even then - you will have to observe this from paradise, corresponding through "paradise VO" ...

Why would suddenly? If you were smart enough to arrange Vietnam behind your fence and then also move the fence so that this Vietnam would take place as if in your own country, the consequences can be the most interesting.

Quote: Wildcat

IMHO, Rapiers have been "tortured" this year and no one will supply this thing with a contact fuse, even on the latest versions.

Why such confidence? Taking into account recent events, the problem of saturating the object air defense of the near zone is more acute than ever.

Quote: Wildcat

But now it is not discussed and is not even declared at the "Wishlist" level.

Well, you see. In the air defense system of the near zone, the author proceeded from the possibilities, and not from rumors on promises.

[Wildcat]

Why? There is a laser path, it does not matter where to fly. The speed of the Hydra is quite decent, there are enough warheads for the KR.

IMHO, the target is small and fast, the FCS is not suitable, and the fuse, IMHO, is a contact one. Any MANPADS with IR seeker will be more effective.
Let's take this as my value judgment. , and how true - in a year we will see at VO.

This is if the dad was not in business. And from the territory of the Republic of Belarus, Iskander gets it everywhere. Moreover, an air defense bush above the rear logistics base is needed not in Uzhgorod, but in the Dnieper, for example.

IMHO, air defense / missile defense resources are not enough to completely counter the threat of BR. Especially when firing "to saturation of air defense / missile defense." Yes, and there is no particular point in such protection - as the "war of cities" in the Iran-Iraq war showed, this has little effect on the results of the database, IMHO.

Why such confidence? Taking into account recent events, the problem of saturating the object air defense of the near zone is more acute than ever.

Over the entire period of their existence, rapiers have shown themselves, IMHO, to be a cheap, but poor means of air defense - they were only suitable for protecting the Olympics. The question of Rapiers was not even raised.

In the air defense system of the near zone, the author proceeded from the possibilities, and not from rumors on promises.

Everything is correct, IMHO.
Near-field air defense systems are available and in production, IMHO, like "fool wrappers" in the arms market. Here the possibilities and promises / rumors may very well coincide, you just need to bring a light container from the warehouse.
The Norgs, for example, simply gave away the decommissioned Mistrals.

Medium and long range air defense systems are a different story. Expensive, there are few on the market, "in warehouses" - a few, in contrast to thousands of MANPADS.

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

Any MANPADS with IR seeker will be more effective.

Yes, definitely. But they asked for something on a pickup truck - by the way, a pickup truck.

Quote: Wildcat

IMHO, air defense / missile defense resources are not enough to completely counter the BR threat

Complete is not required. According to the statements of the former brothers, it has already been possible to lower the flight rate below 50%.

Quote: Wildcat

Especially when firing "to saturation of air defense / missile defense."

Saturate air defense, you know, only rich people can do it.

Quote: Wildcat

Rapiers for the entire time of their existence have shown themselves, IMHO, to be a cheap, but poor means of air defense

Subsonic CR is not the most difficult target.

Quote: Wildcat

Medium and long range air defense systems are a different story. Expensive, few on the market

Yes, but one should hardly be guided by "negotiations", about which we know nothing. Moreover, the mental state of the chief negotiator raises well-known questions, and non-principal ones change from time to time.

[Liam]

Quote: Wildcat

watch it from heaven

)))
How do you imagine the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine and an approximate algorithm for the actions of the parties?

[Wildcat]

1. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 02.06.2020, 355 No. XNUMX
"On the Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence"
"17. The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in the case of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when it is itself at risk the existence of the state.
18. The decision to use nuclear weapons is made by the President of the Russian Federation.
19. The conditions that determine the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons by the Russian Federation are:
...
c) the enemy's influence on critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the disabling of which will lead to the disruption of the response actions of the nuclear forces;

d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is jeopardized."

2. A goal is chosen, for example, here is the opinion of an informed person.

There is also the doctrine of "escalation for de-escalation", but for some reason my posts with its decoding were rubbed, so find it yourself.

3. After the use of tactical nuclear weapons, something happens at the UN with the participation of Nebenzi and other interesting things.

4. A "response" arrives.

5. On the "answer" it is necessary to give an "answer".

6. The VO website has been functioning for some time, there is an active correspondence of members of the forum. There has already been a discussion in Bongo's articles about the consequences of the "response", there is no point in repeating it.
Bongo, IMHO, will survive. Territory and skills will help.
I will try to write from heaven. Due to the territorial location between the centers of decision-making, one cannot sit out in the bath.

[Liam]

)))

Do you seriously think that such a serious matter as the use of nuclear weapons is regulated by some kind of internal document of one state at its own discretion?)

An important addition to the treaty is the resolution of the UN Security Council of June 19, 1968 and identical statements by the three nuclear powers - the USSR, the USA and Great Britain on the issue of security guarantees for non-nuclear states parties to the treaty. The resolution provides that in the event of a nuclear attack on a non-nuclear state or the threat of such an attack, the Security Council and, above all, its permanent members possessing nuclear weapons, will have to act immediately in accordance with the UN Charter to repel aggression; it also reaffirms the right of states to individual and collective self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter until the Security Council takes the necessary measures to maintain international peace and security. The statements made by each of the three Powers at the adoption of this resolution indicate that any State that has committed aggression with the use of nuclear weapons or threatened such aggression should know that its actions will be effectively repelled by measures taken in accordance with the UN Charter; they also proclaim the intention of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain to provide assistance to that non-nuclear party to the treaty, which will be subjected to a nuclear attack.

China, by the way, also undertook to pile on a violator of the convention who tries to use or threaten the use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear country

[Wildcat]

Hmm, I already wrote that IMHO a "response" will arrive, to which a "full response" will arrive, to which a "full response" will arrive.
In this matter, our positions, IMHO, coincide.
Who and with what paper will explain this fact of the history of mankind - this will only be interesting to archaeologists in the distant future.
I'm not interested at all right now.
There are statements by at least three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United States and Great Britain - their positions are as clear as possible.

The US and the UK have already taken places to participate in the event, whether China and France will throw a vigorous loaf is not clear to me personally.
The survivors will know for sure.

[Liam]

In fact, these obligations were accepted by all 5 members of the Security Council, including China. The United States, the World Bank and the USSR simply issued even more detailed explanations. So all four will fly to the violator of the convention.
There will be no nuclear response to tactical nuclear weapons. In the remaining four countries, adequate people are still in power.
It’s just that such an order will be known to all participants 5 minutes after its issuance. No one will hide it and the masses will find out about it. Leaving China aside, NATO will put its forces on full alert. Including nuclear ones. The broad masses will demand that their rulers stop madman. The behavior of rosshirnarmass is interesting by the way)
Noflyzone will be introduced over Ukraine. If this is not enough and the CD with tactical nuclear weapons will be loaded into a strategic strike on the airport of strategists during preparation for the flight. Well, interception of the missile itself if it can be launched by NATO air defense and aviation. positions and objects of Rosarmy on the territory of Ukraine ... within the borders of 1991)

[Wildcat]

France will not participate in vigorous-loaf throws at all: "French President Emmanuel Macron said that Paris would not use nuclear weapons if such weapons were used against Ukraine. According to him, this is not implied by the nuclear doctrine of France." https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5608679

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

Hmm, I already wrote that IMHO a "response" will arrive, to which a "full response" will arrive, to which a "full response" will arrive.

What for?
Gradual escalation does not make sense, dealt with this at one time. But a full-scale preventive strike allows the Americans to realize all their advantages in accuracy, intelligence and missile defense.

[Negro]

Quote: Liam

Do you seriously think that such a serious matter as the use of nuclear weapons is regulated by some kind of internal document of one state at its own discretion?)

You see, the use of nuclear weapons is not regulated at all. Until you try it, you won't know.

There is another question here.

Quote: Wildcat

c) the enemy's influence on critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the disabling of which will lead to the disruption of the response actions of the nuclear forces;

d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened. "

If suddenly Ukrainian cruise missiles start picking at two of the three armies of the Strategic Missile Forces, and at the same time Gadzhiyevo and Engels, then theoretically point c. But what is meant by d? Knocking out power plants and railway facilities, which they so much like to offer here, does it endanger the existence of the state in itself?

[Liam]

Strange as it may seem, the use of nuclear weapons against another nuclear country is indeed an internal affair of each participant in the convention. It is not forbidden to kill yourself beautifully, as they say.
In the case of the use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state, as you can see, it is regulated and very tough. And the violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is the end of any international activity, anarchy and the loss of their exclusivity by members of the Security Council. Everyone will rush to get nuclear weapons. It is clear what this threatens the West with. The same South Caucasus and Japan will acquire nuclear weapons instantly. And immediately after that there will be an international knowledge of Taiwan and its receipt of nuclear weapons for self-protection. Does Comrade Xi need it? .. lose his face to save someone else. such victims.

[Liam]

Quote: Negro

theoretically it is possible to weave a paragraph into

And who is interested in this silly letter for purely domestic Russian affairs ... especially with the well-known Russian creative approach to interpreting everything and everything in the world .. from its own Constitution to international treaties, referendums, recognitions, annexations and other things. They were explained both openly and behind the scenes what and how will happen if they try, what are the risks and consequences. India and China in Samarkand, by the way, also spoke about not even thinking about nuclear weapons in any form.

By the way, about the red lines with supplies. Vague threats about nuclear weapons in the event of the supply of one or the other, also for the domestic public. The West does not give a damn about these threats. The exchange is completely different there. the territories of the Russian Federation are clearly tied to the steps of Russian escalation.

So the Russian Federation, in a sense, decides for itself what will be delivered to Ukraine and what is not. One of these days we will find out what kind of exchange was for strikes on civilian infrastructure.
By the way, they didn’t dare to hit Bankovaya, which means that the response there will be very serious

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

Bongo, IMHO, will survive. Territory and skills will help.

A bongo near the SSBN in Vilyuchinsk, as I understand it. So it's hard to say who was lucky with the territory there.

[zyablik.olga]

Quote: Negro

Quote: Wildcat

Bongo, IMHO, will survive. Territory and skills will help.

A bongo near the SSBN in Vilyuchinsk, as I understand it. So it's hard to say who was lucky with the territory there.

From Komsomolsk to Vilyuchinsk, about the same as from Moscow to Murmansk. You have a poor idea of ​​the scale of the Far Eastern territories.

[Negro]

)))
I imagine the scale normally, but I misunderstood the location of the author. For some reason I was sure that you were in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky.

Komsomolsk yes, calmer in this respect. The Chinese will most likely ask not to bomb the northern territories.

[cold wind]

Quote: Negro

Against drones, and by the way, against subsonic CDs, L3Harris VAMPIRE should drive up. The question is how it will show itself, and if it’s good, how quickly they can saturate air defense with such systems.

Avengers + Sentinel radars will cope better with CR, there is a chance that it will be in the next games. It's strange that they still don't.

[Wildcat]

It is very likely that there are already Polish MANPADS on the carrier, the Poprad air defense system.
Bongo wrote about them here
https://topwar.ru/198270-polskie-zenitnye-raketnye-kompleksy-vojskovoj-pvo.html
Is there an IAI ELM-2106NG radar - it is not clear.

In principle, the market is full of options for "MANPADS on a carrier with an SLA": Germany. France, USA and even Poland. For Ukraine, this was not in the first place yet. Wearable MANPADS were already there.
But since yesterday, a lot has changed, and the same Poprads with radars (Wiesels with radars / missiles) may well appear in large volumes.

[Negro]

Quote from cold wind

Avengers + Sentinel radar will cope better with CR, there is a chance that it will be in the next games

Yes, but they asked for pickups - I offered pickups. Naturally, any MANPADS or a wearable like a British one will do just as well - the problem is not in the rocket, but in 24/7 duty.

[Dmitriy22]

Interestingly, no one considered the "do not destroy, ruin" method as a method of countering air defense. Those. we take missiles from warehouses, let's say "limited combat value" (I won't tell you the brand, substitute it yourself) and launch somewhere in the direction where this very air defense works. And we are disposing of junk at the expense of the enemy. And it would also be nice to develop a special Deshman rocket that could simply fly "in the direction" pulling air defense forces and means onto itself. So that a rocket worth a "Zaporozhets" (God forgive me) would be shot down by a rocket worth a Bentley. Economy however. After the clip is empty, the pistol turns into a paperweight.

[Normal ok]

You didn't discover America. This is how they basically work: they shoot junk wherever they go. But, reports go that 100-500 important targets have been hit.

[solar]

There is such

ADM-160A MALD (Miniature Air Launched Decoy) is a decoy UAV equipped with electronic warfare systems.

The first flight was performed in January 1999. Work on the creation of the device was initiated by the Agency for Advanced Defense Research Projects DARPA. Designed for jamming, simulating the flight of a combat aircraft, as a target or decoy. Equipped with a radar signature simulation system for microwave, VHF and microwave frequencies to achieve realistic simulation of virtually any subsonic aircraft, from the F-117 to the B-52.

[Wildcat]

As always, great article.
From what has been delivered and / or discussed publicly in terms of medium / long-range air defense, everything is described in detail.

It seems that one IRIST has already arrived (there is a photo from Poland), NASAMS too (there is no photo) and "there will be more soon."
By the way, Sidener AIM9X2 was integrated into NASAMS and, most likely, Iris will be integrated.

[Negro]

Quote: Wildcat

By the way, in NASAMS ... most likely, Iris will be integrated.

It seems to have already been done for the army of Norway.

[Wildcat]

The launches were for sure (I wrote a comment about this below), and whether they were formally accepted into service or not is not a clear matter, but if necessary, fast.
" IRIS-T missiles are now used on F-16s. After the completion of deliveries of the F-35, they will no longer be used in the air-to-air variant (we don’t forget about the air-to-surface, but in general this is not connected with the F-35, but with the cessation of operation of the F-16 in 2019-2022 - A.K.). As a result, Norway has a significant excess stock of missiles of this type, which can be used in the surface-to-air variant.
In fact, many have guessed this before, but now it is said directly. Of all the F-35 operators, so far only Israel has been allowed to independently integrate its weapons and electronics systems onto the aircraft. The rest should be content with the supplier's package of proposals, and there, in the short-range air-to-air missile class, nothing but the AIM-9X "Sidewinder" is provided."
https://andrej-kraft.livejournal.com/102758.html
It seems to be a good option for using air-to-air missiles that are no longer needed.

[xGhost]

The manufacturer's website says that iris can already be installed.

[xGhost]

I can suggest once again, to completely destroy the air defense of Ukraine with the help of General Konashenkov.

[xGhost]

Good review article. True, it is not clear why IR-guided missiles are used in Iris-T, and radar-guided missiles in Nasams. I always thought that the radar-homing soul is due to the greater range, IR-only for short-range missiles. And here is an anti-aircraft missile, it should capture a target from 10 kilometers, but is there enough sensitivity?

[Bongo]

Quote from xghost

it is not clear why Iris-T uses infrared-guided missiles, while Nasams uses radar-guided missiles. I always thought that the radar-homing soul is due to the greater range, IR-only for short-range missiles. And here is an anti-aircraft missile, it should capture a target from 10 kilometers, but is there enough sensitivity?

You apparently missed some details regarding the IRIS-T SLM:

The modified surface-to-air missiles are equipped with a combined target guidance system that uses an inertial control system, radio command guidance, and a thermal homing head ...

Next:

After the launch of the missile defense system, it is displayed in the target area by inertial or radio command systems, after which the noise-protected highly sensitive IR seeker is activated.

[solar]

I always thought that the radar-homing soul is due to the greater range, IR-only for short-range missiles.

Not always. This is usually only for pre-launch missiles. In a combination of different guidance methods, IR is also found on long-range missiles. For example, the ship's RIM-66M from the SM-2 family with a range of 160 km has, among other things, an IR homing head in the final section along with semi-active radar (and command-inertial guidance to the final section), which, in addition to high noise immunity, gives, for example, the possibility of hitting a target beyond the radio horizon.

[Wildcat]

Link to Kronsberg/Rytheon's rocket site for NASAMS
https://www.kongsberg.com/ru/kda/what-we-do/defence-and-security/integrated-air-and-missile-defence/nasams-air-defence-system/rayhteon-missiles/
120 AMRAAM
120AMRAAMER
AIM-9X SIDEWINDER BLOCK II
(there is no automatic translator, translate, reader, yourself Interestingly, there is no data on the range).

"In the course of a comprehensive test in late August - early September 2022 at the Andøya training ground in Norway, it was successfully possible to consistently fire from the upgraded Raytheon NASAMS Mk.2 launcher at unmanned targets simulating cruise missiles, first with a long-range missile, then medium and finally short-range.
The upgraded Raytheon NASAMS Mk.2 launcher, in addition to the standard AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, can launch AMRAAM-ER long-range missiles and small AIM-9X Sidewinder Block II missiles from the rails of its containers © Raytheon Technologies
The experiment was conducted by the American company Raytheon Missiles & Defense (RMD) and the Norwegian Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace (KDA) in partnership with the SDPE (Strategic Development Planning and Experimentation) office of the US Air Force AFRL (Air Force Research Laboratory).
The experiment evaluated the actual capability of Raytheon Solipsys' sophisticated field control system. At the same time, the US Army radar detected targets, transmitted information on them to the Battle Space Command and Control Center (Battle Space Command and Control Center), from there key information on targets was relayed to the KDA fire control battery FDC (Fire Distribution Center). The FDC battery operator used the received control center to close the chain of destruction, choosing and launching the most effective missiles available in the containers of RMD's new NASAMS Mk.2 launcher.https://andrej-kraft.livejournal.com/285319.html

"R&D on the development of new missiles for NASAMS air defense systems has been carried out since the early 2000s. Initially, together with AMRAAM missiles, it was planned to additionally use two short-range air-to-air missiles AIM-2000 IRIS-T and AIM-9 Sidewinder from the standard launcher, as well as the RIM-162 ESSM Block 1 (Evolved Sea Sparrow) missile).
In June 2011, during the annual exercise of the air defense forces of the Norwegian Armed Forces Øvelse Sølvpil (Silver Arrow exercise) at the Andøya missile range, the first practical launch of the IRIS-T UR from the NASAMS II launcher was made. Despite the fact that the target was not hit, the tests were considered successful, as they confirmed the possibility of using new types of missiles from standard containers.
The first flight test of the ESSM SAM from a modified NASAMS launcher was carried out in Norway in 2008. In 2011, a new version of the NASAMS upgrade was advertised at an exhibition in Le Bourget, France.
https://andrej-kraft.livejournal.com/265487.html

[Normal ok]

I welcome articles that analyze technical parameters, not ideas / slogans. Reminds VO 9 years ago.

[ilpine]

What difference does it make what air defense system is in Ukraine if our planes fly very low and only over our territory? They have not been able to destroy this air defense system of Ukraine for 7 months already. The Antonovsky bridge has not been restored, which indicates that it is not fully protected by our air defense. Belgorodskub region is bombed, and what does this mean? And the slogan about complete control over the airspace of Ukraine turned out to be a hoax. Now these front-line planes of ours will land on airfields.
Where is the solution to the problem with Ukraine's air defense? The usual key did not fit to solve this problem, where is the new one?
There is only one answer, it is necessary to completely destroy the energy system of Ukraine, otherwise they will bring, install and shoot down our missiles and drones in batches.

[newtc7]

If they put all this here, it will be quite sad for us. For some unknown reason, the old Soviet complexes could not be destroyed in six months, what we will do with modern NATO ones is not at all clear ...
There is only one hope left - armata! )))

[Negro]

Sadness will come if strike weapons appear.

[xGhost]

Perhaps it has already appeared. Anti-radar missiles were not announced

[barbiturate]

As a result, we get a second Vietnam, NATO is calmly chasing weapons without any fear, some kind of idiocy on our part, at first we will fight for ten years, we will lose hundreds of thousands of soldiers in exchange for even a couple of three million soldiers of Ukraine, to the delight of the West, and when the question arises about the existence of Russia (and it will rise), we will use nuclear weapons or issue a categorical ultimatum - we will die together.
Why it is impossible to do it now - to issue an ultimatum, I do not understand. Why can't we say that if we continue to receive weapons, we will destroy the base in Rzeszow, etc.? Want a nuclear war, let's go! Choose! We are already burning and dying, try it too! For a base in Poland, who wants to burn with nuclear fire?

[Comrade Kim]

I would like to read about promising, in terms of deliveries to Ukroreich, Israeli air defense systems.
So far, Zionist greed is giving way to a pragmatic approach.
The Israeli Defense Minister denies the possibility of official deliveries of air defense systems.
But most likely, natural greed will win sooner or later, and the Zionists, using the "Polish scheme", will saturate Ukroreich with their air defenses.

Will our Leader forgive them for this yet another meanness?
This is far from a late question.
A smooth story with sending to Israel, through Riyadh, 43 Israeli executioners-instructors captured in Novorossia, will be "hiccuping" for a long time from the persons responsible for this extradition.