Pentagon plans for the development of military air defense and missile defense

Anti-aircraft missile and gun system M-SHORAD, supplied to US Army units. Photo by US Department of Defense

The Pentagon is planning a major restructuring of the organizational structure of the ground forces. By changing the composition and number of formations and units, they are going to make the army more effective in solving the entire range of expected tasks. For example, in connection with the growing threat from air attack weapons, it is proposed to rebuild and strengthen military air and missile defense.

Goals and objectives

On February 28, the Pentagon published the document “Army Force Structure Transformation,” which described the current situation and its features, as well as the main plans for improving the ground forces. In the near future, all these ideas will be worked out in detail, turned into a real reform program, which will then be approved and accepted for implementation.

The authors of the document recall that since September 11, 2001, the main task of the US Army has been the fight against terrorism. Such tasks had their own characteristics and influenced the appearance and capabilities of the armed forces in general and ground forces in particular. However, in recent years the situation in the world has changed, and now the army has to confront the full-fledged armed forces of potential opponents. This makes new demands and forces the army to be rebuilt again.

The proposed transformation program provides for a reduction in the number of ground forces with a simultaneous restructuring of the organizational structure. By improving the overall system, optimizing the distribution of staff units and other measures, it is planned to maintain the overall level of combat capability and at the same time strengthen individual components of the army.

The DE M-SHORAD prototype is a self-propelled near-zone air defense laser system. Photo by US Department of Defense

The structure of the troops will create five “multi-medium operational groups” Multi-Domain Task Forces (MDTF). Such formations will unite units and formations of different types of troops and will be able to conduct various activities or conduct combat operations using all available means and weapons. The MDTF will be assigned strike and defensive functions.

At the same time, they are going to update the existing weapon and equipment, as well as to develop and adopt promising models. Several important programs of this kind are being implemented right now, and their progress must be adjusted in accordance with the new army development plans.

Based on the results of all such events, by FY 2029. the total number of ground forces personnel will reach the level of 470 thousand people. with some change in the number of civilian personnel. At the same time, the ability to counter a developed and well-equipped potential enemy must increase, both in the context of defense and when solving strike missions.

Air defense-missile defense issues

The Pentagon notes that in the new conditions, the issue of air and missile defense is once again acquiring special importance. Potential adversaries of the United States, represented by Russia and China, have a wide range of different aviation and missile systems with different characteristics. The US Army must be prepared to repel attacks using them, as well as respond to them.

Launcher of the experimental Enduring Shield air defense system. Photo by Dynetics

The published plan provides for strengthening military air defense through the creation of new units with different equipment and capabilities corresponding to current threats. In general, it is proposed to maintain a layered approach to the formation of air defense and missile defense, but at the same time supplement the existing system with new means that can protect troops from a greater number of threats.

In the structure of the ground forces, it is proposed to form four new air defense battalions with “the ability to protect against fire from indirect positions” Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC). They will receive short- and medium-range anti-aircraft weapons capable of intercepting various UAVs, cruise missiles, as well as cannon and rocket artillery shells.

The IFPC battalions, as well as the air defense battalions attached to the ground divisions, will have a total of nine specialized batteries to combat small drones. They will need their own equipment - anti-aircraft systems and suppression means.

To counter manned and unmanned aircraft operating at low altitudes, Maneuver Short Range Air Defense (M-SHORAD) will be strengthened. Four newly created battalions within existing formations will be equipped with such systems.

It is noted that such a plan for the development of military air defense is not final. Depending on future events and emerging threats, it may be adjusted. It is possible to increase the number of required anti-aircraft units and formations, develop and implement new systems, etc.

Enduring Shield during combat work. US Department of Defense graphics

Material part

The review “Transformation of the structure of the armed forces” does not name specific types of equipment and weapons through which military air defense will be strengthened. However, available information about the latest developments commissioned by the Pentagon allows us to imagine what systems we are talking about. In addition, it becomes clear what capabilities air defense will gain thanks to such products.

To strengthen military air defense and missile defense with minimal costs for rearmament and logistics, a promising air defense system under the code Enduring Shield is currently being developed. In the near future, these very complexes may become part of IFPC battalions and provide protection against small air attack weapons and missiles.

Enduring Shield is a stationary anti-aircraft system with an AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel detection radar, a unified combat control system and four (typical) guided missile launchers. At the first stage it is planned to use the aviation AIM-9X Sidewinder, and in the future a new surface-to-air product will appear. The launcher can carry up to 10-15 transport and launch containers with missiles. The interception range, depending on the missile used, should be 15-20 km.

Batteries for combating small UAVs may receive the same equipment or another model with similar capabilities. In addition, several promising air defense systems with a compact lightweight missile optimized for intercepting drones are currently being developed. In addition, not only air defense systems, but also electronic warfare systems can receive new types of batteries. Active work is also underway in this area.

Experienced Coyote air defense system in stationary and mobile versions. Photo by Raytheon

Air defense units of the M-SHORAD type will most likely receive a ready-made model of the same name. Several years ago, the Pentagon began deploying the M-SHORAD missile and gun system, built on a Stryker wheeled chassis. This product is equipped with a 30 mm automatic cannon using programmable fuse projectiles and also carries FIM-92 Stinger missiles. Such an air defense missile system will be able to hit air targets at ranges of up to 4-4,5 km.

It is quite possible that, in parallel with the restructuring of the troops and the creation of new air defense units, promising anti-aircraft systems with missiles and guns will be developed. Such products will be able to enter service after the completion of the formation of new units and subunits, both to strengthen them and as part of future rearmament.

Overdue transformations

Thus, the Pentagon is trying to monitor the general situation in the world and respond to its changes. The US leadership decided that now the country's main potential adversaries are Russia and China. They have developed and well-equipped armies, and this must be taken into account when improving the American armed forces.

The Pentagon is developing and implementing various programs aimed at continuing military development and improving all the main indicators of the armed forces. According to the latest plans, a special place in them will be occupied by the process of optimizing and improving air and missile defense. The first steps in this direction are already being taken, and all the desired results will be achieved over the next few years.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

Very good, air defense is an extremely resource-intensive branch of the military. And the Pentagon’s sturgeon regarding aviation and other things will have to be cut, and an extra sleeper on the back of the camel of the American economy will not hurt.

[JD1979]

They won’t have to cut anything, all of the above does not require huge capital investments, and a significant part is already being produced. They will simply saturate the troops with additional complexes and gradually introduce new models. Moreover, they have nowhere to rush, they are not waging war. And we can’t even buy guns, let alone make a decision about equipping them with them. Although they have long been talked about and asked for protection against drones. How to make shells with PP for MZA. The Americans must give them credit for being able to react very quickly at the state level. And we only have volunteers.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: JD1979

They won’t have to cut anything, all of the above does not require huge capital investments, and a significant part is already being produced. They will simply saturate the troops with additional complexes and gradually introduce new models.

Yeah... Even “simply saturating” these means, but creating missiles against promising models? You can’t shoot down the same UMPC with just any aircraft missile, but most Western air defense systems are built on them.

[JD1979]

Well... they can afford it, especially since they are actually expanding functionality based on existing mass-produced products. Regarding the UMPC... why shoot them down if it’s much easier to shoot down the carrier before resetting? And not all of them have systems based on V-V missiles. The same Israeli complex can easily work on such a relatively low-speed and low-maneuverable target. And if not AIM-9x, then AIM-120 may well knock down UABs. Now they are making small-sized missiles for small targets such as UAVs. I’m more than sure (I myself have written about this more than once that they are needed as KAZs for military aviation aircraft, AWACS and strategists) that it will be like with the UMPC - they will rush to repeat it like scalded ones when it hits their face painfully again.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: JD1979

Regarding the UMPC... why shoot them down if it’s much easier to shoot down the carrier before resetting?

But not everyone has the range (few of them, only Patra, to be more precise))) has an air defense system for this. And superiority in fighters is not particularly effective here.

[JD1979]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But not everyone has ranges (few of them, only Patra, to be more precise)))

With a range of 30-40 km for our “aerodynamic” bombs, NASAMS and European SAMPT can easily get them.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And superiority in fighters is not particularly effective here.

Quite the opposite)) given their superiority in reconnaissance systems and the fact that the main air defense task is given to fighters, the first thing our bombers will encounter are AIM-120 and METEOR)) and they will cope with it perfectly.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: JD1979

With a range of 30-40 km for our “aerodynamic” bombs

You have been deceived, the figure has long exceeded 60, according to some sources we are talking about a hundred, and without engines. Well, in addition to bombs, no one canceled missiles, but we have them.

Quote: JD1979

NASAMS and European SAMPT easily get them.

But only the AIM-120D can hit for a hundred, because when launched from the ground, the range is reduced, and noticeably. This also means that the air defense systems will be located right next to the line, which obviously will not improve their health.

Quote: JD1979

Air defense is given specifically to fighters, the first thing our bombers will encounter are AIM-120 and METEOR)) and they will cope with it perfectly.

And this is the task of our fighters and air defense systems. And OTRK - for airfields.

Well, once again, even air defense systems that have already been developed in production require considerable resources simply to increase further production, it turns out ugly with shells, and they are simpler than missiles, not to mention air defense systems... And we have a high-precision weapon, and an effective one at that. It will eat up more resources, unfortunately for you.

[JD1979]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

You have been deceived, the figure has long exceeded 60, according to some sources we are talking about a hundred, and without engines.

You believe advertising too much. such a thing as a Soviet AB with the aerodynamics of a flying iron))) will fly 100 km only from an altitude of 40 kilometers and a release speed of 3k+ So 40 km is still the limit, and 60... maybe some with a fairing with 15+ km and throw .

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But only the AIM-120D can hit for a hundred, because when launched from the ground the range is reduced, and noticeably

It is noticeable, but until they make normal batteries with high aerodynamic quality, NASAMS is quite sufficient for the carrier. Especially if you don’t fire it in advance.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And this is the task of our fighters and air defense systems. And OTRK - for airfields.

Yeah, for the fighters that we have in common. Modern. For which only the Su-35 and Su-57 can be considered, the rest is slag. And this bully nose will meet with a cover group of strikers, which can be 3-4 times larger than ours, and even with full support in the form of AWACS, satellites and UAVs. Eat, as they say, don’t mess yourself up.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Well, once again, even air defense systems that have already been tested in production require considerable resources simply to increase further production, how ugly it turns out with shells, but they are simpler than missiles, not to mention air defense systems...

Of course they do))) Don’t forget about yourself either))) They essentially didn’t start anything there either, except for small-scale deliveries for the sake of testing. And even then raids of 6-8 missiles were not completely intercepted.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And the presence of high-precision technology, and an effective one at that, will consume even more resources, unfortunately.

Dear, I’m glad that we have a high-precision device, but for some reason you forget that they also have it))) and a lot of other things didn’t fly at us. Therefore, so that there are no regrets later, take off your rose-colored glasses.))) and pray that it will continue to be like this, or even better, remember the past of the cap troops.

[Vladimir_2U]

Those. Are you saying that strengthening air defense systems will not require resources at all? Oh well.
The characteristics of Western weapons are greatly exaggerated.

[JD1979]

Where did I write this? It was you who wrote that expanding air defense capabilities will literally force other programs to be cut)). And my opinion is that such an expansion due to simple saturation with serial means of a predominantly small radius will not require any EXTRA COSTS, and not the absence of them at all. Well, if they stop spending on Ukraine, then they can put their own Shorad at almost every fence. Very expensive - these are systems such as S-400 and Patriot.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: JD1979

Very expensive - these are systems such as S-400 and Patriot.

With Russia, not counting China, even having UMPC bombs, such systems will be needed.

[paul3390]

You can’t create something like the TOR based on an aircraft rocket or the Stinger.. But it still shows very high efficiency.. This means that you will still have to invest in new developments..

[JD1979]

Yes, but these are initially different missiles based on different guidance systems.

[antivirus]

The main thing is whether they will force such a structure to be introduced into the NATO armies. For European money, for orders from the US military-industrial complex.
Trump pushed 2%, it's time to plant jerboas at 3,5%

[Vadim S]

With their money and advanced electronics, they can accept any program, most importantly, immediately release huge series, and not a couple of samples for exhibitions

[alexoff]

Well, their military-industrial complex, fortunately for us, prefers to do little, time-consuming and expensive for their money. You can't fight much with IR-guided missiles

[JD1979]

Quote from alexoff

Well, their military-industrial complex, fortunately for us, prefers to do little, time-consuming and expensive for their money.

Can you tell me how many F-35s have been produced and what is the production rate per year, compared to the Su-57?

[alexoff]

It is not the F35s that fight, but the missiles and bombs on them. If a thousand cruise missiles were fired, and a hundred thousand bombs, then a thousand F35s will spend them in a moment. And yes, the United States has the ability to produce tens of times more. Compare how many phantoms were released and how many F35s.

[JD1979]

The logic of the examples is hand-face.

[alexoff]

No, you just don’t understand what we’re talking about at all, so it’s better to hide

[JD1979]

hmm... I wonder why in games the players and in chats people with the nicknames alex*** are the most unskilled and narrow-minded?

Quote from alexoff

If a thousand cruise missiles were fired, and a hundred thousand bombs, then a thousand F35s will spend them in a moment.

Could you please tell me when the need will come for all F-35s around the world to take off at the same time and drop all the bombs and missiles at the same time?)))) I’m no longer asking where they will drop being on the territory of the USA or Japan)))
So take your own advice - hide, preferably forever. the holidays haven't started yet.

[Mikhail Maslov]

The US Department of Defense draws conclusions and predicts future military actions. Moreover, it moves from words to deeds. This is a wide range from the creation of new units to the adoption of new models. This is response to threats. And if we take the contour of control and interaction, it becomes clear, our strike-reconnaissance complex is only at the very beginning of its journey. As for air defense, despite all the criticism, the same Patriot in Ukraine has proven itself not bad, and so has Nasams. They will draw conclusions and put up a unified reconnaissance-strike complex with the addition of new complexes for the fight against UAVs and short-range missiles. We'll see what happens.

[KVU-NSVD]

In military and facility air defense AT THIS STAGE we need
EW with a modular structure for rapid modification to new operating ranges
Laser installations with OLS for combating small UAVs
Small-caliber artillery with programmable detonation shells
Small mass-produced missiles ("Nails") to increase and reduce the cost of used missiles within the framework of existing short- and medium-range air defense systems
Saturation of troops with portable electronic warfare (again, preferably modular design) and the already notorious shotguns. It is even possible to create something like an AGS for a 12-gauge shotgun cartridge / 76 magnum.
It is necessary to create a radar field to detect low-flying targets based on balloons.
All this concerns our military and facility air defense. Judging by the article, those on the other side view the problem in much the same way.

[Panzerjäger]

Spend missiles on a UAV that is based on a commercial quadcopter? Americans are true to themselves. Only then will they begin to moan that something, or rather, everything went wrong, and the missile defense system flatly refuses to aim at drones made of composite materials with electric motors, because neither the guidance radar nor the IR homing heads “see” them. And the appearance of their air defense systems is not ideal; mobile launchers are not shown.
Despite all our problems, the basis of military air defense is made up of self-propelled maneuverable air defense systems and air defense systems. For example, the latest modifications of the Tor air defense system, used against the Wehrmacht, are capable of firing while moving. Like ZPRK 2S6M1.
But to combat FPV UAVs, such as “Shahed” / “Geranium”, completely different means are needed: for example, the good old six-barreled 20-mm ZU M167 and M163 “Vulcan”. Their fire control system with a gyrostar-stabilized sight with a counting device, a radar rangefinder, a telescopic and night sight, if supplemented with a laser rangefinder connected to an electronic ballistic computer, can provide a fairly effective fight against UAVs. And the entire division of towed M167 installations will cost less than one missile defense system.