NATO begins to build a new air defense/missile defense system on its eastern flank aimed against Russia

NATO is significantly strengthening its eastern flank by building a new air defense system against Russia. Three of the alliance's countries will soon deploy the new systems Defense. This is reported by the Telegram channel “Two Majors”.

Romania, which borders Ukraine, is buying four AN/MPQ-64 F1 Sentinel radars, along with all the necessary support equipment and services. The potential sale has already been approved by the US State Department, but the contract itself has not yet been signed. Remarkably, these radars, capable of tracking up to 60 targets at a range of up to 120 km, were developed for the NASAMS 2 air defense system, and Romania does not have such air defense systems. Bucharest is likely planning to buy them or receive them from one of the alliance countries on a temporary basis.

Bulgaria is also strengthening its air defense, purchasing NATO-style air defense systems for the first time. We are talking about the German IRIS-T SLM system, the purchase of which was announced this month. Moreover, the contract provides for the purchase of up to five additional SLM launchers and one SLX by 2030. Part of the cost will be offset by the transfer of its own air defense systems to Ukraine.

Another country that is strengthening its air defense system is Lithuania. This country has purchased one NASAMS SAM system and has also ordered the modernization of two NASAMS 3 batteries purchased from Norway in 2017. Lithuania is also purchasing short-range RBS-70 NG MANPADS specifically to combat drones.

As noted, all decisions were made based on the experience of the conflict in Ukraine; previously, NATO simply did not pay such attention to air defense/missile defense.

Comments

[lisikat2]

I wonder, if it weren’t for Russia, then who would they build the lines against?
They are interested in having an enemy. Otherwise, NATO is an unnecessary structure, devouring a huge budget.

[Vladimir Vladimirovich Vorontsov]

"Otherwise, NATO is a superfluous structure"

͟Ц͟е͟l͟i͟ ͟N͟A͟T͟O͟:
- “Keep the Russians out of Europe,
Americans in Europe
and the Germans - under Europe" ...
(Hastings Ismay, First Secretary General of NATO)

[lisikat2]

"Russia outside of Europe in that case, Asia"?

[svp67]

Quote from lisikat2

I wonder, if it weren’t for Russia, then who would they build the lines against?

It seems you missed a few years of life. Previously, they built it in Europe against Iranian and North Korean missiles... and only now have they admitted that this system will work against Russian missiles as well.
The conflict in Ukraine has actually pushed them to completely reconsider the principles of building the entire air defense system, and they are now taking the USSR air defense system as a basis, especially in terms of equipment and structure of the air defense forces. The number of assets and structures in NATO armies is growing sharply, it remains to be seen how much time they will need to equip them with the necessary amount of equipment and train personnel. According to the most optimistic estimates, no less than five years

[Clear]

Quote: svp67

The number of assets and structures in NATO armies is growing sharply, it remains to be seen how much time they will need to equip them with the necessary amount of equipment and train personnel. According to the most optimistic estimates, no less than five years

Sergey, so it turns out that the West is doing well (tautology), starting with the operation "perestroika" where they placed their appointees in all positions of government of the country without exception. So the West is confident that in the end "they won't kill us painfully anyway."

[lisikat2]

"Missed a few years ago" I was not on the site..

[ZovSailor]

svp67
Today, 10: 20
It seems you missed a few years of life. Previously, they built it in Europe against Iranian and North Korean missiles... and only now have they admitted that this system will work against Russian missiles as well.
The conflict in Ukraine has generally prompted them to completely reconsider the principles of building the entire air defense system, and they are now taking the USSR air defense system as a basis, especially in terms of equipment and structure of the air defense forces.

So far, we can only make preliminary forecasts, but most opinions are inclined to support the victory of the Russian Federation in Bandera State; the slow dying out of NATO is not needed in gay Europe; and the Russian Federation needs to be expelled from the continent of Eurasia!
One of the main prerequisites for the extinction will be the election of the shot Ushatik as a prez, which can speed up the process.

[svp67]

Quote: ZovSailor

slow dying of NATO is not needed in gay Europe

Yes, yes... but there is a real threat of NATO disintegrating into several European military-political alliances, with centers in London, Paris and Warsaw

[orionvitt]

Quote: svp67

According to the most optimistic estimates, at least five years.

They took the words right out of my mouth. The contracts haven't been signed yet, just intentions, and in the area of ​​armaments, air defense is the most complex and expensive. Both in terms of production and in terms of the professionalism of the personnel. Plus the fact that the West doesn't really have much money anymore. Everyone has a colossal budget deficit, huge internal and external debts, social services are being cut, migrants are being fed, farmers are being pressured, production of literally everything is being cut. If you look at the economic reports (Western), even taking into account that they tend to embellish the situation, the spectacle is frankly dismal. And it doesn't encourage a turn for the better. But what a bravado.

[opuonmed]

Quote from lisikat2

I wonder, if it weren’t for Russia, then who would they build the lines against?

They would find someone, everything is done artificially for the sake of hegemony over everything.

[BAI]

They are preparing for war. And we are not. Then, under the missiles, in the scalded cat mode, we will have to make up for lost time.

[Clear]

Quote: BAI

They are preparing for war. And we are not. Then, under the missiles, in the scalded cat mode, we will have to make up for lost time.

And how can we make up for it if practically all government bodies are headed by protégés of the Western fifth column, and they simply massively sabotage the work of their bodies...

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: BAI

They are preparing for war. We are not.

They are at war, and we are still using the entire Russian economy in some operation.

Quote: BAI

Then, under the missiles, in the mode of a scalded cat, you will have to make up for lost time

The main thing is that our missiles can overcome this air defense/missile defense system...

[Ascetic]

This means that the Bandar-logs will get less; their own shirt is closer to the body.
The enemy's air defense forces are now a mere snout and a hoof. They were left just after August, when everything that the Banderites had dragged into the borderland as air defense forces, including the "Patriots" that were quite inadequate for this purpose, was subjected to a major massacre. There are many images of objective control on the Internet. So the hot enthusiasm in the form of deliveries of Western air defense/missile defense systems to the Ukrainian Reich directly for slaughter, especially the expensive and already quite scarce ones, will be greatly reduced, and only crumbs of Soviet systems remain, and even those are in an unknown state.

[Zaurbek]

We cannot do without the revival of IRBMs.

[Clear]

Quote: Zaurbek

We cannot do without the revival of IRBMs.

Of course, IRBM won't hurt. But, you can come down to earth and first understand that the General Staff and the government overslept or sabotaged the creation of territorial defense in Russia in response to its creation in Ukraine. Ukraine created territorial defense back in 2022, and all our media then screamed: "- the f.o.h.l.s have finally panicked and are handing out weapons to the population, to anyone who wants them..."
The creation of territorial defense by the enemy had a positive effect on the training of the main units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. A reserve appeared in which fighters are tested and trained.

[orionvitt]

Territorial defense is the weakest link in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. And what kind of beast is this, territorial defense? It is good, for example, to protect a populated area from a raid by some bandits, but it is completely powerless against a modern and equipped army. And by the way, the fighters are tested in combat units, and not in some territorial defense, where narrow-minded Ukrainian men went, hoping not to end up at the front, but to sit it out closer to home. But it was not like that.

[Glagol1]

If they are afraid, it means they respect, or they are simply very afraid. Flag in hand, feed the striped vampires. The countries mentioned are very poor by Western standards.

[Lech from Android.]

NATO begins to build a new air defense/missile defense system on its eastern flank aimed against Russia

Who would have thought.
Having carried out an expansion across the territory of Eastern Europe, NATO has come up against the borders of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine... and now this beast wants to swallow these territories too.
We will objectively have to prepare for a military clash with NATO in order to survive...war is inevitable with such rabid Russophobia in the West.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: Lech from Android.

We will objectively have to prepare for a military clash with NATO in order to survive...war is inevitable given such rabid Russophobia in the West...

...and with such liberalism in Russia...
Everyone is afraid of offending various “funders” and “herrs”, so as not to lose what they “honestly” stole and invested...

[Or me]

That's too much. One twin 23mm ZU would be enough for her.

Another country that is strengthening its air defense system is Lithuania. This country has purchased one NASAMS SAM system,

[Stardock]

NATO's budget is 10 times bigger than Russia's. That's a fact.
One of the main reasons for the collapse of the USSR was the exorbitant defense spending. The country could not withstand such a burden. Products disappeared from the stores. There was no one to produce them. On the black market, goods cost crazy money.
With the beginning of the market economy and the liberation of prices, crazy inflation began in the country. Up to 2200%. Or prices increased 22 times in a year.
These are facts that must be accepted as truth, and not thrown into angry hysterics at me. No need to suggest closing schools and hospitals altogether, not building roads and bridges, stopping paying pensions and child benefits - and throwing all the money into producing missiles to break through Western air defense systems. Let's wring their necks! No need to suggest dropping nuclear charges on London, Paris and Berlin so that NATO shuts up and, of course, immediately runs away in fear into the bushes and we will immediately win, take a few more Ukrainian villages. Victory! The psychiatric team works around the clock.

[rocket757]

One of the main reasons for the collapse of the USSR was the exorbitant defense spending.

. We can assume/admit that this was one of many reasons, BUT, we will still run into one of the... main/non-main reasons, that the destruction of the USSR was facilitated by the very top, the leadership of the country, where they climbed, pushed through people who were DESTROYERS, and not creators.
No matter how you look at it, there were no fundamental, insurmountable reasons for the destruction of the USSR, there was... betrayal, incompetence, etc., at the very top, in the leadership, in the person of specific figures.

[Stardock]

I remember the times of the USSR very well. I followed those events actively. I don't think that in the Central Committee of the CPSU, in the Politburo (the highest real organ of power in the USSR) there were traitors, renegades, etc. They wanted the best, but it turned out as always.))
There sat people who sacredly believed in the precepts of Lenin. Any deviation from those norms was regarded as betrayal and treason. Revisionism was considered the gravest crime betraying the most sacred thing - the construction of communism throughout the world.
In the 60s, the Communist Parties of Yugoslavia and China took a different path, which led them to a break in party relations with the USSR and led to a conflict on Damansky Island.
And these countries already in the 70-90s achieved great success and developed well. China began reforms earlier and their results are well known.
The essence of their reforms is the introduction of market relations.

In the USSR, the market was impossible. It was considered a crime.
Socialism in its classical form was not viable as an economic and political system. The economy spent huge amounts of money from oil sales and did not develop.
For example, there was a shortage of grain in the country. 20 million tons and they bought it in Canada. Or there was a real famine in the USSR. Isn't that a disgrace in an agrarian country?
To put it even more simply, no one had an incentive to work well. Not a worker, not an engineer, not a director. Everyone received almost the same.

No matter how much you improve a locomotive, it won't go any faster.
If only the best machinists were there.

Under Gorbachev, as an option, it would have been possible to carry out reforms like the Chinese ones. And today we could have been a powerful, strong country respected by the whole world, a country integrated into the world economy with world wage levels. Like the Czech Republic, East Germany.
We would have had a successful Superjet, successfully developed deposits on Sakhalin, Yamal, in the Arctic. Western investments in our factories raised our industry to a new world level.
A striking example is Renault, which invested billions in AVTOVAZ, carried out modernization there and began producing European-class cars.
But it didn't happen. Thanks to the indifferent majority of citizens.

[rocket757]

They wanted the best, but it turned out as always.))

. There have been many arguments about this topic! And what is the result?
There is no consensus and there probably won't be one.
By the way, the question has been raised many times: For whom did they want the best???

[Stardock]

They wanted to keep their power and money. There is nothing new in this desire for people sitting in power. And now it is the same. They sit until they are jailed or overthrown. Stories about elections are for the media.

[rocket757]

How many people, so many opinions.
And so, those who have seized power change for the worse, as a rule...

[Stardock]

Rocket, the forum here is for smart people only to exchange opinions and information.
Stupid people consider this a place of quarrels, insults and provocations. But I don't communicate with such people. ))

[rocket757]

Communication, exchange of opinions... that's basically it.
However, you can also find something instructive here.
If you manage to bring someone to their senses, that’s a great success.
Still, many people write for a reason, but with meaning and benefit for others.

[Stardock]

I was attracted to the site because knowledgeable and qualified people often speak here.
You believe them. They are practitioners, people of action, not windbags and braggarts. Very interesting review articles from journalists about the development of technology, about its prospects. It is obvious that people seriously prepared. I do not know of any other sites like this.

[rocket757]

So yes, how to evaluate the work of the site, this is also a personal opinion...
Overall, there are benefits.

[Dart]

Liberal mantra, copy-paste.

[TermNachTer]

If it turns out like in Banderland, then it's better not to start. It's better to spend the money on arranging burial sites))

[rocket757]

So everything was heading in the direction that the foreigners would come to their senses and start trying to do something, to protect themselves, as it seems to them...
In that case, it is worth reminding them that most countries disappeared, became "third world" countries, as they say, due to internal contradictions, troubles, and from the outside, as a rule, it rolls in later, and does not always roll in at all.

[voyaka uh]

Forgot about Germany.
And Germany purchased an Israeli specialized long-range missile defense system - Arrow-3.
Interception of ballistic missiles in space before they enter the country's airspace.

[Maikcg]

And what if Iskander flies to Germany at an altitude of 50 km? Which is half the conventional boundary of space. And Arrow-3 says: sorry, I couldn't...

[voyaka uh]

There are two other systems for such missiles: Arrow-2 and the new David Sling.
David Sling is going to be bought by Finland.
For Germany, defense against medium-range ballistic missiles and ICBMs is more relevant

[Maikcg]

Why is it relevant? ICBMs will fly away (and promise not to return) via the North Pole (and some via the South Pole), medium-range ones still need to be made or bought from Iran. And from Kaliningrad to Berlin is 530 km in a straight line. Iskander is flying, hello to the Reichstag Or the Dagger, it is also not ballistic in the classical sense. But you can shoot it right from St. Petersburg.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

There are two other systems for such missiles: Arrow-2 and the new David Sling.

Arrow-2 and David Sling are not about Iskander-M. Both are against TBM, which Iskander-M is not. David Sling is an analogue of ERINT in its purpose.

Quote: voyaka uh

David Sling is going to be bought by Finland.

It costs them less than ERINT.

Quote: voyaka uh

For Germany, defense against medium-range ballistic missiles and ICBMs is more relevant

For Germany, protection against IRBMs is irrelevant unless Germany is going to fight Iran. And these systems will not protect against ICBMs.

[voyaka uh]

Iskander-M is a powerful, but completely outdated missile. A monoblock of huge
dimensions and weight. Brakes sharply at the terminal section, up to supersonic speed.
Correction at the terminal section does not always work,
as its application has shown.
The interception is difficult due to the short reaction time, but there is nothing special.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

Iskander-M is a powerful, but completely outdated missile. A monoblock of huge
dimensions and weight. Brakes sharply at the terminal section, up to supersonic speed.
Correction at the terminal section does not always work,
as its application has shown.

This is some kind of Israeli Iskander-M.

Quote: voyaka uh

The interception is difficult due to the short reaction time, but there is nothing special.

The Russian Iskander-M also flies non-ballistic, below the altitudes of ARROW and above the altitudes of ERINT (MIM-104F (MSE)) and David Sling.

P.S. Here they refer to the Germans:
https://topwar.ru/251737-nemeckij-doklad-postavlennye-kievu-zrk-patriot-sbivajut-ne-bolee-treti-rossijskih-raket.html

[voyaka uh]

"This is some kind of Israeli Iskander-M."///
----
The Israeli Iskander is a Lora ballistic missile.
It throws the same warhead, at the same distance, along the same trajectory.
But it weighs almost half as much and is much more compact.
It was used in Karabakh.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

The Israeli Iskander is a Lora ballistic missile.
It throws the same warhead, at the same distance, along the same trajectory.

No, Lora flies like ATACMS, not like Iskander-M.

[voyaka uh]

It seems to be the same 40-50 km apogee of the trajectory, also quasi-ballistic
trajectory... What's the difference?
Only it's made of light materials. And the fuel, I suppose, is better.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

It seems to be the same 40-50 km apogee of the trajectory, also quasi-ballistic
trajectory... What's the difference?

The difference is in the trajectory itself.

[voyaka uh]

Iskander's maneuvers in the middle section of the trajectory (if that's what you're talking about) are fiction. It never does them, and never will. Regular ballistics on a low trajectory (to reduce flight time).
And the optimal interception is precisely in the middle section.
At the terminal, interception is an act of desperation.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

Iskander's maneuvers in the middle section of the trajectory (if that's what you're talking about) are fiction. It never does them, and never will.

This is some Israeli Internet version of Iskander. Who is the author of this Israeli Internet version of Iskander? Please provide a link to the material about this Israeli Internet version of Iskander with the author's name.

Quote: voyaka uh

And the optimal interception is precisely in the middle section.

The Russian Iskander maneuvers at all stages of its flight path. The type of flight path of the Russian Iskander depends on the capabilities of the opposing missile defense system.

[voyaka uh]

"Russian Iskander maneuvers at all stages of flight path"///
---
In theory... In practice, it is impossible. There are inertial forces. Maneuvering at such a speed is very, very limited. You will fly off the trajectory forever due to inertia.
In theory, Iskander hits with a CEP of 5 m. In practice, in most cases - 50+

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

In theory... In practice, it is impossible. There are inertial forces. Maneuvering at such a speed is very, very limited. You will fly off the trajectory forever due to inertia.
In theory, Iskander hits with a CEP of 5 m. In practice, in most cases - 50+

Where do you get this nonsense from? Give me a link. I am very interested in the authorship.

[voyaka uh]

David Sling is much more modern and accurate than ERINT.
David Sling has both active radar and IR scanning optics, while ERINT has only radar.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

David Sling is much more modern and accurate than ERINT.

No.

Quote: voyaka uh

David Sling has both active radar and IR scanning optics, while ERINT has only radar.

But ERINT has moment gas-dynamic control, and David Sling does not. Therefore, the reaction time of the David Sling SAM is longer, and the available overload of the David Sling SAM is less than that of the MIM-104F (MIM-104F MSE). Therefore, the requirements for the accuracy of the target sensor of David Sling are higher than those of the MIM-104F. The increased requirement for accuracy in the angular channel is ensured by the IR sensor of the angular velocity of the target line of sight and the target bearing. The speed of approach to the target and the range to the target of David Sling are ensured by the radar sensor of the target. But the IR target sensor does not see anything in the clouds, and without an IR sensor in the angular channel, accuracy cannot be ensured. But David Sling is cheaper than MIM-104F.

[voyaka uh]

David Sling - two-stage rocket. All the maneuverability of a "kill vehicle" with its gas rudders.

The multi-stage interceptor consists of a solid-fuel rocket motor booster, followed by an asymmetrical kill vehicle with advanced steering for super-maneuverability during the kill-stage. A three-pulse motor provides additional acceleration and maneuverability during the terminal phase.

[Comet]

Quote: voyaka uh

David Sling - two-stage rocket. All the maneuverability of a "kill vehicle" with its gas rudders.

I wrote above that David Sling does not have momentary control, like ERINT. Therefore, David Sling's reaction time is longer, and the available overload is less than ERINT's. And the PR department employees who wrote this text incorrectly used the term super-maneuverability.

[kill the fascist]

Air defense directed against Russia sounds somehow crooked. So far, no obvious breakthroughs are visible in the work of Western systems. In Banderastan, our army is learning to work with them and successfully destroy these air defense systems.

[voyaka uh]

There are no miracles. Sometimes missile defense systems shoot down ballistic missiles, sometimes ballistic missiles destroy missile defense positions.
But even while diverting enemy ballistic missile strikes, the missile defense system is fulfilling its purpose.
the main task is to protect the population of cities.

[Yuras_Belarus]

I'm sick of it already! Where does NATO get its "eastern flank" from? Have they already deployed a front somewhere? As long as there is no front and LBS, there are no flanks. Unions and alliances have directions, not flanks.

[Maikcg]

And have citizens thought about the efficiency of existing Western systems? And that several additional launches do not play a role in the case of Russia. A colonial tax in the form of buying useless beads.