Military Review

Will the revision of the world security system break out?

113
They quickly "worked off" the topic of striking objects from Russian ships and ... forgot? It seems like, hooray, we have proved and now everyone knows! For the layman is no longer interesting. So, it's time to talk about other topics, about other issues, about today. The event has passed.




And no.

In fact, everything is just beginning. Without fanfare, without loud statements, without a pump. Military experts are working. Work politicians. Work engineers and designers.

So, in early October, from the territory of the Caspian Sea, Russia struck the Caliber NK cruise missiles on the territory of Syria. The strike is not only unexpected in range, but also accurate. Prior to this strike, the intelligence of a probable opponent reassured its bosses. Well, no Russian Tomahawk cruise missiles. And all these "Iskander" and other installations are dangerous only for the Baltic countries and Poland. Leading European countries are not afraid of them. And the American missile defense system will cope with Russian ballistic missiles.

The Russian strike was not so much a blow to Syria as a blow to NATO. The time to spit east has passed. And the thoughtless actions of the European military no longer bring self-confidence, but fear. Fear of what else Russians will answer.

Many are now talking about the violation of the INF Treaty 1987 of the Year. According to this agreement, ground-based missiles with a range of 500-5500 km were destroyed. Just those that can work on the European (and not only) countries without any problems. Only here they forget a simple, but essential thing. Russian cruise missiles are not covered by this treaty!

A missile boat or a ship does not belong to the "ground-based". This, anyway, surface-based. Like the American "Tomahawks" on ships. And about sea basing in the contract does not say. What is the secret? Why were our friends in Europe and the USA alarmed?

And the secret is simple. And it is precisely this secret that flew one and a half thousand kilometers. And it is called ZM-14. As an astute reader already understood, this is a cruise missile designed for the Caliber NK SMKB Novator. So why before the start-up no one really paid attention to this "Caliber NK"? Why did everyone calmly look at the complex, capable of demolishing NATO bases in Europe with one blow?

A casket is not just one century just opened. Equipped with this complex export missiles. The ZM-14E missiles were called P-500. As if emphasizing that such missiles do not fly further than 500 km. But this very letter "E" with some refinement at the factory is removed quickly enough. The engines of the rocket, developed in NPO Saturn (TRDD-50, product 36МТ), allow to increase the launch range by several times. Nobody usually reads the asterisk at the very bottom of the instructions. And in vain, less shock could be.

There is one more nuance about which they are now talking little or just silent. Russian systems are not originally designed for any single rocket, but for a whole range of such products. Simply put, the launcher will fire at a ride. And such a replacement does not really change the technical characteristics of the complex.

It is no secret to anyone in the relevant services in the West that the Caliber missile will come to the Iskander launcher as if it were going home. And it is no secret that both products, if necessary, can carry YABCH. It didn’t excite anyone there because the nuclear warhead with a range of 500 km didn’t scare anyone in the West. And then this turn ...

Yes, the power of a tactical missile charge is incomparable with ICBMs. Hundreds of kilotons against tens of megatons. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki say that 15 kilotons is enough. And when it comes to the order of 300-500 ct ... There is something to think about in Europe. And in all, without exception. No, in Spain and Portugal they can still sleep peacefully. Until.

A year or two ago, Russia warned NATO and the US about retaliatory actions in the event of deploying missile defense systems and heavy weapons near our borders. Remember how often the name of the Kaliningrad region sounded? How many times have the leaders of the country at different sites warned the Europeans about an adequate response.

And then suddenly such talk stopped. Why install in the Kaliningrad region, if the missile pontoon in the fire pond of the village of Pupkino in the Leningrad region is quite capable of “covering” the NATO base somewhere near Lisbon? Or a missile boat, for example, in Lake Peipsi or Pskov Lake.

Syrian attacks showed Europe all the futility of the missile defense system and air defense, which is created by the Americans. Showed the practical vulnerability of European cities in the event of a global conflict. Because the missile defense is not yet, and what can fly from Russia is already available. And not the fact that the missile defense system will be able to cope with the flown even on the hypothetical 80-90%.

Now the answer to the question posed at the beginning of the article. Where is the reaction of European politicians, where is the howl of the European and American press, where are the proposals for negotiations, the creation of contact groups?

Europeans and those who really control Europe are at a loss. More recently, Americans could afford to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty (for example, on European missile defense) and do everything they considered necessary. More recently, the appearance of a battalion group or brigade in Poland or the Baltics strained our military. But it was all over.

The 1987 Treaty of the Year is now the only stop that saves Europe, and indeed the world, from global security changes. Moreover, such a change, the consequences of which are not yet predictable. Politicians are now frantically seeking a way out of the stalemate. To keep the contract is difficult. And for both sides. And to develop a new, similar, in the new political realities is difficult. And Putin is not at all like Gorbachev. The interests of their country will not sell for the beautiful wrappers of Western goods.

The party was postponed, the parties took time to think.
Author:
113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 2 November 2015 06: 43
    15
    Quickly "worked out" the topic of striking targets from Russian ships and ... forgot?
    how so! you will forget about it ... laughing once a week exactly remind! laughing
    1. domokl
      domokl 2 November 2015 06: 49
      11
      lol That's why the pike in the lake, so that the crucian wouldn’t doze off ... Hi Yurich hi
      1. atalef
        atalef 2 November 2015 07: 06
        +4
        Syrian strikes have shown Europe the worthlessness of the missile defense and air defense system that the Americans are creating. They showed the practical vulnerability of European cities in the event of a global conflict. Because there is no missile defense yet, and what can fly from Russia is already in stock. And it’s not a fact that missile defense will be able to cope with a flown even on hypothetical 80-90

        Good morning everyone !
        Hi Roman!
        Just a question, I'm not quite in the subject about air defense
        Caliber (as I understand it) is a universal-based cruise missile.
        In general, nothing (as I understand it) - no different from an ax.
        Doesn't protection against cruise missiles exist? and they are not detected by air defense and missile defense?
        What is the difference between basing the KR in a * pond *, from launching it from a submarine, a ship, an airplane, a ground launcher? - axes start from the same thing.
        So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
        And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?
        The enemy’s presence of a symmetrical response, in the absence of an attacker with similar missile defense systems - seems to be unable to change the balance, especially dramatically.
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 2 November 2015 07: 34
          11
          Quote: atalef
          So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.

          Hello San, well, for example: they showed that all of Europe (read-NATO) is accessible, moreover, nuclear weapons and "missile defense", as that, to put it mildly, did not see the missiles ... which leads to sad thoughts of other people's military ... wink
          1. atalef
            atalef 2 November 2015 08: 07
            10
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich
            Hello San, well, for example: they showed that all of Europe (read-NATO) is accessible, moreover, nuclear weapons and "missile defense", like that, to put it mildly, did not see the missiles ... which leads to sad thoughts of other people's military


            Hey . Andrew !!
            The week began horribly. in a plane crash with my family my classmate (classmate.) died in peace and eternal memory.
            Well, back to the topic.
            Well, first of all, no one knows whether she saw it or not, especially. what the USA did say. that they not only saw, but also knew which ones did not fly and where they fell. there were also pictures of debris.
            But suppose. what . what they saw is a lie. and debris - lies
            Iraqi Kurdistan (where the missiles flew) - all the same, agree this is not the missile direction of Europe and the United States, so that there would be full coverage of the anti-aircraft defense and air defense zone
            Then, still the question. KR (Caliber) - is not weapons based on new physical principles or completely new weapons (unknown to this day)
            Does anyone really think that air defense and missile defense systems are created without taking into account the possibility of combat employment of missile defense?
            Type. did missile defense, but about KR - oops, forgot?
            Increasing the range is certainly wonderful, but again I have a question - does increasing the range of the Kyrgyz Republic make it invulnerable and undetectable, and if everything is so scary, how can Russia respond (from the point of view of air defense and missile defense) to an analogous ax?
            Now . that someone would answer me the same.
            I'm not saying that. what a caliber opportunity. they were certainly a surprise for the adversary.
            The rocket is not new. Yes, it is also exported in a more truncated version and it was hardly difficult for the intelligence services to calculate the increase in its range.
            The fact that this, of course, does not add to the joy of NATO. Is understandable. but to bury their entire air defense and missile defense system - in one Caliber - well, it’s somehow optimistic. I would say.
            1. Sirocco
              Sirocco 2 November 2015 08: 31
              17
              Quote: atalef
              but to bury their entire air defense and missile defense system - in one Caliber - well, it’s somehow optimistic. I would say.

              And who told you about the funeral of Caliber? MASS MEDIA? I think in the case of hour X, all the aces will be taken out of the sleeves, both with us and with the adversary. I think that the surprises are not over, if they do not write about them, this does not mean that they are not. But here in VO, we are not at the headquarters of the GRU, and therefore we don’t know much, and we don’t know.
              Further, the very fact that the Caliber is used with a nuclear warhead, not a ballistic missile launcher, will sober up many, and not the fact that only air defense and missile defense systems will be hit. There is something to think about for the EU population. Although the EU population is now threatened with other weapons, Relocation-1. Which they don’t put in anything, and after 20 years, when a new, young, generation of immigrants grows up, they will sweep away the Europeans as on the Ukrainian Maidan, and kind, nice Europeans will be servants of the new, right Europeans.
              I think the EU is held hostage by the United States, both in confronting Russia and with immigrants.
              That in the first case is fatal and immediately, that in the second episode, death, but slowly.
              1. atalef
                atalef 2 November 2015 08: 37
                0
                Quote: Sirocco
                And who told you about the funeral of Caliber? MASS MEDIA?

                Well, we are discussing an article

                Quote: Sirocco
                I think in the case of hour X, all the aces will be taken out of the sleeves, both with us and with the adversary

                Of course
                Quote: Sirocco
                , if they don’t write about them, this does not mean that they are not

                on both sides. I think
                Quote: Sirocco
                Further, the very fact of using Caliber with a nuclear warhead, not a ballistic missile launcher, sober many


                no longer sober up. it will be the end of all and those who attack and those who attack
                Quote: Sirocco
                There is something to think about for the EU population.


                Do you imagine one-sided nuclear war?
                Quote: Sirocco
                and in 20 years, when a new, young, generation of immigrants grows up, they will sweep away the Europeans as on the Ukrainian Maidan

                troubles must be experienced as they come in. Who knows what will happen in a year. and you offer to wait 20 years
                Quote: Sirocco
                I think the EU is held hostage by the United States, both in opposition to Russia and with immigrants


                Well, Europe will disappear (by the way, Russia’s immediate neighbor is 0 — of course I will laugh. But suppose
                What about the USA?
                1. Sirocco
                  Sirocco 2 November 2015 08: 57
                  +9
                  Quote: atalef
                  Quote: Sirocco
                  There is something to think about for the EU population.

                  Do you imagine one-sided nuclear war?

                  Well, what does it happen, it just happened that the EU population is in a dream in connection with the deployment of missile defense, it’s clear that these are potential targets, with all the consequences, and the EU population in pink glasses, or turned on the invulnerability toggle switch?
                  Quote: atalef
                  and you offer to wait 20 years

                  About five years ago, I began to speculate about what is happening in the EU with immigrants, and gave Europe about 50 years to replace the indigenous population with immigrants from the BV. Wrong, everything goes much faster.
                  Well, about the troubles, then they must be anticipated and warned, and when the roof burns, it is too late.
                  Quote: atalef
                  Well Europe will disappear

                  Europe will not disappear, it is part of the mainland laughing here with the population, a problem may arise. Wrote the above post. Moreover, the legalization of gay marriage, and similar know - how. Which are not so popular with immigrants with BV.
                  Quote: atalef
                  What about the USA?

                  Like what? they expect that this will not affect them all, they are in an obviously advantageous position on the island. I will answer your question)))))))
                  Do you imagine one-sided nuclear war?
              2. Alexey-74
                Alexey-74 2 November 2015 11: 00
                +3
                I think we still have a trump card up their sleeve, because recently we did not particularly discuss the KR "Caliber", and now the "turnip" is scratching the whole world ...
                1. dorz
                  dorz 2 November 2015 12: 49
                  +1
                  The fact that missile defense in Europe can be destroyed does not raise any doubts, but you also need to understand that a system that monitors the space to the Urals is not good, and is only one link in global tracking.
                2. afdjhbn67
                  afdjhbn67 4 November 2015 15: 45
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey-74
                  and KR "Caliber", and now the "turnip" is scratching the whole world ...

                  In general, the feeling that a turnip about this only on VO is scratched .. well, languages ​​along the way ..
              3. satris
                satris 2 November 2015 11: 39
                +2
                They will sweep it away, but ... an old song comes to mind: "We will tear the whole world of violence to the ground, and then ..." Will these "new and correct" Europeans be? Will they not bring with them what they fled from their countries? Especially in the absence of proper education and culture, which are very necessary to preserve "Europeanness". And if there is a mess both in the "old homeland" and in the new one, then ... where will the "new and correct Europeans" run next for a "new and better" life? Will they have this very "next"? Yes, you can live without working on a generous (by their standards) allowance, but not for long - as long as there is someone to provide for this good life. But "then" - won't you have to remember the half-forgotten skills of cannibalism? After all, it was said somewhere that civilization and culture are superficial, and if all this is "ripped open", then at the base there will be a semi-savage creature, capable only of swinging a club and devouring its own kind - on the ruins of the Vienna Theater.
              4. mav1971
                mav1971 2 November 2015 17: 26
                +4
                Quote: Sirocco
                Quote: atalef
                but to bury their entire air defense and missile defense system - in one Caliber - well, it’s somehow optimistic. I would say.

                And who told you about the funeral of Caliber? MASS MEDIA? I think in the case of hour X, all the aces will be taken out of the sleeves, both with us and with the adversary. I think that the surprises are not over, if they do not write about them, this does not mean that they are not. But here in VO, we are not at the headquarters of the GRU, and therefore we don’t know much, and we don’t know.


                The world has changed since the time of the ambush regiment policy. cleaning guns with bricks and other aces in the sleeves.
                Remember!
                Aces hidden in the sleeve lead to unreasonable, but conflict.
                To the wars.
                One is mistaken about the "underestimated potential" of the other and starts a war.
                As a result, "both" still suffer !!!
                It’s like in nature.
                Porcupine knows how to spread its needles. The boa constrictor does not know. Swallows a porcupine, he opened the needles inside - and both died.


                So.
                The last 70 years - no one seeks to hide his aces.
                On the contrary, directly or indirectly, they are made clear about them.
                Teachings, tests that can "telemetry" potential enemies.
                Lots of options.
                The only option for hiding secrets is development and initial construction.
                But already built, created in sufficient quantities - does not lurk!
                Voiced.

                So forget about "we have such devices, but we won't tell you about them" ...
            2. Albert1988
              Albert1988 2 November 2015 08: 33
              +4
              Quote: atalef
              Well, first of all, no one knows whether she saw it or not, especially. what the USA did say. that they not only saw, but also knew which ones did not fly and where they fell. there were also pictures of debris.

              The United States had previously stated that they knew that Russian aviation was bombing civilians, but again they did not provide evidence, they say, take the "honest" at their word, the same situation is with the fragments of calibers.
              And as for the "caliber" - then the fact that we have CDs of this class in general is important, which means that there is a certain chance of response, which is not like the "brightest and most democratic" - they thought that we are generally CDs comparable to we do not have their axes, but it turned out not.
              As for the characteristics of the caliber, yes, there is nothing special about them, including the max. the range of 3000 km was announced long ago, just some gentlemen from all "competent" departments need to work more actively, otherwise the senators on Capitol Hill have already raised the question of what the intelligence spends the money of honest taxpayers on - they slept through the Crimea, slept through the calibers, etc. etc.
              1. atalef
                atalef 2 November 2015 08: 48
                0
                Quote: Albert1988
                The United States has previously stated that they know that Russian aircraft are bombing civilians, but again they haven’t provided evidence.

                Russia does not bomb civilians, but you can doubt the civilian population dies the same. this is the nuance of war in urban development
                . evidence 7 In general, there are a lot of rollers and photos - true or not, each of them is unlikely who and when will prove to each of the parties. but that . that civilians are dying - accept it as
                axiom.
                Quote: Albert1988
                And as for the "caliber" - then the fact that we have CDs of this class in general is important, which means that there is a certain chance of response, which is not like the "brightest and most democratic" - they thought that we are generally CDs comparable to we do not have their axes, but it turned out not.

                about the possibilities of Russia (Answers 0, I never doubted at all. I dispute only the fact - Caliber’s funeral of the entire air defense and missile defense system of the adversary
                Quote: Albert1988
                and then there are senators in the Capitol

                what are we talking about 7 about budget wars or PR systems. Air defense?
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 2 November 2015 09: 05
                  +7
                  Quote: atalef
                  Russia does not bomb civilians, but you can doubt the civilian population dies the same

                  Naturally, war is always a war, and if the Americans with their high-precision weapons calmly hit the civilian population ... As for the "evidence" that they say some calibers have fallen, this is from the category of the best from Jen Psaki - they say we we know, but we will not show you anything, believe us (only forgot to wave a hypnotic lotion lol).
                  Quote: atalef
                  about the possibilities of Russia (Answers 0, I never doubted at all. I dispute only the fact - Caliber’s funeral of the entire air defense and missile defense system of the adversary

                  It is necessary (and possible) to bury missile defense and air defense only in a comprehensive manner - before it was only ballistics of the "Iskander" type, now the "caliber" has also been added - as they say, the more means of suppression, the better.
                  As for the performance characteristics of calibers, it is worth adding here that they are capable of launching not from large destroyers, but from small ships, and although the destroyer carries missiles like our 10 MRKs, MRKs, unlike destroyers, can shoot from any puddle in the European territory of Russia, and this gives rise to some difficulties in dealing with them. Moreover, the "caliber" can be used not so much to fight against air defense / missile defense, but, in principle, to destroy various targets in Western Europe, where the same "Iskander" will not reach, the whole question is in the massiveness of the volley.
                  Quote: atalef
                  what are we talking about 7 about budget wars or PR systems. Air defense?

                  We are talking about the "surprise" of some politicians by the launches of our missile defense systems - and all from the fact that intelligence corny "slept" ...
            3. korvin1976
              korvin1976 2 November 2015 10: 28
              +7
              Maybe of course I'm wrong about something, but ......
              The significance of launching the Caliber at such a distance, to some extent, changes the balance of power in Europe. And that's why:
              - up to this point, the West considered itself to some extent protected from Russian missiles, since the launch range under the agreement could not exceed 500 km. And accordingly, the western part of Europe lived relatively calmly. The use of ballistic missiles without a nuclear charge is essentially ineffective;
              - at the moment, the ground-based caliber is limited in the same way by flight range, and to be more precise, the missiles located in the launchers are limited, but given the fact that any missile can be charged in the launchers, this aspect changes the picture quite dramatically;
              - in fact, it makes no sense to compare Caliber and Ax, to argue which of them is better and which is worse. In fact, the situation boils down to one thing: They are and we can. And this very moment scares the West.
              If you take into account the sufficient variety of Caliber missiles, then for the West this is generally a bad situation.
              1. Supersonic missiles of the Iskander type and analogues in Caliber destroy the nearest frontier missile defense and air defense
              2. Long-range missiles with a variety of warheads (depending on the tasks) destroy strategically important targets over long distances. And in fact there can be a lot of such missiles, and it’s not necessary to launch them from surface and underwater launchers, if you have not forgotten universal missiles in Caliber. And if in peacetime the range of missiles in the launcher is limited by the agreement, then in wartime these restrictions are removed.
              3. If you take into account the diversity of PU: ships, planes, land and CONTAINERS, the situation becomes even more deplorable for the West

              The significance of launching from the Caspian is primarily a demonstration of weapons, the fact that we have them, that they work, and then, as they say, learn the mate part.

              Comparison of Caliber and Ax, an occupation of course is extremely interesting and fascinating, but not appreciative enough. It’s like comparing the AK-74 and M-16, T-90 and Abrams, the essence of the objects being compared seems to be one, but the implementation is different. Assault rifle and assault rifle, medium tank and heavy tank.

              Look deep into things, the truth is hiding there.
              1. 222222
                222222 2 November 2015 10: 37
                +2
                korvin1976 RU Today, 10:28 ↑ New
                Maybe of course I'm wrong about something, but ......
                The significance of launching the Caliber to such a distance, to some extent, alters the balance of power in Europe. And that's why:""".
                ..And now the reaction of the Allied High Command of the Allied Forces in Europe to the United States Armed Forces in Europe ...
                "The intelligence and analytical resources of the United States are turning back towards Russia. The Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Armed Forces of NATO in Europe, US General Philip Breedlove, assured journalists of this today at a briefing at the Pentagon.


                “As I found out, we lack the ability to see what is happening in Russia, especially at the operational-tactical level,” he said, answering a question on this topic. In recent years, the US has "been focused on a strategic level," Breedlove added.


                He sees the explanation for the situation in the fact that the United States "tried to turn Russia into a partner." Meanwhile, they faced various problems in Iraq and Afghanistan. Therefore, according to the general, the United States focused its limited intelligence, sensing and tactical surveillance capabilities elsewhere in the world. “We tore our eyes away from Russia and transferred it to the places where our troops fought and were on the ground,” he explained.


                Now, in terms of intelligence against Russia, the United States "is not in the position it should be in, and the intelligence community is doing this," Breedlove went on to say. "It has already made a number of very radical changes in the way we use our analysts in recent months, and now it is starting to look at reallocation of assets," he added.


                Thus, "we are smoothly turning the bow of this ship back in the direction we need to look," stated the commander-in-chief of the US and NATO Joint Armed Forces in Europe. "
                Very interesting admissions:
                1. it turns out that they have sources (moles) in Russia at a strategic level. Where? In the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Intelligence Service, GRU.GSh..a maybe higher ?????? laughing
                2. Do you need to understand his words. What will they climb to the level of-okrug-army ???????? wink
                1. Semen Semyonitch
                  Semen Semyonitch 4 November 2015 11: 47
                  0
                  Quote: 222222
                  "We are smoothly turning the bow of this ship back in the direction we need to look," stated the commander-in-chief of the United States and NATO Allied Forces in Europe.

                  The main thing about someone’s boots is not to touch that very nose. And it doesn’t matter if they smoothly deployed or not ... laughing
            4. Andrey Yuryevich
              Andrey Yuryevich 2 November 2015 11: 23
              +2
              Quote: atalef
              Hey . Andrew !!
              The week began horribly. in a plane crash with my family my classmate (classmate.) died in peace and eternal memory.

              my condolences... sad
              Quote: atalef
              physical princes

              Sasha, you still hurt me ... sho you, with spelling? lol
              Quote: atalef
              (Caliber) - is not weapons based on new physical principles
              well ... until the new principles it is not soon ... what
              Quote: atalef
              what can Russia answer (from the point of view of air defense and missile defense) - to a similar ax?

              with a massive blow - "poplar" or "yarsom" preemptively, at least. (a group preparing for an attack, we will notice) and single launches are meaningless. right? MiGs and others will work
              Quote: atalef
              I'm not saying that. what a caliber opportunity. they were certainly a surprise for the adversary.

              Sasha, I am sincerely glad that you wrote the word "adversary" without "quotes" hi
              Quote: atalef
              The rocket is not new. Yes, it is also exported in a more truncated version and it was hardly difficult for the intelligence services to calculate the increase in its range.

              you can calculate a lot, but in this case, it was COUNTED. it is possible that someone from the "eggheads" foresaw this, but they did not heed. the fact turned out to be a surprise (childish) (sorry, I could not resist)
              Quote: atalef
              but to bury their entire air defense and missile defense system - in one Caliber - well, somehow optimistic

              Sasha, I beg you! who here spoke for one "caliber"? Want surprises? -I have them! ( wink) hi
              1. Semen Semyonitch
                Semen Semyonitch 4 November 2015 11: 53
                +1
                Quote: Andrey Yurievich
                preparing

                hi Preparing))) Everyone has drinks
            5. seos
              seos 2 November 2015 11: 52
              +3
              It’s hard to protect oneself from cruise missiles; they can be shot down only from a VERY close range. And long-range cruise missiles in the USSR since 70 years in service ... S-10 "Grenade" is the same ...
              1. Skifotavr
                Skifotavr 2 November 2015 15: 07
                +1
                Quote: seos
                It’s hard to protect oneself from cruise missiles; they can be shot down only from a VERY close range. And long-range cruise missiles in the USSR since 70 years in service ... S-10 "Grenade" is the same ...

                I agree. The only more or less reliable way to detect and destroy cruise missiles in the air is through joint patrolling of modern AWACS and fighter aircraft. But they can not be in the air constantly, but only in the most threatened period. Therefore, strategic CDs are called surprise weapons. But their minus is the very low speed and high vulnerability in case of loss of the suddenness factor.
                1. mav1971
                  mav1971 2 November 2015 17: 38
                  -2
                  Quote: Skifotavr

                  I agree. The only more or less reliable way to detect and destroy cruise missiles in the air is through joint patrolling of modern AWACS and fighter aircraft. But they can not be in the air constantly, but only in the most threatened period. Therefore, strategic CDs are called surprise weapons. But their minus is the very low speed and high vulnerability in case of loss of the suddenness factor.


                  more than 40 AWACS aircraft are located in NATO countries.
                  Even if all 5 are patrolling - then there can be no talk of any suddenness.
                  Therefore - Caliber. as a means of a first and sudden strike on Europe - is absolutely useless!
                  1. Skifotavr
                    Skifotavr 2 November 2015 21: 24
                    0
                    Quote: mav1971
                    Quote: Skifotavr

                    I agree. The only more or less reliable way to detect and destroy cruise missiles in the air is through joint patrolling of modern AWACS and fighter aircraft. But they can not be in the air constantly, but only in the most threatened period. Therefore, strategic CDs are called surprise weapons. But their minus is the very low speed and high vulnerability in case of loss of the suddenness factor.


                    more than 40 AWACS aircraft are located in NATO countries.
                    Even if all 5 are patrolling - then there can be no talk of any suddenness.
                    Therefore - Caliber. as a means of a first and sudden strike on Europe - is absolutely useless!

                    Firstly, Russia is not going to be the first to attack Europe (although the United States would not mind), and secondly, after the collapse of the USSR, the level of combat readiness of the European part of NATO has become very degraded. And stop repeating the word "Caliber" as if Russia has no other strategic cruise missiles. The same "Caliber" is the renamed Soviet naval KR "Granat", but with a non-nuclear warhead (a non-nuclear warhead is always heavier - and therefore the flight range is shorter).
                    1. mav1971
                      mav1971 2 November 2015 23: 11
                      0
                      you yourself said that only AWACS aircraft can detect, but they type fly only in an endangered period.
                      and they don’t fly yet - you can use a weapon suddenly.
                      I answered you. About. how many such planes do they have.
                      And that they are not fools, and even if they hold a tenth of their strength in the air, then there is simply no sense in calibers. There will be no suddenness.
                      You can just talk about the characteristics. quantities. power. but AWACS aircraft. like that lazy man. that he came and dispersed everyone ...
                      1. Skifotavr
                        Skifotavr 3 November 2015 00: 40
                        +1
                        You are exaggerating too much. In practice, no AWACS aircraft will give a 100% guarantee. Every weapon has a place. Moreover, the stealth technology used on some new cruise missiles significantly increases their potential. As they say - a bad peace is better than a good war. But whoever wants peace, he needs to prepare for war. And for Russia this is especially true. In general, I don’t want to prove anything to anyone, and I don’t understand what our argument is with you at all. I just wrote some of what I know. This is the point.
                      2. Skifotavr
                        Skifotavr 3 November 2015 01: 02
                        +2
                        PS I read all your comments and found that they are all on the same topic - how everything is really awful in Russia, but NATO is fine. At the same time, you also like to remember the word "facts". Truth from facts except the word itself is nothing. In general - a very familiar song and familiar handwriting.
                      3. mav1971
                        mav1971 3 November 2015 15: 22
                        +2
                        Quote: Skifotavr
                        PS I read all your comments and found that they are all on the same topic - how everything is really awful in Russia, but NATO is fine. At the same time, you also like to remember the word "facts". Truth from facts except the word itself is nothing. In general - a very familiar song and familiar handwriting.


                        You're wrong.
                        I just do not tolerate hatred.
                        And all my posts are devoted to this very thing and from this flow.
                        So far we have real parity such that each Tomahawk has its own Caliber, each Rafal has its own MIG-35, each F-22. your PAX. or MIG-31 to the extreme. for every Burke, every Nimitz, every Patiot, etc. was our counterpart in the same quantity.
                        Then I will be fine!
                        And when the enemy (let's not call them partners. To be honest) has 100, and you have 1-5 at best, 10-20 - then there is hatred - to put it mildly, not just inappropriate, but also must be punished. Like children were hit on the lips for bad words. and haters and idiots need ... at least take away the keyboard ...
                      4. Skifotavr
                        Skifotavr 3 November 2015 23: 16
                        +1
                        I am also against hatred. But I am also against the black propaganda of the fifth column, trying to show any news or information in black, mixing truth and falsehood, and using double standards, twisting facts, pulling words out of context, psychological tricks and much more. Shouting that everything is bad and we all end so that we do not, and therefore run after the rope and soap - this is definitely not a fight against hat-making. And I am very amused by attempts to give all sorts of harmful advice. For example, abandon cruise missiles, abandon tanks, abandon strategic aviation, abandon nuclear submarines, use bombs of only the smallest caliber, etc. Do those who write this really believe that Putin will read it and do so? Or are you just zombifying the public for the future?
                      5. mihai_md2003
                        mihai_md2003 4 November 2015 16: 01
                        0
                        You are 100 percent right. I, too, prefer to analyze the situation from a critical point of view, and then this makes at least some practical sense. You can really think about the weaknesses and weaknesses and eliminate them. And when they just write, our missiles are the best just because they are ours, there's nothing to add.
                        On this topic.
                        "Calibers" are not a panacea and do not solve all problems, but this is very good in the sense that they can greatly complicate the life of the same air defense and missile defense. And as a non-specialist, the following seems obvious to me.
                        These missiles are harder to track than large ICBMs (low flight, smaller size)
                        They cost much cheaper and therefore can be produced in much larger quantities, because of their accuracy and cost, it is quite advisable to use them and in the non-nuclear version + it is possible to launch not only from ships.
                        In addition to everything, I’ll write that in the USSR, and then in Russia, the task of detecting and destroying cruise missiles was a long time ago. Systems were developed sharpened from the part to perform these tasks.
                        And even considering that tamahawks have been known since at least 1983, the task of destroying a cruise missile is considered a very difficult task. And defeat her great luck.
                        For NATO, such a threat did not exist recently. Now let them get involved in the topic of detection and destruction in such large spaces. Let them create their twigs 31 and so on, in order to continue to maintain the illusion of inanimity.
      2. Skifotavr
        Skifotavr 2 November 2015 14: 46
        +6
        Quote: atalef
        The United States did. that they not only saw, but also knew which ones did not fly and where they fell. there were photos of debris.
        How is it in Hebrew to insert misinformation into the sea of ​​text as if by chance smile
      3. figter
        figter 2 November 2015 21: 06
        +1
        atalef (8) IL Today, 08: 07 ↑
        Hey . Andrew !!
        The week began horribly. in a plane crash with my family my classmate (classmate.) died in peace and eternal memory.
        Well, back to the topic.
        Well, first of all, no one knows whether she saw it or not, especially. what the USA did say. that they not only saw, but also knew which ones did not fly and where they fell. there were also pictures of debris.
        But suppose. what . what they saw is a lie. and debris - lies
        Iraqi Kurdistan (where the missiles flew) - all the same, agree this is not the missile direction of Europe and the United States, so that there would be full coverage of the anti-aircraft defense and air defense zone
        Then, still the question. KR (Caliber) - is not weapons based on new physical principles or completely new weapons (unknown to this day)
        Does anyone really think that air defense and missile defense systems are created without taking into account the possibility of combat employment of missile defense?
        Type. did missile defense, but about KR - oops, forgot?
        Increasing the range is certainly wonderful, but again I have a question - does increasing the range of the Kyrgyz Republic make it invulnerable and undetectable, and if everything is so scary, how can Russia respond (from the point of view of air defense and missile defense) to an analogous ax?
        Now . that someone would answer me the same.
        I'm not saying that. what a caliber opportunity. they were certainly a surprise for the adversary.
        The rocket is not new. Yes, it is also exported in a more truncated version and it was hardly difficult for the intelligence services to calculate the increase in its range.
        The fact that this, of course, does not add to the joy of NATO. Is understandable. but to bury their entire air defense and missile defense system - in one Caliber - well, it’s somehow optimistic. I would say.

        I will try to answer your question. The probability of hitting aerodynamic targets with air defense systems, depending on the types of air defense systems, varies on average within 0,6-0,9. The probability of defeating cruise missiles is much lower - within 0,3-0,4. For the destruction of the Kyrgyz Republic many times more SAMs are assigned at times than for the destruction of the AC. From the upper mathematics it follows that with an increase in the number of launches of cruise missiles, the probability of their destruction is further reduced. Thus, the air defense / missile defense system is not able to fully reflect the massive launch of cruise missiles. Yes, a certain amount of missiles will be shot down, but if you assign several missiles from different directions to each target to be destroyed, such a target will most likely be destroyed. At the same time, the suddenness of striking the Kyrgyz Republic and the mobility of military assets launching such missiles are of great importance.
  2. science fiction writer
    science fiction writer 2 November 2015 08: 41
    13
    ) - than the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
    And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?
    The enemy’s presence of a symmetrical response, in the absence of an attacker with similar missile defense systems - seems to be unable to change the balance, especially dramatically.

    The fact is that Americans, Europeans, Russians know about the "IJIS" system.
    this is a missile defense system which is designed to destroy ballistic missiles
    type "Poplar" "YARS" at the initial stage of the flight of the rocket, therefore the Yankees and place
    her in Europe closer to our borders so that there would be an 100% chance to bring them down.
    But the Yankees cannot defend their system "IJES" from the Russian "CALIBERS"
    as short-range air defense systems and even at low altitudes they don’t have,
    in any case, effective systems, such as our "PANTSIR S" and "S-400" and if there are, they are not very effective, otherwise we would have long been hearing all the Americans' ears about their wunderwaffle.
    1) if the "bloodthirsty Russians" want to destroy the USA, then first with CALBRAM
    we will destroy the "IJIS" and then we will destroy the USA with "POPLES" and "YARS".
    2) if the Yankees want to destroy Russia by delivering the first blow with their Axes
    then we will use our own air defense (which is superior to the American one) to reflect it
    not at 100% of course, the losses will be but not catastrophic, and then see n No. 1

    Well, it’s kind of like that, if you don’t miss something hi
    1. atalef
      atalef 2 November 2015 08: 51
      -2
      Quote: fiction
      But the Yankees cannot defend their IJES system from the Russian "CALIBRERS" since they do not have short-range air defense systems, and even at low altitudes they do not,


      the US and Europe do not have protection from the Kyrgyz Republic? Are you sure ?
      Quote: fiction
      in any case, effective systems, such as our "PANTSIR S" and "S-400" and if there are, they are not very effective, otherwise all our ears would have been for a long time Americans have been buzzing about their wunderwaffe

      I think on this optimistic note, let's stop.
      Good luck and optimism.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. alexej123
        alexej123 2 November 2015 10: 39
        +4
        You have been correctly assigned for the "Aegis" system. To defeat a whole range of air targets - CD, ballistic, air, altitude flights, an air defense / missile defense system is needed. Tell me, is there such a system in Europe and in the United States? If so, give the facts. In Russia, at the very least, the system is built, starting with the "Pantsir" and ending with the S-400 (including "Torah", "Buki", on various media). They cover the most significant objects, objects of "Retaliation". This is what they are trying to explain to you. The West is "hitting the tails." In the USSR, they did it for the future.
      3. umah
        umah 2 November 2015 10: 44
        +3
        the US and Europe do not have protection from the Kyrgyz Republic? Are you sure ?

        Tomahawks were adopted in the 1983 year. Since that time, in the USSR, in the development of each air defense system in TK, the task was to combat the KR at low altitudes. Because from our side no weapons like the Tomahawk were put into service, and countermeasures by the SGA (NATO) were not developed.

        At the moment, the more or less real counterbalance system of the Kyrgyz Republic may be the Falanks systems installed on land platforms, but this is a weapon of a close zone and it seems to me dangerous to let the Kyrgyz Republic so close. Interceptor planes can also be an effective measure, but they must always be in the air, Raman scanners must be detected at a range sufficient for the interceptors to react, and interceptors must be able to see Raman scanners against the background of the underlying surface. As for the anti-aircraft missile systems, they either have a height limit (not lower than 60 m) or an insufficient reaction rate. It seems that Some kind of missile defense can work with our missiles, but the cost of a missile is much higher.
        1. Petrix
          Petrix 2 November 2015 14: 02
          -1
          Quote: umah
          Because from our side no weapons like the Tomahawk were put into service, and countermeasures by the SGA (NATO) were not developed.

          Well, there were anti-ship missiles, for example. And how do they fundamentally differ from the KR near the target? Missile defense began to be developed with the advent of missiles.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. mav1971
      mav1971 2 November 2015 17: 57
      0
      Quote: fiction
      ) - than the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
      And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?
      The enemy’s presence of a symmetrical response, in the absence of an attacker with similar missile defense systems - seems to be unable to change the balance, especially dramatically.

      The fact is that Americans, Europeans, Russians know about the "IJIS" system.
      this is a missile defense system which is designed to destroy ballistic missiles
      type "Poplar" "YARS" at the initial stage of the flight of the rocket, therefore the Yankees and place
      her in Europe closer to our borders so that there would be an 100% chance to bring them down.
      But the Yankees cannot defend their system "IJES" from the Russian "CALIBERS"
      as short-range air defense systems and even at low altitudes they don’t have,
      in any case, effective systems, such as our "PANTSIR S" and "S-400" and if there are, they are not very effective, otherwise we would have long been hearing all the Americans' ears about their wunderwaffle.
      1) if the "bloodthirsty Russians" want to destroy the USA, then first with CALBRAM
      we will destroy the "IJIS" and then we will destroy the USA with "POPLES" and "YARS".
      2) if the Yankees want to destroy Russia by delivering the first blow with their Axes
      then we will use our own air defense (which is superior to the American one) to reflect it
      not at 100% of course, the losses will be but not catastrophic, and then see n No. 1

      Well, it’s kind of like that, if you don’t miss something hi


      Probably missed everything!
      To get started, see the map of the NATO radar. Their 130 pcs at least.
      Look at the number of NATO AWACS aircraft - their minimum number is 40.
      See a map of NATO fighter airfields.
      Look at the real state of the air defense systems of NATO countries. Far zone, middle, near.
      and not those articles that describe only the Patriot of the very first modification. And then some "authors" like to publish any nonsense here, under the guise of articles.

      Later.
      Estimate the speed of rocket production.
      You can simply compare the terms of the contract and the quantity in any field of rocket technology. Given that the engines are on calibers in the form of turbojet engines, which are assembled piece by piece, because they are complex.
      This guidance system can be riveted by robots :) by analogy with the conveyor.
      There are no engines. No matter how much they were needed - they are thin. handwork.
      Factories are needed, trained people are needed.
      For fine and handmade.
      and you will understand. in order to simply accumulate the 2-3 thousands of missiles needed for a massive surprise strike - it will take 10 years !!!
      During these 10 years, absolutely everything can change.
      Obama, Merkel, Cameron will leave Zurama, Snorkel, Butaffon - and we will kiss on the gums :) As an option!
      And why the heck did we make these 3 thousands of rockets then?
      Have you trained 10 thousands of highly specialized workers who have become useless?

      And if the inhabitants of Brokeback Mountain come. coupled with juvenile justice and pedophilia - it turns out. what had to be done not 3 thousands but 5 thousand missiles, and all with special warheads :)))
      1. science fiction writer
        science fiction writer 2 November 2015 19: 06
        +2
        To get started, see the map of the NATO radar. Their 130 pcs at least.
        Look at the number of NATO AWACS aircraft - their minimum number is 40.
        See a map of NATO fighter airfields.
        Look at the real state of the air defense systems of NATO countries. Far zone, middle, near.

        I would like to discuss this issue with the swamis, but I will dwell on this:
        accumulate 2-3 thousand missiles, needed for a massive surprise strike - it will take from 10 years !!!

        What for us a sudden massive blow if we have a defensive military doctrine.
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 2 November 2015 19: 49
          -1
          Quote: fiction

          What for us a sudden massive blow if we have a defensive military doctrine.


          Then why talk about a massive blow to Europe?
          Why initially raise the question?
          Why raise the question of the destruction of the air defense / missile defense system of Europe?
          After all, if you have already raised the question like that, then you must know that the destruction of air defense / missile defense is a massive blow.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Orionvit
        Orionvit 3 November 2015 00: 26
        0
        Yes, the engines are complex, but they are assembled piece by piece, and they experience piecewise. But in the 80s in the golden age of aviation, the RD95-300 engines (product 95, for installation on X-55 missiles) were made in Zaporozhye at the engine plant for 10-15 pieces. per day. The country needed rockets, and the country was different, all the forces for defense. Now in Omsk will they be able to create such a pace for the assembly of turbofan engines-50? After all, Russia needs missiles, and a lot. The only thing is not happy that such a weapon is a very expensive pleasure. For every ISIS, you can’t save enough.
    3. kos2cool4u
      kos2cool4u 2 November 2015 21: 15
      -1
      IJIS, as far as I remember, knocked out one test subject on the Khibina carrier plane, after which the plane performed more than a dozen (!) Training bombings, and contract sailors from the American destroyer in the amount of 21 people quit, citing moral injury))))) )
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. BLOND
        BLOND 4 November 2015 09: 33
        -1
        ... 27 US troops quit the Donald Cook destroyer after ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. BOB48
    BOB48 2 November 2015 08: 47
    +6
    ax flies 5,5 thousand km ???? stop
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco 2 November 2015 09: 04
      +3
      Quote: BOB48
      ax flies 5,5 thousand km ????

      The USA, as a rule, overestimate the performance characteristics of their products, I did not find further 2500, although options are possible request
      Well, Russia, as the heir to the USSR, always underestimates the performance characteristics of its products.
      1. domokl
        domokl 2 November 2015 09: 28
        +2
        Quote: Sirocco
        I did not find further 2500,

        really xnumx bully
      2. Ladoga
        Ladoga 2 November 2015 19: 05
        +1
        This is not the United States overstating the performance characteristics. In this and the specific case, comrade, from Israel, inflated. Perhaps because it is momentary and nervous, the NK Caliber, with a guarantee, covers not only Israel, but also the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. Hence the nervousness.
  5. andj61
    andj61 2 November 2015 09: 53
    +5
    Quote: atalef
    Caliber (as I understand it) is a universal-based cruise missile.
    In general, nothing (as I understand it) - no different from an ax.
    Doesn't protection against cruise missiles exist? and they are not detected by air defense and missile defense?
    What is the difference between basing the KR in a * pond *, from launching it from a submarine, a ship, an airplane, a ground launcher? - axes start from the same thing.
    So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
    And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?

    Good morning! hi The capabilities of the Gauge axes, of course, do not negate. But until now it was believed that Russia did not have any European strategic means at all - and now they "suddenly" appeared! fellow
    This is the "radical change in the security system"! yes Previously, it was available only to light elves, but now it is not only.
    And air defense systems, of course, work out any missile defense systems, including long-range ones - only the Russian air defense system was originally designed for this development, but there are no light elf air defense systems.
  6. ava09
    ava09 2 November 2015 09: 59
    +2
    It turned out that the one Uncle Sam went to with the "ax" is not unarmed, he has a crowbar in his hands ...-)))
  7. Tihas
    Tihas 2 November 2015 12: 10
    +2
    What NATO is going to bring down Caliber: http://topwar.ru/85380-chem-nato-sobiraetsya-sbivat-kalibr.html
  8. hrych
    hrych 2 November 2015 12: 43
    +3
    Quote: atalef
    So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.

    Missile defense systems observe the exit of a target — warheads — from behind the 2 – 3 horizon line thousands of kilometers, however, provided that the warhead flies at an altitude of 200 –300 kilometers. The CR is pressed to the ground, flies at an altitude of several tens of kilometers and jumps over the horizon for radars over a couple of tens of kilometers, the reaction time for counteraction is sharply reduced to 4 minutes, and our Caliber this section is supersonic. This is the basis for the US doctrine of a global, disarming strike, moreover, it is based on non-nuclear Axes, according to our strategic facilities, missile defense systems, air defense systems, control centers, and airfields. Then their aircraft with impunity will take our sky under full control. However, one problem is our centers are located in the interior of the territory, on a plain, there’s nowhere to fly for axes, there’s nowhere to hide in the relief, sea carriers can’t get close to the Pacific coast, there’s nowhere to get there, the main blow is only from the Mediterranean and Baltic, but from there it is too far away again. Therefore, they want to place the so-called pro elements in Europe, which is essentially ground installations for axes, but even from Poland to Moscow an ax can fly a couple of hours and the only trump card is the thousandth number of missile defense systems with which our air defense does not coincide, but the nuclear response is inevitable .. Closer to the point - those shortcomings in the concept of a global strike on the Russian Federation are absent in the EU, there is no depth of territory, the same Baltic Sea goes around the whole north of the EU, and East Prussia shoots everything, including the center of evil - the Buckingham Palace, and with diesels and boats, without breaking agreements the Mediterranean shoots from Crimea, and most importantly, the Arabia and the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, etc., shoot through the Caspian Sea, where the complete dominance of the United States and the lack of opportunity for the tactical forces of the Russian Federation were considered. Also, boats and diesel engines will have the opportunity to burn Japanese cities ... And the deployment of strategic weapons on diesel engines, boats, in the long run on tractors and sea containers simply puts an end to the dominance of the atlantists in the oceans, no more and no less, plus they abandoned their BR, in favor of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Ohio mines were converted to axes, but we updated the entire line of Ballistic Missiles ...
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 2 November 2015 18: 17
      0
      Quote: hrych
      Quote: atalef
      So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.

      Missile defense systems observe the exit of a target — warheads — from behind the 2 – 3 horizon line thousands of kilometers, however, provided that the warhead flies at an altitude of 200 –300 kilometers. The CR is pressed to the ground, flies at an altitude of several tens of kilometers and jumps over the horizon for radars over a couple of tens of kilometers, the reaction time for counteraction is sharply reduced to 4 minutes, and our Caliber this section is supersonic. This is the basis for the US doctrine of a global, disarming strike, moreover, it is based on non-nuclear Axes, according to our strategic facilities, missile defense systems, air defense systems, control centers, and airfields. Then their aircraft with impunity will take our sky under full control. However, one problem is our centers are located in the interior of the territory, on a plain, there’s nowhere to fly for axes, there’s nowhere to hide in the relief, sea carriers can’t get close to the Pacific coast, there’s nowhere to get there, the main blow is only from the Mediterranean and Baltic, but from there it is too far away again. Therefore, they want to place the so-called pro elements in Europe, which is essentially ground installations for axes, but even from Poland to Moscow an ax can fly a couple of hours and the only trump card is the thousandth number of missile defense systems with which our air defense does not coincide, but the nuclear response is inevitable .. Closer to the point - those shortcomings in the concept of a global strike on the Russian Federation are absent in the EU, there is no depth of territory, the same Baltic Sea goes around the whole north of the EU, and East Prussia shoots everything, including the center of evil - the Buckingham Palace, and with diesels and boats, without breaking agreements the Mediterranean shoots from Crimea, and most importantly, the Arabia and the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, etc., shoot through the Caspian Sea, where the complete dominance of the United States and the lack of opportunity for the tactical forces of the Russian Federation were considered. Also, boats and diesel engines will have the opportunity to burn Japanese cities ... And the deployment of strategic weapons on diesel engines, boats, in the long run on tractors and sea containers simply puts an end to the dominance of the atlantists in the oceans, no more and no less, plus they abandoned their BR, in favor of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Ohio mines were converted to axes, but we updated the entire line of Ballistic Missiles ...


      In your discussions of 4, the global mistakes due to which you are your whole speech, you can forget.
      1. Supersonic mode - only in the anti-ship version.
      2. AGM-158 flies at an altitude of 20 meters. I don't give a fuck "hide" behind the terrain.
      3. Ground missile defense elements in Europe are Radars and Aegis launchers in the Escher version. those. anti-aircraft missiles and air defense radars.
      4. All central control points are located just very close to the borders. Mostly in Moscow and the Moscow region. 70% of the country's population is located in three federal districts extreme to the West.
      1. hrych
        hrych 2 November 2015 20: 52
        0
        The weakness of your replica is that you mean the performance characteristics of export samples. The data in service with the Russian Federation are completely classified and have already surprised the enemies with their capabilities, however, when comparing the images of the zm-54 and zm-14, both with the letter "e", their identity is striking, with the exception of the warhead, the anti-ship version stands out AGSN, which not surprisingly, the corresponding halving of the warhead in favor of the AGSN too. The identity of the rest of the team can also speak of the unification of combat capabilities, and if this useful maneuver is necessary, it will be performed on the strategic option.
        In the vicinity of Moscow to the border, I completely reject more than a thousand kilometers from the Polish border to the solo city, fly a tamahawk for an hour and a half, from Latvia an hour is the closest, and our blocks take 20 minutes to reach a new York. One of the versions that they needed Nezalezhnaya to get a global strike was to get closer, however, they received the nomination of our PUs, I'm talking about Crimea. The Agm-158 is not strategic and the carrier must still crawl into the active defense zone and naturally will not come out, and the launch range is only 350 kilometers. About Aegis crap, missile defense requires a very large-sized and powerful Raytheon XBR radar and ten mine-based anti-missiles
        1. hrych
          hrych 2 November 2015 21: 34
          0
          GBI, Aegis is only being tested, and the standard-3 missile task is to shoot down medium-range ballistic missiles; however, again, a powerful, stationary or on a floating platform, dimensional radar must be aimed at the target, and not something that, say, a destroyer ... the container will look at it as a component of the MRIS system, which sees an ax for three thousand kilometers, even though it sits on the ground and duplicates radars about Voronezh because it also sees up to three hundred kilometers. In total there will be ten with a circular view of 180 degrees.
          1. mav1971
            mav1971 2 November 2015 22: 55
            -3
            The destroyer is enough. The latest SPY has the required functionality. and he is not single.
            He is already network-centric.
            And everything for ZGRLS - is.
            1. hrych
              hrych 2 November 2015 23: 34
              +1
              I repeat for the very clever, to irradiate a target at a range of several thousand kilometers, a dimensional and powerful radar is required, here the size and power matter uniquely. Aegis, as a missile defense system, is only at the stage of testing, advertising and bluffing.
        2. mav1971
          mav1971 2 November 2015 23: 06
          -3
          Go to the garden with your secret polymers.
          It is so easy to assume that everything is secret with us, and pompously swell from our own importance.
          There is nothing secret anymore.
          To do this, you just need to understand what and how it works and what masses it has.
          A horse cannot be disguised as a goose.
          If there is such a mass, such a weight, such a warhead, such an engine - then with an accuracy of 99% - all the characteristics will already be clear.
          For a jet engine cannot eat 3 times less. what do they eat.
          there were already idiots who spoke about 5 of thousands of kilometers of Caliber in secrets.
          And about the fact that he is all supersonic in secret versions. Yeah.

          Do not try to count. that mattresses will allow without attention even our one substrate at a distance of 2 thousand miles to the shores of the United States. I'm not talking about the 200 miles you indicated.
          They have boats much better and much more.
          Until. for the coming years 20. I hope so.

          The 158 version of B flies on 1000.
          Least.

          For the missile defense, TPY-2 and 3 and 6 versions are already enough.
          Wake up. You are somewhere very far away.
          1. hrych
            hrych 3 November 2015 00: 17
            +6
            Come on, man, don’t be ham or go the forest yourself. The fact that experts didn’t believe in the 533 mm torpedo tube was loaded into the strategic CR until the launches from the Caspian. We are talking about container placement, when an enemy base or a city can be attacked from a bulk carrier from a sea container, but for you that. TTX of such things is not in print, you can not rot only export options are given. I repeat the possibility of switching to supersonic, and it’s not a secret, the fact that in the export version this option is provided only with the anti-punish option does not mean that it cannot be applied to a stationary object, which is much simpler ... For the United States, we have YaRS, Bulava and Soviet intercontinental heritage. The same performance characteristics of the yars and clubs are unknown only to rumors and expert opinions, the secret is the cast weight, range, number of combat units, etc. What we have on Wikipedia is inaccurate data. I repeat this for missile defense, this is not enough, you need a powerful radar capable of seeing for several thousand kilometers, and capable of tracking a target to calculate the trajectory, you need a rocket capable of maneuvering in airless space and intercepting a target at an altitude of two hundred kilometers, which they are trying to do with standards, but all this is beyond testing and loud statements are not coming. Agm-158 rests on the dimensions of the internal b-1 and b-2 compartments, it is tactical and tactical, and there’s nothing to fantasize with transferring to strategic ones, but even a thousand kilometers, even at a speed of a thousand kilometers per hour from Poland, fly more than an hour, it’s subsonic, carrier should climb into our space or fly directly to the border and Tamagavk does not exceed anything ...
            1. adept666
              adept666 4 November 2015 14: 24
              +1
              experts did not believe the strategic Kyrgyz Republic up to launches from the Caspian.
              The caliber is not a strategic missile, but a tactical one.
              I repeat the possibility of switching to supersonic, and this is not a secret
              There is, only it is necessary to add at the same time that the range is greatly reduced. I agree with the rest. hi
          2. meriem1
            meriem1 4 November 2015 04: 24
            +4
            Quote: mav1971
            Go to the garden with your secret polymers.
            It is so easy to assume that everything is secret with us, and pompously swell from our own importance.
            There is nothing secret anymore.
            To do this, you just need to understand what and how it works and what masses it has.
            A horse cannot be disguised as a goose.
            If there is such a mass, such a weight, such a warhead, such an engine - then with an accuracy of 99% - all the characteristics will already be clear.
            For a jet engine cannot eat 3 times less. what do they eat.
            there were already idiots who spoke about 5 of thousands of kilometers of Caliber in secrets.
            And about the fact that he is all supersonic in secret versions. Yeah.

            Do not try to count. that mattresses will allow without attention even our one substrate at a distance of 2 thousand miles to the shores of the United States. I'm not talking about the 200 miles you indicated.
            They have boats much better and much more.
            Until. for the coming years 20. I hope so.

            The 158 version of B flies on 1000.
            Least.

            For the missile defense, TPY-2 and 3 and 6 versions are already enough.
            Wake up. You are somewhere very far away.



            They have boats much better and much more.
            Until. for the coming years 20. I hope so.


            Better ??? Don't hope. Their boats did not float in our bays, but vice versa !!!! They themselves call our BOREAU the best! (By the way, when did they have the last boat lowered off the slipway ??? 12 years ago? And + construction! And development. Isn’t it old?) They generally fear diesel WARSAWS because they don’t hear her !!!
            About performance characteristics you turned down my friend! Let me draw a not entirely correct analogy! How much power can be removed from the internal combustion engine with the same weight and volume ???? A DIFFERENCE AT TIMES !!! Let's say it is quite clear execution, but to the detriment of the resource. The resource is not important either !!! The product is disposable. Both for the sender of the "gift" and for the receiver. So, weight matters, but there are options! Your arguments will be appreciated by the State Department. And urya, it has nothing to do with it. Everyone judges by himself !!! And in this regard, your poison is understandable.
  9. asergu
    asergu 2 November 2015 17: 46
    +2
    A lot of answers about this lie here http://topwar.ru/85380-chem-nato-sobiraetsya-sbivat-kalibr.html
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 2 November 2015 22: 50
      -5
      there are no answers - one is duck! I looked through everything there ...
  10. mabuta
    mabuta 2 November 2015 21: 42
    +1
    The whole question is that the Axes must swim to the launch site. Any enemy vessel is tracked. A salvo from 3-5 thousand km will be exposed in any case and measures will be taken. Our motor boats from any body of water can fire up, and in summer it is a water "BZHRK", and the place of launch from the landing site is much smaller. Also, the direction of the launch is not known, and the enemy will have to have their Patriots, as in thimbles, I twist - I want to find a verch. IMHO.
    1. hrych
      hrych 2 November 2015 22: 07
      +1
      In fact, with a land mine, the range of the sea ax is just over a thousand kilometers, with a special warhead two and a half, but with a global strike, the lion's share will be high-explosive, which in the case of the Russian Federation requires shooting from Poland or the Baltic states and from land, from the sea to Moscow in the high-explosive version is just not enough. Plus, almost to our shores, it’s necessary to fit the whole armada of marine carriers in order to launch thousands of missiles, and we won’t wait, the bastions with onyxes and the same calibers will not doze off, and actually weave ICBMs ...
  11. adept666
    adept666 4 November 2015 07: 35
    0
    Caliber (as I understand it) is a universal-based cruise missile.

    Right.
    In general, nothing (as I understand it) - no different from an ax.
    It doesn’t differ in ideology: flying on NVD, enveloping the terrain and areas saturated with enemy missile defense (structurally different - this is not a clone).
    Doesn't protection against cruise missiles exist?
    There is - Her Majesty Air Defense.
    What is the difference between the basing of the Kyrgyz Republic in a * pond *, from launching it from a submarine, a ship, an airplane, a ground launcher?
    This is not the same rocket, there are structural differences.
    axes the same from all this are launched.
    Launched. There are no airborne axes; the MRASM program is closed.
    So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
    Especially nothing, too hype hype (and purposefully and not by us (RF)).
    And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?
    Axes do not fly at such a range. With a nuclear warhead, max is 2500 km, with a conventional warhead is 1600 km (somewhere they say about 2400 km).
    The enemy’s presence of a symmetrical response, in the absence of an attacker with similar missile defense systems - seems to be unable to change the balance, especially dramatically.
    It’s absolutely true that in order to balance the balance, you need to have a sufficient number of weapon carriers, unfortunately there are very few of them in the Russian Federation, only ArlyBerk can take more axes than our entire caliber Caspian flotilla combined.
  • Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 2 November 2015 07: 27
    0
    Sasha, good to see ... hi
  • marlin1203
    marlin1203 2 November 2015 10: 30
    +3
    Don't hold the Americans for fools. "R-500, 500 km, they didn't look at the" asterisk ", but we can at times! ..." They all knew that they had a multi-billion dollar piece of the budget pie for a reason. Or you have to be a complete idiot to believe that no one except them has made a normal cruise missile in 30-40 years. And this despite the fact that in missile technologies Russia has never been inferior to them. So all of them most likely knew, but they could not do anything about it and will no longer be able to ...
    1. adept666
      adept666 4 November 2015 07: 56
      +1
      Do not keep the Americans fools.
      Don’t say how small children are. So the X-55, which with YaB and flies to 3000, they also did not see and did not consider as potential threats before the caliber launches, but then they shot back with Caliber and everything was just a guard laughing They also seemed to have missed Iskander-K, it seems, based on the KR S-10 Grenade (its ground version is Rubezh).
  • olimpiada15
    olimpiada15 2 November 2015 06: 45
    +8
    Yes, Putin does not look like Gorbachev.
    The West did not expect such surprises from Russia.
    And our Gauges seem to have hit another target - they fell into Western permissiveness.
  • populist
    populist 2 November 2015 06: 48
    +4
    And Putin is completely unlike Gorbachev. He will not sell the interests of his country for beautiful wrappers of Western goods.

    And who closed Lourdes?
    1. olimpiada15
      olimpiada15 2 November 2015 07: 04
      +5
      A full understanding of the dangers posed by the states and the west for Russia came on 08.08.08. And then there was work in the spirit of the main profession, the fruits of this work have already begun to appear.
      But this is the personal opinion of one person.
    2. meriem1
      meriem1 4 November 2015 04: 34
      0
      Quote: populist
      And Putin is completely unlike Gorbachev. He will not sell the interests of his country for beautiful wrappers of Western goods.

      And who closed Lourdes?


      The answer is simple!!!!! Just a year to close you need to see. 2002 year. But there People sat idle !!! from the 97th. Closed by default, and then not really !!!
  • 31rus
    31rus 2 November 2015 07: 02
    +2
    Dear, yes, we Russia showed NATO that times have come different, but what has really changed? The West and NATO slowed down, stopped deploying, the question arose about negotiations on the reduction of at least some weapons in Europe, but no, everything is the other way around, additional contingents are being deployed, Montenegro is "reaching for the ears" to NATO, is deploying about, so explain what opinion are you talking about? So it turns out that we take the military component for the political
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 2 November 2015 11: 35
      +2
      but what really changed?
      What has changed is that the EU can no longer rely on the protection of the states: it will have to take into account Moscow's position for its own security, i.e. so as not to lose everything. We have created a rift in Euro-Atlantic "solidarity." The EU may break away, because a possible interception of even 20% of Caliber is not capable of changing the fate of the defenders: the remaining 80% will create enough gaps to send the EU into the stone age. But only if we have a sufficient number of launchers and missiles.
  • ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 2 November 2015 07: 03
    +5
    In the European media, information somehow slipped through that the vaunted American intelligence had missed the launch and trajectory of Russian missiles, but the authorized gentlemen quickly removed these seditious messages out of sight, so as not to disturb the ordinary European citizen once again. Instead of this bitter truth, stats went off in a jamb that supposedly "nothing terrible happened, the Russian missiles were no good, almost a third of them did not achieve their intended goals."

    What goals did the Russian missiles have and how many of them worked in normal mode will be left to the conscience of European propagandists. But suppose that indeed every third missile did not reach the target. This means that it is necessary to increase the number of launched missiles in a salvo by a third. Given the breakthrough of ABM / air defense - by 50%. Yes, at least twice. Anyone who needs to have enough rockets. Politicians, intelligence officers and the military understand this well and think about it.

    But ordinary Europeans have so far calmed down. If the average person bought a box of chocolates and one of them turned out to be squashed or incorrectly decorated, he returns it and demands his money back. But 70% combat effectiveness is not enough. For comparison, the effectiveness of US air strikes on Iraq in Operation Desert Storm turned out to be 13%. But these 13% were enough to "bomb Iraq in the stone era."
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 2 November 2015 07: 55
      +2
      Quote: ivanovbg
      But these 13% were enough to "bomb Iraq in the stone era."
      Probably, the whole point is how much interest is taken, if one US missile destroyer surpasses all our boats of the Caspian Flotilla in salvo power, and the Yankees have more than four thousand "axes", then 10% of missiles that have definitely broken through will be quite noticeable. If we make our "Calibers" in pieces, and the Americans "axes" in hundreds and thousands, at the same time they strengthen the missile defense system, and we also strive to sell the S-400 for export ... Don't treat the enemy like a fool, if we declare our capabilities, it’s so stupid not to take into account the capabilities of the enemy, his opposition. To Europe, the United States, perhaps, does not care, so if our even diesel-electric boats, in whole flocks, will quietly "graze" off the coast of America with such cruise missiles, or ICBMs will be on underwater platforms somewhere in the Caspian, reaching the States, this will already be more essential for sobering up the United States.
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 2 November 2015 11: 51
        +2
        To 4000 axes, more than 2700 AGM-158A with a range of 360 km and more than 2500 pieces of JASSM-ER with a range of 980 km must be added. True, they are all non-nuclear. It is not yet possible to fight off a possible 5000 CR salvo. But now they are entering the EW troops, which can "turn" these rackets back. Well, the production of the Vityaz air defense system begins (so far about 12 launchers have been made for testing) with missiles with ARGSN 9M96 / 9M96E (from the S-400 air defense system) and 9M100. These new missiles are just designed to independently search for low-flying targets in a given intended area, including by the external control center.
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 2 November 2015 18: 19
          0
          Quote: Tektor
          To 4000 axes it is necessary to add more than 2700 AGM-158A with a range of 360 km and more than 2500 pieces of JASSM-ER with a range of 980 km. True, they are all non-nuclear. It is not yet possible to fight off a possible 5000 CR salvo. But now they are entering the EW troops, which can "turn" these rackets back.


          They are coming.
          But if you see contracts and terms, then you will cry.
          By 1 pcs per year.
          Orders for 10pcs.
          And what kind of protection is this?
          But no ...
          Only the headquarters of the districts cover and all.
  • parusnik
    parusnik 2 November 2015 07: 18
    +3
    Many now speak of violation of the 1987 INF Treaty... This is said by those who themselves do not keep the word .. and the contracts do not comply ..
  • Egoza
    Egoza 2 November 2015 07: 39
    +2
    Europeans and those who really control Europe are at a loss.

    Are you sure?
    "..... literally days after the holiday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon himself declares:" Facing the blatant inhumanity, the world fell into paralysis ... This makes the very existence of the UN meaningless "(!).
    What happened? Why are UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Peter Maurer so sharp today who issued a joint statement in the text of which accused world leaders of inaction (!).“Today the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross have called for an end to impunity and callous disregard for human life and a renewed commitment to international humanitarian law. We call on everyone who has the ability to influence all parties to the conflict to demand that they treat people humanely and abide by the law, "Ban Ki-moon said at a joint press conference!"
    Yeah! Good intentions ....
    There you go! Dissolve the UN, and there hands are untied !!!!
    1. domokl
      domokl 2 November 2015 08: 23
      +3
      Greetings Elena. In my opinion, you have confused sweet and white ... The statement does not apply to Russia's missile strike.
      And about the dissolution of the UN. So have already passed with the League of Nations. Dissolution is equal to the beginning of the war. That's all. Only the situation in the world is different. Europe will not go to war. Too used to live satisfying. Yes, and refugees ... the United States? Even simpler ... The United States engages in war only when the real winner is visible. To snatch a piece of the pie.
      But do you not take into account the factor of China, India, Brazil and a number of other powerful economies?
      So, one change, to a multipolar world is happening now. And the guarantor of peace in Europe shows its weakness. I think the Europeans are thinking.
  • VadimSt
    VadimSt 2 November 2015 07: 54
    +4
    ... if the rocket pontoon in the fire pond of the village of Pupkino
    Well, well done authors, rightly noticed - there are more seas, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, rivers, swamps and springs in Russia than the Chinese. Hello, RSDM is not land-based!
  • pascal309
    pascal309 2 November 2015 08: 02
    +3
    Indeed, the NATO military is puzzled and confused, the missile defense system did not see missile launches and their very flight to the target. The Americans, with their vaunted intelligence, also overlooked everything. That's why they scratch their turnips, thinking what to do next.
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 2 November 2015 08: 11
    +6
    The mere fact that the confidence in permissiveness and impunity has been destroyed is a big plus and a good "tub" of water to cool hot heads both in the USA and NATO! What else would you like to add? There is no need, gentlemen, "sofa experts" to talk so pejoratively about Russian missile defense systems, otherwise once again you will be disappointed together with the West, and our western counterparts will be very surprised! And as the Great Grandfather Kovpak said that: "... from great surprise there is grit ... (diarrhea according to honey)"!
  • Decathlon
    Decathlon 2 November 2015 08: 33
    +3
    "... in Spain and Portugal they can sleep peacefully for now ..."
    Well, I do not! I am totally against it. Fear must be even!
    1. domokl
      domokl 2 November 2015 08: 40
      +2
      laughing Saturn is working on this problem bully
  • Wolka
    Wolka 2 November 2015 08: 37
    +1
    our Gauges, Iskanders and other and other, like a cold shower for the Yankee hawks and their lackeys ...
  • rotor
    rotor 2 November 2015 09: 08
    +3
    On October 30, cruise and ballistic missiles were launched in various parts of Russia, from Kamchatka to the southern and northern regions. All this happened as part of the verification of the command and control system of the Armed Forces.





  • akudr48
    akudr48 2 November 2015 09: 32
    +2
    The 1987 Treaty is now the only stopper that saves Europe, and indeed the world, from a global change in security

    Let's save Europe less and the whole world, let's think more about Russia.

    The only stopper that still saves Russia is its nuclear power!

    Winged Gauges undoubtedly enhance this power.
  • Concept1
    Concept1 2 November 2015 10: 34
    +4
    Quote: atalef
    Syrian strikes have shown Europe the worthlessness of the missile defense and air defense system that the Americans are creating. They showed the practical vulnerability of European cities in the event of a global conflict. Because there is no missile defense yet, and what can fly from Russia is already in stock. And it’s not a fact that missile defense will be able to cope with a flown even on hypothetical 80-90

    Good morning everyone !
    Hi Roman!
    Just a question, I'm not quite in the subject about air defense
    Caliber (as I understand it) is a universal-based cruise missile.
    In general, nothing (as I understand it) - no different from an ax.
    Doesn't protection against cruise missiles exist? and they are not detected by air defense and missile defense?
    What is the difference between basing the KR in a * pond *, from launching it from a submarine, a ship, an airplane, a ground launcher? - axes start from the same thing.
    So the question (who is in the subject and will be able to explain to me) is how the presence of Caliber has fundamentally changed the security system.
    And how did this cross out the capabilities of the same axes flying to 5.5 t km?
    The enemy’s presence of a symmetrical response, in the absence of an attacker with similar missile defense systems - seems to be unable to change the balance, especially dramatically.


    The trick is that NATO does not have such a powerful, deeply echeloned pro / air defense system as Russia has. which includes the complexes S300, S400, Buki, Torah, Pantsari, Tunguska, Sosny, Wasps, as well as the unique Mig 31, from 2016 C350 will be added, S500 is on the way, coupled with the latest radar systems of all possible ranges, such as Voronezh DM , Sky-U, etc., not to mention the missile defense and air defense system of Moscow. And all this is covered with 18 types of the latest electronic warfare systems. And such a powerful pro and air defense system follows from our DEFENSE doctrine. We have always had a priority of SHIELD defense (because we don’t need the West, to put it mildly, for nothing, with all its "values") And the West has always honed the SWORD by developing any plans like Barbarossa. Well, as it turned out, Russia also has a SWORD ...)))
    1. alexej123
      alexej123 2 November 2015 10: 45
      +2
      I wrote to him about the same thing, in the West there is no SYSTEM of air defense / missile defense systems. You have developed the topic in more detail. Thank.
    2. mav1971
      mav1971 2 November 2015 18: 24
      -4
      Quote: concept1


      The whole joke is that NATO does not have such a powerful, deeply echeloned system of pro / air defense as Russia has. which includes C300, C400, Buki, Torah, Armor, Tunguska, Pine, Wasp complexes, as well as unique 31 Mig, with 2016 C350 will also be added, on the C500 approach, coupled with the latest radar systems of all possible ranges such as Voronezh DM , Sky-U, etc., not to mention the Moscow missile defense and air defense system. And all this is covered by 18-types of the latest electronic warfare systems.


      Now read about the quantities of equipment purchased.
      How many C400 divisions bought?
      How much does the 300 division cost?
      How much else is on duty?
      How much mercury was purchased. Krauchi? Duration of contracts?
      Please see on the Internet all this is.
      And when you look, just don’t cry!
      You will be hurt by your own words.

      It’s necessary to work and not the praises of that. what really isn’t!
      1. hrych
        hrych 3 November 2015 11: 35
        +3
        Don't cry baby, for the safety of the Russian Federation it is not even necessary, a hypothetical one salvo of the type of operation "Begemot" is enough or at least a routinely completed belay one "Voevoda" in order to inflict unacceptable losses on the enemy, or rather, so that they lose the desire to conquer Russia, having lost a couple (ten - another) of their megalopolises, where the leaders of the world order live with their families and go crazy with power and opportunities ...
        1. mav1971
          mav1971 3 November 2015 15: 38
          -3
          Quote: hrych
          Don't cry baby, for the safety of the Russian Federation it is not even necessary, a hypothetical one salvo of the type of operation "Begemot" is enough or at least a routinely completed belay one "Voevoda" in order to inflict unacceptable losses on the enemy, or rather, so that they lose the desire to conquer Russia, having lost a couple (ten - another) of their megalopolises, where the leaders of the world order live with their families and go crazy with power and opportunities ...


          Only Yarsu I pray! :)

          Thank you kind man, regretted, sheltered! :)
          1. hrych
            hrych 3 November 2015 18: 01
            +2
            You're welcome! Eat for health! drinks
          2. BLOND
            BLOND 4 November 2015 09: 46
            +1
            mav1971 it looks like you have a tantrum ...
            ... although not only for you, mattress covers and mattress covers are also in snot
      2. Concept1
        Concept1 4 November 2015 07: 24
        0
        Already worth 24 C400 motions. approximately 208 PU.
        S300 is 160 units 1900 PU, 200 S-300V
        SAM BUK 400 batteries.
        Air defense shell until 40 complexes.
        Complexes are in dozens ..
        Two large plants Almaz Antey are being built, Production growth in the defense industry reaches 20% per cent, which is still ....
        While you are here, people work in three shifts.
  • Streich
    Streich 2 November 2015 10: 57
    +2
    The article is interesting, calm and competent. Yes, everyone was surprised by the launches of the Klibrs from boats, but the same missiles can be used from planes, etc. so that the opponents probably thoughtful. But it is not "bread alone" that you can be frightened by missiles alone. Let me remind you when the Americans wanted to get into Syria about, of course, chem. weapons, two missiles fell into the sea. What, who started them silence. Then it seemed like the Jews with the Americans experienced something and literally at once the Americans postponed everything and went for everything with Lavrov. And interestingly true? There was a rather small amount of infa there was an article on our portal that the rackets were destroyed by some system? I do not want to be widowed like that, I will come closer. On April 12, an old SU24 swooped down on the super modern destroyer Donald Kwak and swooped over the destroyer 12 times. How's that? By the way, Vladimir Vladimirovich very subtly avoided the question, therefore, the occasion and turned the arrows to Bastion's radars.
    Missiles, missiles, but now there are enough electronic warfare equipment that would not only defend but completely extinguish all electronic systems.
    At 80, we ourselves made a radar out of the means at our disposal to determine the traffic police radars, but they didn’t install them; our radars fired the radars aimed at us that were too powerful. Of course the distance was not kilometers. But time passed and serious people did something in this area. It seems to me. At this time intervals, the electronic warfare systems will be more confident about themselves. What I am very pleased!
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 2 November 2015 22: 08
      0
      EW systems in our army unit.
  • wild
    wild 2 November 2015 11: 06
    -1
    Bullshit is all that no one knew that the Russian Federation does not have such KR. Everybody knew everything perfectly and from five years ago, and I remember a long time ago it was written that the sea-based missiles of the Kyrgyz Republic do not fall under the contract and we have them. Another thing is that the concept of a mosquito fleet with which the USA has been worn since 20 years and in which decent funds have been swollen has not been realized from the USA, but in Russia it has been realized and even tested. All the highlight is just in this and at hour X, many small-tonnage vessels gather at a point and inflict a dread. The chip is in a small draft and the inability to track in which pond they focus.
  • ermolai
    ermolai 2 November 2015 12: 20
    +1
    Quote: Sirocco
    and after 20 years, when a new, young, generation of immigrants grows up, they will sweep away the Europeans

    ek, my friend, you waved for 20 years, they won’t wait so much, they already demand today, they download rights, I think much more likely there will be good European eunuchs, with harems.
  • G_E_T_Z
    G_E_T_Z 2 November 2015 13: 33
    +1
    article is good.

    regarding comments.

    you need to understand how the KR flies. she has no AI on board. KR (any) flies along a rigid trajectory. The mode of enveloping the relief does not exist, it is only a conditional phrase. it all depends on the accuracy of intelligence about the location of the pro and the availability of information about the terrain on the flight path. in fact, the KR flies as instructed by the operator in the flight program. he is responsible for the route. we can say KR flies in a virtual space in which it is prescribed when and in what place to be and is oriented mainly by satellites. according to entom, so many turning points are invested (which was mentioned in the report after the launch of calibers).

    if we have so much developed electronic warfare, why don't you consider something similar in the Kyrgyz Republic? in addition to a flight height of 20-100m, it can also affect the likelihood of delivering an SMS to the addressee.

    Who told you that America didn’t know anything? or maybe she knew but was silent. since there is nothing to oppose. if it is recognized - then why does Europe need it?

    the silence of Europe does not mean that she did not understand. perhaps everything is cut out and censored. so that there is no panic. since neither she nor america has anything to hide behind.
  • Stalnov I.P.
    Stalnov I.P. 2 November 2015 14: 24
    +3
    I am not a fan of GDP, especially in domestic policy, but in foreign policy I am 95-98% in favor, despite the fact that we still do not know many questions and will never know. After the shooting with Calibers, the entire nuclear triad was shot, then the representatives of the electronic warfare added when they said that they could completely close certain territories, moreover, hundreds of square kilometers. And now let's remember not a distant story, when in the press and on TV in the early 2000s they talked about the creation of cold plasma, about which ICBMs simply break like a glass ball on a concrete wall and which should have started working by 2005 if the USSR was alive. Let us recall the recent history of 2012, when two Israeli missiles launched towards Syria, having flown 280 km, for some reason, fell sharply into the sea before reaching the target, they were almost immediately detected by our missile control systems after the launch, and the Americans admitted that the launches were only a few hours after our statement, and then hesitated and chewed for a long time, probably hard to chew. The United States and Israel referred, but ours did not dissuade them that these were training launches. Remember the treaty on medium-range missiles, the KOALO project is a hypersonic strategic cruise missile that was tested and was practically put into service, but came under the treaty between the USSR and the United States, much was said about it until 2010, then the conversation somehow dried up, but comrades from Concern "Tactical missile weapons" said that a hypersonic missile was tested and put into service for Pantsir and I am sure that the KOALO project has not been forgotten either, well, it is not possible to forget it. All this from open military and civilian sources. It turns out that WE know about less than 1% of what we have and this is GOOD, I am sure that our top leadership in the military sphere is doing much better than in the economic sphere, this is a small injection from the POWER. Let the adversary think, he has now, but in general, lately, BRAINS IN RAPID and the more they will be like this, the better for the RUSSIAN PEOPLE and the STATE. I HAVE HONOR TO OUR MILITARY, SPECIAL SERVICES, THE READER AND THE SITE MEMBERS, AS WELL AS THE SITE ORGANIZERS FOR THE POSSIBILITY TO EXPRESS YOUR THOUGHTS!
  • zulusuluz
    zulusuluz 2 November 2015 16: 18
    0
    And Putin is completely unlike Gorbachev. He will not sell the interests of his country for beautiful wrappers of Western goods. - As they say, comments are superfluous.
  • Old26
    Old26 2 November 2015 18: 41
    +1
    Quote: Per se.
    or ICBMs will be on submarine platforms somewhere in the Caspian

    A contract to read is not fate? Banned in Yandex and Google ???

    Quote: I.P. Stalnov.
    Remember the treaty on medium-range missiles, the KOALO project is a hypersonic strategic cruise missile that was tested and was practically put into service, but came under the treaty between the USSR and the USA, a lot was said about it until 2010, then the conversation somehow dried up, but comrades from Concern "Tactical Missile Armament" said that a hypersonic missile was tested and put into service for Pantsir and I am sure that the KOALO project has not been forgotten either,

    Let's start with the fact that in-1 is not KOALO, but "Koala". This is the NATO designation of the Meteorite-A rocket, which was actually tested, but was never HYPERSONIC. This is a supersonic missile with a flight range of 3000 km. They say a lot. After all, paper (the Internet) will endure everything, even if they write nonsense. Now Koala called the X-90 missile. Everyone complains that this hypersonic thing is not accepted for service. At the same time, they post as an experimental photograph GZLA "GELA". And the name of a missile not put into service is given by one that only a missile put into service has (index Х for air-to-ground missiles only given upon acceptance into service. And her, this KOALU no one has yet taken, and it is hardly possible to adopt a non-existent missile.

    Hypersonic on the Shell? AND FUCKI would like to ask? With a range of 20000 meters, does the missile overcome it in 15-20 seconds? Want 5 seconds? And what's the point, if at the same time it cannot fully maneuver and fall apart from overloads?

    Quote: I.P. Stalnov.
    Recall the recent history of 2012, when two Israeli missiles launched towards Syria, flying 280 km, for some reason fell sharply into the sea before reaching the target, after launch they almost immediately detected our missile control systems, and the Americans recognized that the launches were only a few hours after our statement, and then hesitated and chewed for a long time, probably chewing hard.

    This is called "I heard the ringing, but I don't know where it is." There was a test launch of missiles as part of missile defense work, which was not planned in order to reach Syria. They still have to fly and fly to it (about 1500 km).
    So what? "Voronezh" spotted, after a few hours there was an answer (no one hesitated or chewed. You should not pass off your Wishlist for realities
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Karavan-150
    Karavan-150 2 November 2015 21: 55
    +3
    To the main passenger of flight 7K9268. Bright eternity on the rainbow ...
    _________________________________
    I put two palms on the window,
    Outside the window - planes in a row ...
    I haven’t grown a bit yet
    But my family say
    Which is already big - I'm already flying
    I’m already resting warm on the sea,
    And I like to watch airplanes ...
    Maybe big, but why grow up?

    Let them read books to me - still a baby
    Let them drive in a stroller, dad builds his eyes,
    Mom knits fur coats, grandmothers teddy bears,
    Dolls and animals are given to me as toys ...

    I put two palms on the window ...
    He is such a big airport!
    I'm like a little baby
    Like a midge. Our name is "aboard" -
    Voice flight number announces
    So we have to go flying now.
    I've already eaten and yawn
    But I’m not closing my eyes yet,
    I'm so curious -
    I need to see the plane ...

    Maybe I’m dreaming - I’m flying like a bird,
    I run my hands near the clouds
    The sun jumps in the sky like a bright ball
    Blinds my eyes ... You can’t fall asleep ...

    Mom and Dad are nearby - I don’t be alone ...
    I am flying through the sky ... I am flying home ....
  • bad
    bad 3 November 2015 15: 11
    0
    Quote: zulusuluz
    And Putin is completely unlike Gorbachev. He will not sell the interests of his country for beautiful wrappers of Western goods. - As they say, comments are superfluous.
    -fact! laughing
  • Alexander_
    Alexander_ 4 November 2015 10: 37
    0
    "the parties took time to think"

    As the states withdrew from the ABM Treaty, they thought it all up. Any agreements on restrictions with the Western aggressor are futile, as well as with the Middle East. In vain we pay taxes.
  • Semen Semyonitch
    Semen Semyonitch 4 November 2015 11: 23
    0
    This did not excite anyone there, because a nuclear warhead with a range of 500 km did not plow anyone in the West.
    Even the Poles ??? winked
  • AGV Pagan
    AGV Pagan 4 November 2015 14: 09
    0
    "And Putin is completely unlike Gorbachev. He will not sell the interests of his country for beautiful wrappers of Western goods" - And thank God! Let the first live long, and let the second die in cramps! am
  • KievObuvel
    KievObuvel 4 November 2015 22: 10
    0
    Hai Currently, there is increasingly a need to buy different types of shoes, such as: high-heeled men's shoes
    , female sneakers
    or children's low shoes
    in the online store at good prices. In the manufacture of shoes use: Distinguish between natural and synthetic materials. Leather or artificial leather: Dermatin, Nubuck, Plastic and various types of plastic, Rubber - material for sandal elements, as well as soles. Molded rubber soles are often not repairable. Fabric - natural or artificial. Wood - for example, the famous old Dutch shoes; or tree bark - for example, bast bast shoes. Rubber - for the sole, natural. Materials for shoe finishing are more diverse: from glass to diamonds. More and more jewelry houses are fighting for cooperation with shoe companies. Polyurethane - Material for the sole. All you can do is google women's sports shoes
    . After you can make a choice with a good choice of many options and click on the post http://obuv-kiev.com.ua/detskaja-obuv/tufli-1635725277.html
    Have you heard about famous shoe designers such as: Vivienne Westwood, Jimmy Chu, Christian Louboutin, Manolo Blanic, Salvatore Ferragamo, Charles Jourdan, Valentino Garavani, Beth Shack, Pura Lopez?
  • Fight cat
    Fight cat 5 November 2015 01: 27
    0
    can you imagine how much the Pentagon lobbyists of the military-industrial complex lost money, literally with blood pulled this money from their mouth from a volley of Caliber-NK missiles. they planned there planned based on old intelligence and here on you. Cold water is being bugged, and now it is not clear who will buy the very missile defense and air defense systems of Amerigostan ... and some began to think! what
  • Old26
    Old26 5 November 2015 08: 27
    0
    Quote: Fighting Cat
    can you imagine how much the Pentagon lobbyists of the military-industrial complex lost money, literally with blood pulled this money from their mouth from a volley of Caliber-NK missiles. they planned there planned based on old intelligence and here on you. Cold water is being bugged, and now it is not clear who will buy the very missile defense and air defense systems of Amerigostan ... and some began to think! what

    Yes, they have not lost anything. And they rely on data that have been collected and analyzed by specialists for years, and not like we sometimes do. I heard, dived into the Internet, read the first or second article and already special. If ours (advertising and PR is still a great thing) did not inform us about the volley from the Caspian, would we learn a lot? Or again "From the Voices"?
    They perfectly understand and know how and how to shoot down this type of missile, what kind of air defense is needed for this. Unlike us, they have been using them for at least a quarter of a century, knowing all the pros and cons. So do not give out a hysteria to the media as the ultimate truth.

    The only thing that was declared openly by this volley is that we have a weapon similar to the Tomahawk. The same small and long-range.
    Whether this will lead to a revision of the global security system - yes, it will. But don't think that this weapon is a panacea. A good tool for performing a certain range of tasks, especially in local conflicts. But not more. No "super breakthrough" happened