Electronic warfare. Foreign anxiety and Russian plans

One of the main directions of development of the domestic armed forces is the creation of new electronic warfare systems. Such equipment makes it possible to impede or make impossible the work of various enemy systems, such as communications equipment or radar detection stations. Disabling enemy detection and communication equipment gives troops a certain advantage, which can be used to effectively solve existing problems.


In recent years, a large number of various systems of electronic reconnaissance and electronic warfare have been adopted for armament of various types of armed forces. A new equipment of this purpose is installed on ships and airplanes, as well as performed in the form of self-propelled land complexes. All this makes it possible to effectively solve a number of problems of suppressing communication channels, countering detection tools, etc.

The main manufacturer of EW systems in our country is the Concern "Radioelectronic Technologies" (KRET). The various organizations that are part of the Concern regularly report on the creation, commencement of mass production or the delivery of the latest electronic warfare systems and other equipment to the troops. All this is a good reason for the joy of fellow citizens. At the same time, foreign specialists and the military are trying to predict what will happen next and how the latest Russian systems can affect a hypothetical armed conflict.



Back in August of this year, Defense News published several interesting statements by American military leaders, as well as retired generals. In the context of the war in Ukraine, in which, according to the official American version, the Russian armed forces are involved, several statements were made that affect the development of Russian EW facilities. The generals quoted by Defense News are prone to good estimates of Russian success.

The commander of the NATO ground forces in Europe, Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, noted that the Ukrainian conflict helps the Alliance’s military collect information on the latest Russian systems. The general said that the Ukrainian military can teach a lot to their American counterparts. So, the US military never came under fire from Russian artillery and did not come across Russian EW systems. Ukrainians, in turn, have this experience and can share it with NATO experts.

Thus, with the help of the Ukrainian military, American experts will learn about the Russian electronic warfare systems, as well as receive information about the characteristics, range, tactics of use, etc. It should be noted, B. Hodges and earlier touched upon the topic of Russian EW facilities. Previously, he argued that they are very painful for the enemy.

Defense News also published the opinion of Lori Bakhut, the former head of the EW US Army service. This specialist called the main problem of American troops. He believes that it is directly connected with the recent armed conflicts: the American army had not fought for decades in the conditions of the use of communication suppression by the enemy. As a result, the armed forces do not know how to work in such conditions. There is no tactics to act in such situations, in addition, no one prepares to work when the enemy uses EW systems.

L. Bakhut also recognizes that Russia surpasses the United States in the capabilities of electronic warfare. The former head of the EW service notes that the United States has advanced intelligence and can listen to anything. Nevertheless, the Americans do not have even a tenth of the Russian capabilities for disabling equipment. According to the expert, EW products are highly effective, but they are also a “non-kinetic form of attack”. Such an impact is harder to watch, and it is unlikely to be perceived as an open attack.

In late October, General Frank Gorenk, the US Air Force Commander in Europe, touched upon the topic of Russian EW assets. He believes that the Russian military was able to close an important breach, which is why American opportunities began to melt. In addition, Russia’s new opportunities in the A2 / AD (Anti-access / Area-denial) strategy are a cause for concern. This strategy implies preventing adversary troops from entering its territory or reducing its capabilities during a breakthrough.

Rossiyskaya Gazeta cites the commentary of KRET Director General Nikolai Kolesov on Gorenko’s statements. He argues that Russia is not engaged in plugging gaps. On the contrary, our country is returning to the positions left earlier. EW facilities are one of the main components of the A2 / AD concept when it comes to armed conflict with an adversary that relies on air superiority, precision weapons and intelligence data. According to N. Kolesov, the EW can knock such trumps out of the hands of the enemy, disrupting the so-called power projection.

Also at the end of October, RIA News published a few interesting statements by the General Designer and Deputy General Director of KRET on EW and Innovations Yuri Maevsky. The Concern's General Designer touched upon the subject of further development of domestic electronic warfare systems. As follows from the words of a specialist, the Russian industry has big plans for this.

According to Mayevsky, the United States is deploying missile defense facilities in Europe as part of the implementation of the so-called. rapid global strike, the purpose of which is the destruction of Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles of various types on the flight trajectory. Such threats require an appropriate response. In particular, the possible appearance of solutions "lying in the EW plane." Such questions are already being worked out by the specialists of Concern "Radio-electronic technologies".

Y. Mayevsky also said that work is already underway on EW systems designed to counter enemy unmanned systems. There are already prototypes of similar equipment. Details of these projects have not yet been disclosed, but it can be assumed that they are based on the idea of ​​suppressing UAV communication channels, after which he will not be able to effectively carry out the task.

Another promising area is the creation of a new generation of electronic warfare helicopter systems. In the field of electronic warfare, new technologies are being introduced, such as digital electronics, microelectronics, broadband phased antenna arrays, etc., which allows you to accordingly update systems of various classes, including those intended for installation on aviation technique. According to Yu. Maevsky, KRET is currently working on a plan to create helicopter complexes for aviation defense. The general designer of the Concern is optimistic about the future and does not doubt the successful completion of the work.

In early November, Y. Mayevsky revealed new details of the work of the EW. KRET has chosen a new strategy for the development of radio intelligence and electronic warfare. All such tools will now be developed on the basis of uniform hardware solutions. Such unification, through the use of uniform modules, will reduce the development time, as well as simplify and reduce the cost of manufacturing products. In addition, some gains are expected in weight, size and power consumption.

Regular reports on the development, commissioning and supply of electronic warfare systems are cause for optimism, as well as pride in the domestic industry. In addition, they provide an occasion for curious statements made by the current and former commanders of foreign armies. Statements of such specialists are of particular interest, since they can reveal the concerns of foreign countries related to the latest Russian projects.

Only in the last few days a number of news about current and future developments in the field of EW has appeared. Concern "Radio-electronic technologies" is developing new aviation systems of electronic warfare, means of countering drones, etc. In addition, the possibility of creating means to suppress some elements of the Euro-Atlantic anti-missile defense system is not excluded.

Thus, there is every reason to believe that the troops in the future will receive new EW assets, and the situation in the media sphere, in general, will remain without major changes. Domestic industry will report on their successes, the armed forces will continue to report on the development of new technology, and foreign generals, as now, will continue to express concern related to Russian innovations. In the meantime, the potential of radio intelligence and electronic warfare units will grow, increasing the overall capabilities of the armed forces as a whole.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://tass.ru/
http://defensenews.com/
http://rg.ru/
http://russian.rt.com/
http://kret.com/
Author:
Photos used:
Kret.com
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. ImPerts 9 November 2015 07: 40 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    This is one of the asymmetric responses that we can oppose to the Western "partners." The developments of the Soviet Union superimposed on modern knowledge and technological capabilities give us such opportunities that we will more than once scare our “partners” in the world league soldier
    A joke about a bucket of nuts in orbit is of course a joke, but every joke has a fraction of a joke hi
    1. oldseaman1957 9 November 2015 08: 52 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      This is still with our far from advanced electronic technologies. And if there will be a breakthrough in electronics, then great grief awaits our dear "partners".
      1. Vadim237 9 November 2015 18: 22 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        They’ll already become advanced.
        1. mirag2 9 November 2015 21: 07 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The achievements of the Soviet Union superimposed on modern knowledge and technological capabilities
          - here it is more appropriate to replace the words "developments of the Soviet Union" with "knowledge of physics".
          ps how much you can refer to "developments", "backlogs" - all this is already in the past, the generation has changed so there are no old specialists-pensioners all, and this is history.
  2. paxil 9 November 2015 07: 58 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    The general said that the Ukrainian military can teach a lot to their American counterparts. So, the US military never fell under the shelling of Russian artillery and did not collide with Russian electronic warfare systems. Ukrainians, in turn, have such experience and can share it with NATO experts.
    Some kind of nonsense, however laughing .
  3. Kalmar 9 November 2015 08: 46 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    But we once purchased samples of foreign unmanned aerial vehicles. No one has ever tried to run the EW systems on them? Well, it’s good to learn to jam GPS reliably: this would greatly complicate the use of many high-precision weapons by our “partners”.
    1. tacet 9 November 2015 09: 50 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Have tried. In 2014, in the territory of the ARC, they seized control and planted 2 drones.
  4. Tatar 174 9 November 2015 08: 59 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Electronic warfare systems have enormous potential, putting satellites with these systems into orbit, you can drown everything. Not a single plane will fly, not a single rocket will find its target, not a single radio transmitter will work ... Maybe this is the super task - to control all the radio activity of the planet, because this is not a weapon in the classical sense and putting such systems into orbit is not prohibited . Or banned?
    1. Kalmar 9 November 2015 10: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Electronic warfare systems have enormous potential, putting satellites with these systems into orbit, you can drown everything

      If you drown out everything at all, then your own communication / control systems will stand up. Including control systems for the same EW satellites. The whole planet will quietly wait until their batteries run out :)

      Then, as I understand it, it is unrealistic to create a satellite that can qualitatively fade out interference at all possible radio frequencies. Say, the range of VLF satellites will not be easy to fill up.

      Finally, some unbroken bands of interference still need to be left “for oneself," which means the enemy will be able to use them.
  5. sevtrash 9 November 2015 09: 53 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The development of attack / defense means is a dynamic process, now, for example, the means of counteraction is effective, then the enemy recognized the threat, created a new attack / defense means, etc. I wonder what is the basis of this provision on the advantage in electronic warfare? Indeed, as elsewhere, success depends on the volume / quality of material / intangible resources aimed at solving a particular problem.
  6. Alexey-74 9 November 2015 10: 09 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I think the United States is not in vain hysterical about our electronic warfare, they do not fully know its capabilities, and with those situations that they have already faced, they do not bode well for them ... they howled - they cannot build tactics ..... good
  7. Mestny 9 November 2015 10: 12 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Quote: sevtrash
    Indeed, as elsewhere, success depends on the volume / quality of material / intangible resources aimed at solving a particular problem.

    Not just material ones.
    There is also a theoretical part. And this kind of research, as was conducted in the USSR, is being conducted now.
    And it is far from always important whether you use the latest technologies or not for implementation. You just need to imagine what you want to achieve, what result. And the funds can be very different, including from what is.
    As the saying goes, a real musician will play on an empty glass in the absence of a piano, and everyone will gasp.
  8. over 9 November 2015 11: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Pleased with such news. I always thought that all missile defense and missile defense systems were yesterday. Expensive and not effective. Another thing is systems that turn any means of air attack into an ordinary piece of metal. Just turn off the light)))
  9. 31rus 9 November 2015 11: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Here, an interesting “interaction”, the development of electronic warfare and airborne forces, which is common, but still the same, does not give the enemy any chance (this is to use the airborne divisions in the developed enemy air defense system)
  10. kav669 9 November 2015 11: 43 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    EW systems have great potential, we do not show everything and do not talk about everything. Let them fear, fear strengthens obedience.
  11. gridasov 9 November 2015 12: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    One sentence is enough, what is expected !!! ??? some gain in mass. dimensions and energy consumption to understand that all developments are based on old scientific principles. Therefore, believe what was said in the article must be very careful.
  12. Reptiloid 9 November 2015 12: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It makes me very happy that the huge achievements of the Soviet Union still support our country.
    Thanks so much for the article!
  13. Tektor 9 November 2015 13: 38 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Now imagine that they will deliver an APU with a power of 100 kW, for example, to Khibiny to wingtips ... Such a “polite” KR will be able to make a gap in any anti-aircraft defense zone and spend a bunch of other missiles next to it.
  14. Engineer engineer 9 November 2015 14: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: gridasov
    that all developments are based on old scientific principles

    And the fact that the apple still falls down doesn’t bother you?
    1. gridasov 9 November 2015 14: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And is it not familiar to you that an apple at each point in the displacement space changes its interaction parameters with this space? And these processes can and should be analyzed in order to manage - is that not interesting for you?
      1. Engineer engineer 9 November 2015 14: 39 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I personally have no doubt that our electronic engineers not only use Ohm's law. smile
  15. Abrekkos 9 November 2015 14: 54 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    Quote: Tartar 174
    putting satellites with these systems into orbit, you can drown everything


    I think you can drown but not more than 3-5% and then for a few seconds. Then a drop of molten metal will remain in orbit. The energy of the sides is now very modest.

    In general, attempts to present EW tools as a panacea or as some kind of super weapon are a very big stretch.

    EWs are effective in a very narrow range (both spatially and temporally) countermeasures. No more.

    And about the fact that the Ukrainians will help them-this is garbage.
    Especially compared to the fact that by the grace of our not far-sighted “strategists” our potential opponents are now studying with pleasure and holding their breath in a completely different region of the world.

    This is taking into account the specifics of this type of weapon, trouble. In the USSR, there were electronic warfare systems too, but their use without the most severe necessity was under the strictest ban.
  16. yuriy55 9 November 2015 16: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    EW tools and systems are aimed primarily against those equipment and weapons that require semiconductor elements and devices in their work. By the way, radio tubes are more protected from the effects of electronic warfare. The asymmetric response of our scientists and the military is the neutralization of the vaunted missile defense system, the creation of which the United States has so boasted. In practice, the deployment of elements of this missile defense system near the borders of the Russian Federation is useless.
    I would like to believe that this is not all the trump cards of our defense industry, although the first game was certainly won.

    It should be noted that the vaunted aircraft carriers of the same America will no longer have such a frightening role for Russian aircraft.
    soldier
  17. Indifferent 9 November 2015 18: 06 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I don’t understand, here the authors understand what they are writing? Why do I think so? I will answer. I still found those times when the esteemed Joseph Vissarionovich lived, and with him not one ... (indecent word here) could not listen to voices from a hillock. Like the Air Force, Freedom, Voice of America, and other evil spirits.
    They broadcast on all radio frequencies from 10 meter range to almost 100 meter. It so happened that my teacher was a radio engineer of the highest class who could do everything with his own hands. In addition, while serving, he dragged home a dozen army receivers. Well, to be honest, I wanted to listen to how foreign liberals interpret our events. I can tell you honestly. This could not be done. As soon as they went on the air, immediately from nowhere turned on the jammer and that's it! Arrived. Jammers covered the whole country and so tightly that the bulk of the listeners did not hear anything. Any attempts to install filters, increase the quality factor of the coils in order to narrow the passband and other tricks did not give anything. Something was heard, but it was a torment. We experimented with antennas to increase the directivity, the converters did ... In general, the electronic warfare was at its best, and this was in the 50s! And now what technique has appeared? I can’t even believe that all this can be created. The circuit is calculated by a computer. Antennas too. Amplifier elements the size of a marigold, but dissipate power by hundreds of watts and operate in frequencies up to gigahertz. Digital technology allows you to switch frequencies with gigahertz speed over the entire range and catch anything from there. There are technologies with microlamps with low-temperature electron emission. In fact, processors are already trying to do it, but on lamps, and the dimensions are only three times larger than on silicon.
    Emitters capable of “melting a tank” with an electromagnetic pulse are created. I am exaggerating, but the opportunities are huge. And all this is probably being applied or is being developed and will soon be in service.
    Our "friends" from NATO will have to switch to spears and arrows. Because all their modern weapons are electronically controlled, and it can be suppressed or taken out of action.
    And this will be the next stage of the inability to start a big war. Everything that will be launched in our direction as a weapon and the anti-weapon will be destroyed. Yet on the electronics !!! And war for NATO will lose its meaning. I am sure that our engineers and designers will one day achieve this. Or maybe already. Unfortunately, everything is classified.
    1. KCA
      KCA 10 November 2015 07: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In the early 90s, I heard from REBovtsev (he served as a signalman, sometimes crossed) about disposable explosive emitters to protect critical objects from nuclear warheads of ballistic missiles at the final stage of the trajectory
  18. Army soldier2 9 November 2015 18: 23 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    Quote: yuriy55
    EW tools and systems are aimed primarily against those equipment and weapons that require semiconductor elements and devices in their work. By the way, radio tubes are more protected from the effects of electronic warfare. The asymmetric response of our scientists and the military is the neutralization of the vaunted missile defense system, the creation of which the United States has so boasted. In practice, the deployment of elements of this missile defense system near the borders of the Russian Federation is useless.
    I would like to believe that this is not all the trump cards of our defense industry, although the first game was certainly won.

    It should be noted that the vaunted aircraft carriers of the same America will no longer have such a frightening role for Russian aircraft.
    soldier

    In fact, electronic warfare equipment is opposed to those that emit or receive radiation in EMD for its functioning.
    Colleagues, raise your hand those who believe that American generals are telling the truth and do not want to increase the defense budget.
  19. Aleksiy 9 November 2015 18: 25 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    The main thing - DO NOT SELL KETA COPIER, and indeed to anyone. Such technologies, this is the pearl of the Russian army, should not be targeted.
  20. Anchonsha 9 November 2015 22: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In fact, it is a terrible weapon, invisible and largely irresistible, and God grant us to develop it further, not yielding to primacy. This is our security guarantee.
  21. Alex 10 November 2015 06: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If the United States begins to talk a lot about the superiority of the enemy, then as a rule this means that an informational background is created for knocking out money for its military programs, one can recall the hysteria in the American press about the backlog in bombers in the 1950s, about the missile backlog in 1960- e gg, etc.