European missile defense system - problems and prospects. Triumph of the THAAD missile defense system Thaad mobile ground-based anti-missile system
4. US missile defense4.1 US global missile defense segments
Figure 1. Purpose of US missile defense elements
In 2002, the United States decided to create a national US missile defense system, the main weapon of which would be GBI (Ground Based Interceptors) long-range interceptor missiles, and a regional missile defense system (also known as theater missile defense), the basis of which would be the systems , designed to intercept medium- and shorter-range missiles.
Based on the concept of building a national missile defense system, it should include the following segments:
Figure 2. Transportation of the GBI missile defense
First segment- defense in the middle section of the trajectory - received the name GMD (Ground Missile Defense). It should be based on anti-missile systems for the transatmospheric interception of ICBM warheads based on GBI anti-missile missiles. It included two positional areas for the deployment of GBI interceptor missiles - in Alaska and California. It was envisaged that the ground echelon would be supplemented by a third position area located in Europe, but these plans were not destined to come true.
Figure 3. US guided missile destroyers
Second segment- defense in the ascending sector, including the active section. Within the framework of this segment, the following are being developed: a multifunctional sea- and land-based missile defense system “Aegis” with “Standard” interceptor missiles of various modifications placed on cruisers, destroyers of the Navy, as well as in silos, capable of intercepting both missiles medium range, and ICBMs. Navy ships equipped with complexes sea-based“Aegis” can cruise unhindered in the World Ocean and actually carry “forward-based missile defense systems” on board, blocking ballistic missiles in the middle and final stages of their flight trajectory. Space systems are also being considered - complexes based on space-based lasers SBL and kinetic interceptors Brilliant Pebbles ("Brilliant Pebbles"), as a legacy from SDI.
Figure 4. THAAD complex on a mobile platform
Third segment- PRO of the final section. Complexes in this segment are currently being developed for protection against short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. These include the ground-based THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 systems, as well as the sea- and ground-based Aegis systems. The groundwork accumulated in the field of missile defense formed the technological basis for work on creating a global layered defense system against ballistic missiles BMD (Ballistic Missile Defense), the creation of which became one of the main elements of US military-technical policy. As a conditional starting point for the beginning of work on the creation of the BMD system, we can take George W. Bush's statement on December 17, 2002 about the beginning of its deployment, which followed the US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty in June 2002 and the restructuring of the program and budget of the Missile Defense Agency.
It is assumed that the presence of these three segments will make it possible to cover all stages of the flight of ballistic missiles and will allow them to be intercepted at any part of the flight path. Also, many experts indicate that the mega-system being created will be capable of not only intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles, but also shooting down satellites, fighting medium-range missiles, and also being a nuclear attack system, but more on these “delights” of the US missile defense system being created a little later.
Let's take a closer look at all three segments of the system being created and start with the long-range GBI interceptors.
4.1.1 Long-range heavy GBI interceptor missiles for the GBMD system.
The GBMD system began to be deployed in 2005 as the first truly operational anti-missile system to destroy enemy missiles and warheads in the mid-trajectory. Its basis is a ballistic missile with a firing range of 2000 - 5000 km.
A little clarification is required here: the GBI anti-missile missile is actually a solid-fuel Minuteman-2 ballistic missile with a kinetic interceptor installed instead of a nuclear warhead. Theoretically, it is possible to install a nuclear warhead on such an anti-missile missile and turn it into a weapon of nuclear attack.
Figure 6. Kinetic interceptor EKV of the GBI complex
A kinetic interceptor is a small spacecraft capable of targeting a warhead in space as well as maneuvering. This interceptor will destroy a warhead by direct collision with the attacked warhead. A kinetic counter-attack method, when the speed of the target and the anti-missile missile relative to each other is 10-15 kilometers per second, guarantees its destruction in case of a hit. However, this requires very precise targeting. An accuracy of 50-200 meters, as for anti-missiles with a neutron warhead, is no longer enough.
It was the GBI missiles that were supposed to become the basis of Euro-missile defense, which would make it possible not only to destroy ICBMs launching from the European part of Russia, but also, if desired, to launch a nuclear strike, for example, on Moscow with a flight time of about 3 minutes. however, plans to locate the GBI in Europe were not destined to come true, as there followed an extremely harsh reaction from our country, both officially and, probably, unofficially. The Barack Obama administration revised plans to deploy missile defense in Europe, replacing the GBI system with a sea and ground version of Aegis with SM-3 interceptors. In addition, the development of the European missile defense system was somewhat extended in time, divided into several stages.
Plans for the period until 2025 include the creation of a third missile defense region of the continental United States, covering the industrial centers of the Atlantic coast;
Bringing the total number of GBMD missile defense systems in the United States to 56 (28 in Alaska, 14 in California and 14 on the Atlantic coast); in the future, up to 100 interceptor missiles.
4.1.2 Mobile interceptors of the "Aegis" system ("Aegis" - Aegis) land and sea based. SM-3 rocket.
Fig 7. Launch of the SM-3 rocket from the vertical cell Mk. 41
The Aegis system is a multifunctional combat information and control system (MBICS), consisting of an integrated network of sensors and computers, as well as strike weapons in the form of the first generation Standard missile 2 (SM-2) interceptor missiles and more advanced Standard interceptor missiles missile 3 (SM-3), launched using universal vertical launch systems Mk 41 located below the main deck of such cruisers and destroyers. Currently, such missile cells are carried by the Ticanderoga missile cruiser and the "class" missile destroyers. "Arleigh Burke""Officially, 24 destroyers and one missile cruiser are now involved in the construction of the Aegis system, but the launch cells Mk 41 They are universal and are used for a large list of US weapons, and are also installed on a huge number of ships of the US and NATO countries, which allows them to quickly reorient ships to solve missile defense problems.
MBIUS Aegis was originally developed in the 70s. last century with the aim of destroying aircraft and anti-ship missiles. For the first time such a system was installed on warships US Navy in 1983
Fig. 8. Universal vertical cells Mk. 41
In subsequent years this program has repeatedly undergone deep modernization in order to increase the effectiveness of its information, reconnaissance and strike-combat components. The implementation of a long-term program for the installation and modernization of this system is entrusted simultaneously to the Navy and the US Missile Defense Agency, which is the lead agency responsible for the development, creation and deployment of the US missile defense system on a global scale.
The EPAP program provides for the deployment of not only a maritime, but also a land-based version of the Aegis MBIUS - the so-called system Aegis Ashore missile defense. Such interceptor missiles and corresponding radars will appear by 2015 in Romania, where each division will have missile defense system software in version 5.0, SPY-1 radar and 24 SM-3 Block IB interceptor missiles, which will allow the United States to cover the southern part of the European continent. In 2018, a ground-based version of Aegis with software 5.1 and SM-3 Block IB and Block IIA interceptor missiles will be deployed on the territory of Poland in order to control the space of the northern part of Europe.
Fig 9. What Aegis Ashore will look like
One should also take into account the fact that ships with the Aegis system can be used not only to intercept ballistic missiles, but also be used as anti-satellite weapons, which has already been proven by the destruction of the American satellite.
Graphically, the stages of modernization of the SM-3 missile are presented in the image from the manufacturer, which shows that in the fourth phase of improvement of the SM-3 missile, it will be capable of shooting down missiles of almost any range.
Figure 10. Stages of development of SM-3 missile defense capabilities
However, the danger of Aegis is not only that it is being actively improved, but also that the number of carriers of this system is constantly increasing.
The US Department of Defense is committed to involving warships of NATO allies in providing missile defense in Europe. This was announced on February 28, 2012 by the acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy James Miller. “Some of our allies have naval capabilities that can be modernized and included in the NATO missile defense system,” he noted. - The Alliance should work on concepts international cooperation in the field of sea-based missile defense, providing for the exchange of radar data and cooperation in the destruction of missiles. This may become the basis for the formation of a group of countries with sea-based missile defense components.” According to Miller, at the summit of leaders of the North Atlantic Alliance, which is scheduled to take place on May 20-21, 2012 in Chicago, it may be “announced that a group of allies will clarify the possibility of implementing one or more initiatives in the field of missile defense.”
In November 2011, plans were announced to re-equip the air defense radar into long-range missile defense radar on four frigates Netherlands. These are the ships De Zeven Provincien (F-802), which has 32 launch silos, as well as the same type Tromp (F-803), De Ruyter (F-804) and Evertsen (F-805), which were introduced into the Dutch Navy in 2002 -2005
As stated, this step was taken as a “national contribution to NATO’s missile defense capabilities.” Some US NATO allies also have ships equipped with missile defense systems: three ships have Germany and three - Denmark. She showed interest in modifying several of her ships for this system. France. They have their own sea-based missile defense systems UK and Spain. Washington does not object to the ships of these European states being armed with SM-3 interceptor missiles.
At the same time, missile defense potential is being built up in the Asia-Pacific region. They contribute to it Australia, which plans to build three Hobart-class destroyers (the first of which will be delivered to the Navy in 2013), as well as Japan - six Kongo-class destroyers will be converted to the Aegis system, although four ships were previously planned to be modernized. South Korea's sea-based anti-missile defense systems (KDX-III class destroyers) have already joined this process; it is possible that the US navy will participate in the anti-missile project Taiwan And Saudi Arabia .
It should be noted that Japan, which seems to be neutral in words, but in reality has already become a bloc country, is actively participating in work to improve the most promising types of SM-3 interceptor missiles. In particular, Japanese engineers found special technical solutions, which allow you to adjust the rocket trajectory by high speeds. In fact, Tokyo is being drawn into an anti-missile arms race, which is causing reasonable concern in many countries around the world, including in the Asia-Pacific region. Washington achieved the creation of two specialized structures in the field of missile defense in this region: “trilateral forums” with the participation of Australia, the United States and Japan, as well as the United States, South Korea and Japan. In March 2012, speaking at a political science forum in Washington, US Deputy Secretary of Defense Madeleine Creedon announced Washington’s readiness to create a broad regional missile defense infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region, similar to the European missile defense system. Following her, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke in favor of strengthening cooperation on the development of the US missile defense system with the Gulf states.
By the end of 2011, the US Navy already had a total of 24 cruisers and destroyers equipped with the Aegis MBIUS. The total number of SM-3 interceptor missiles in the US Navy was 111 units.
By 2025, it is planned to increase the number of ships with an anti-missile version of the Aegis system to 32 units, and it is also planned to integrate an Aegis-based missile defense system into the Japanese fleet.
4.1.3 THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 ground-based systems
Figure 11. Launch of an anti-missile missile from the THAAD complex
These systems are designed to directly cover protected objects from warheads arriving from space at the final stage of their trajectory.
American mobile against missile system(PRK) long-range interception THAAD(Theater High Altitude Area Defense) is designed to destroy operational-tactical missiles (OTR, firing range up to 1000 km) and medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBM, up to 3500 km) at altitudes of 40 -150 km and ranges up to 200 km.
R&D for its creation has been carried out since 1992 by Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space with a group of industrial enterprises, among which Raytheon is responsible for the development of a multifunctional radar. They have one of the highest priorities within the theater missile defense program and are at the stage of confirming the technical feasibility of the chosen concept.
At the beginning of 1995, the White Sands missile defense site (New Mexico) was deployed prototypes launcher, multifunctional radar GBR-T and command post(KP) of this complex, and flight tests of experimental samples of its anti-missile (AM) have also begun.
Since 2000, the program has been in preparation for serial production engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). In May 2004, production of 16 interceptor missiles began for flight testing at Lockheed Martin's new plant in Pike County, Alabama. 
Figure 11. THAAD kinetic interceptor
The head part of the anti-missile missile is made in the form of a detachable homing kinetic interception stage, designed to destroy ballistic targets through a direct hit.
Anti-aircraft missile system "Patriot" PAC-3 (Patriot Advanced Capability-3)- one of the latest options for modernizing the famous Patriot air defense system and is designed to intercept warheads of tactical ballistic and cruise missiles, including those made using stealth technology.
Figure 12. Launch of the Patriot anti-aircraft missile
The first was carried out under the leadership of Ratheon and included the development of an improved MIM-109 anti-aircraft missile with active head homing, high-explosive fragmentation warhead and with an engine length increased by 0.76 m. The dimensions and mass of the MIM-109 rocket were almost identical to the MIM-104 rocket, and at the same time, the available overloads of the new rocket reached 40 g.
The second option, proposed by Loral Vought Systems, includes the use of a highly maneuverable ERINT (Extended Range Interceptor) direct-impact interceptor missile in the Patriot PAC-3 complex.
In August 1994, the competition commission chose the second option and a contract worth $515 million was signed with Loral Vought Systems. and duration of action is 47 months. The ERINT missile defense system was created, first of all, as an interceptor of the lower line of missile defense in the theater of military operations, in addition to the upper line interceptor - the THAAD missile. Features of the PAC-3 are the use of an active homing warhead and a relatively short range - up to 15-20 km for ballistic targets and up to 40-60 km for aerodynamic targets. Moreover, for maximum realization capabilities and minimizing the cost of performing a combat mission, the PAC-3 battery includes missiles of earlier versions of the PAC-2.
These systems (THAAD and Patriot) will be deployed both in the USA and Europe, and in South Korea, which allows us to assert that the global missile defense system considers not only the Russian Federation, but also the PRC as the main adversary.
An interesting point in the creation of a global US missile defense system was that the leadership of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) repeatedly noted that main feature creating a BMD system is refusal to pre-develop its architecture. It should be determined and refined as development and testing of its major components are completed. In order to accelerate the creation of a missile defense system, since 2004 the BMD program has been implemented in stages, in two-year blocks, which are “capability packages” of the system (or its individual components) created over previous years.
The refusal to pre-develop a missile defense architecture, as well as the US's many years of dedicated work to create it, indicates several things:
1. US missile defense will be built regardless of any technical and technological problems
2. US missile defense has the highest priority over the development of other military systems
3. US missile defense will be implemented in any case
4.2 Phases of US global missile defense deployment
Figure 13. Four phases of US global missile defense development
After Barack Obama came to power, the United States began to adjust its plans. The talk was about creating a more mobile and flexible system that would mainly provide interception of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. The main weapon is now considered not the massive silo-based GBI interceptor, but the more compact and lightweight SM-3, which has one significant advantage - mobility.
In September 2009, US President Barack Obama made a special statement on missile defense. He announced the Pentagon’s readiness to continue to develop the missile defense system on a global scale, as well as to adjust plans for the deployment of a third positional area of the anti-missile system on the territory of Poland and the Czech Republic, previously advocated by the previous American administration. Simultaneously The White house unveiled a program for deploying missile defense facilities in Europe. It is planned that the deployment of anti-missile systems will take place in four stages.
First phase(planned for completion around 2011) provides for the deployment (in Europe) of already established and proven missile defense systems, including sea-based Aegis systems, SM-3 interceptors (Block-IA) and AN/TPY-2 radar detection system with so as to be able to repel regional ballistic missile threats to Europe.
Second phase(to be completed by 2015). It is planned to deploy a more powerful modification of the SM-3 interceptor (Block-IB) in sea- and land-based versions, as well as more advanced sensors necessary to expand the protected area from short- and medium-range missile threats.
Third phase, which is due to end in 2018, involves the development and deployment of an improved SM-3 (Block IIA).
Fourth phase The missile defense system is scheduled to be completed by 2020. It involves the deployment of SM-3 (Block IIB) to better counter mid- and long-range missile threats and possible future intercontinental ballistic missile threats against the United States. It is assumed that until the first ground-based objects appear, US Navy ships with interceptor missiles on board will be on combat duty off the coast of Europe.
At the NATO summit held in November 2010 in Lisbon, the US proposed “phased adaptive approach” to the development of its missile defense systems in Europe was approved.
As stated earlier, it was decided that the NATO missile defense system will be created in the period 2011-2021, and its final configuration will be determined taking into account the reality of missile threats, the availability of technology and other factors. It will be based on elements of the US global missile defense system (positional areas of interceptor missiles in the Czech Republic and Poland, as well as Aegis anti-missile ships in the Mediterranean, North and, not excluded, in the Black and Barents Seas).
4.3 Reconnaissance and target designation means of the US global missile defense system. Satellites and radar
Figure 14. SBIRS satellite
SBIRS (Space-Based Infrared System)- an American two-component integrated space system for early detection of ballistic missile launches (ESRN) of a new generation. In addition to monitoring space launches, the system is designed to determine their flight trajectory, identify combat units and decoys, issue target designations for interception, as well as conduct reconnaissance over the territory of military operations in the infrared range.
Work on its creation began in the mid-90s and was supposed to be completed in 2010, however, as of 2016, only three upper echelon satellites in elliptical orbits (HEO) and two geostationary satellites (GEO) were launched into orbit.
In 1991, the US Department of Defense, analyzing Iraqi launches of short-range ballistic missiles during the war Persian Gulf, came to the conclusion that the existing missile defense (ABM) and space launch warning systems require improvement in terms of providing operational information about short- and medium-range missile launches.
In 1994, the US Department of Defense explored the possibility of combining various space-based infrared systems for missile defense needs. The result of this study was the decision to create a replacement SBIRS system existing system PRO - DSP (English: Defense Support Program - Defense Support Program). The DSP system was created in 1970 as a strategic surveillance and early warning system for long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).
As of 2013, the US Department of Defense has five DSP satellites of the SEWS (Satellite Early Warning System) missile attack warning system. The satellites are deployed in geosynchronous orbits and make it possible to record rocket launches in 40-50 seconds, as well as determine their flight trajectories in the active phase.
The SBIRS early warning system should replace SEWS. It will provide missile detection in less than 20 seconds after launch and will allow the identification of warheads and decoys in the middle part of the trajectory.
The SBIRS program was designed as a complex system of independent components and consists of the following systems:
SBIRS High - a constellation of satellites with infrared equipment on board in geostationary (SBIRS-GEO) and high-elliptical (SBIRS-HEO) orbits;
SBIRS Low - a constellation of satellites in low Earth orbit;
Figure 15. Mobile radar SBX
Radar
In August 2003, it was decided to reactivate the naval base on Adak Island in the Aleutian chain, closed in 1996, to support the key element of the missile defense system being created - the floating SBX radar. A powerful phased array radar was installed on a modernized oil platform capable of moving at speeds of up to 4 knots. On January 2, 2007, its towing began from the naval base of Pearl Harbor to the Aleutian Islands.
According to data presented at the end of February 2007 by the director of the US Missile Defense Agency, Lieutenant General Henry Obering, the US missile defense system at that time already included facilities located in North America, Western Europe and in the Far East:
4 early warning radars: Cobra Dane(Shemia Island, Aleutian Islands); Beale(California); Fylingdales(Great Britain); Thule(Greenland, Denmark);
Sea-based radar SBX, stationed in Pacific Ocean in the Alaska area;
Forward-based radar FBX-T on the island of Honshu (Japan);
Figure 16. Scheme of targeting and control of the American global missile defense system
On March 15, 2013, US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced that the United States intends to deploy a second centimeter-wave radar station in Japan. Mobile radar will become an important component not only systems for protecting American territory, but also regional missile defense system in Asia, which the United States is creating together with Japan and South Korea.
Having briefly examined the elements of US missile defense, we can conclude that a global combat system is being created that will be capable in the future of solving a huge range of defensive and offensive tasks: air defense and missile defense of entire regions from aircraft and cruise missiles, protection from medium-range missiles in Europe and Southeast Asia , protection from ICBMs in all phases of flight, destruction of satellites and space stations, participation in a decapitating nuclear strike, etc.
The talk that interceptors in Europe are a myth and a waste of budgets is completely unfounded.
The US missile defense system is a most dangerous distributed combat system, the final task of which is to give the US global advantage and the ability to dictate its will any country on our planet.
IN last third In part, we will look at how our country’s only missile defense system was built and now exists, as well as what steps our country is taking and will take so as not to burn in the atomic flame from our “partners.”
Perhaps it is not an exaggeration to say that the American THAAD mobile missile defense system being developed is by far the most effective defense system against medium-range ballistic missiles, as evidenced by about 30 successful tests. It is this system that can be a role model in the development of a domestic missile defense system for the foreseeable future.
As you know, recently the First Deputy Prime Minister Russian government Sergei Ivanov set the team of the Almaz-Antey air defense concern the task of developing a unified air defense-missile defense system capable of creating a truly multi-tiered defense against aerodynamic and ballistic attack weapons. True, it is not clear what the Deputy Prime Minister had in mind - to create a single missile to destroy helicopters, cruise missiles, ICBMs and satellites, or whether it was about creating a system with different missiles, but integrated into a single detection and destruction system. If the first, then this is technical absurdity and economic insanity. If the latter, then it is absolutely clear that the backbone of such a system should be something like the American THAAD, around which long-, medium- and short-range air defense systems should be grouped.
The ground component of the American national missile defense system is based on three pillars. The first is the GBI system, capable of hitting targets at long ranges and altitudes, the second is the THAAD system, which undertakes to hit targets in the middle echelon, and the third is the Patriot complexes in the PAC-2 and PAC-3 configurations.
Where did THAAD come from?
In 1987, the US Department of Defense formulated requirements for a missile defense system, which must be mobile and create a reliable missile defense system in a theater of military operations, which can be located thousands of kilometers from the mother country. Probably, the Americans were prompted to take this step, among other things, by the fact of successful work in the USSR on the military S-300B air defense system, which had revolutionary anti-missile capabilities at that time. American experts It was believed that under certain conditions, the anti-missile missile of this complex, designated SA-12B Giant in the West, was capable of intercepting ICBMs, which was a somewhat exaggerated perception of the capabilities of this system. Western experts, presumably, were greatly impressed by the first photos of the S-300V equipped with an oversized missile, the transport and launch container of which was at least 10 m long.
Work on the THAAD program has intensified since 1992. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space was appointed as the lead contractor for the project; Raytheon became responsible for the development of the GBR-T multifunctional radar (T means “transportable”) and the command post (CP) of this complex (see photo). The radar was developed on the basis of the AN/TPY-2 missile defense radar and has a phased array with an area of 9.2 square meters. meters and is capable of detecting targets at a distance of up to 1000 km. The developers were tasked with creating a system that would effectively hit ballistic targets with a flight range of up to 3,500 km. The affected area was supposed to be up to 200 km and at altitudes from 40 to 150 km. Maximum speed anti-missile flight speed is about 3 km/s. At the beginning of 1995, prototypes of the launcher, GBR-T multifunctional radar and command post were deployed at the White Sands missile defense test site (New Mexico), and flight tests of experimental samples of its anti-missile missile began.
THAAD anti-missile - single-stage solid propellant (launch weight 900 kg, length 6.17 m and maximum diameter hull 0.37 m), consists of a head part, a transition compartment and a solid propellant rocket engine with a tail stabilizer skirt. The solid propellant engine was developed by Pratt & Whitney. The head part of the anti-missile missile is made in the form of a detachable homing (IR sensors) KVV kinetic interception stage, designed to destroy ballistic targets through a direct hit. The stage is equipped with a liquid shunting engine, which in the future should be replaced with a solid propellant engine with the necessary characteristics.
Since 2000, the program has been in preparation for serial production; in May 2004, production of 16 pre-production interceptor missiles for flight testing began. Preliminary comprehensive testing of the system will begin in early 2005 and continue until 2009. It is planned that the system will be put into small-scale production in 2007 and the first phase of its deployment will begin.
Let's compare?
Firstly, tall people command respect performance characteristics THAAD anti-missiles. With a length of 6.17 m and a launch weight of only 900 kg, it is capable of hitting targets at ranges of up to 200 km and altitudes of up to 150 km, while developing a speed of up to 3 km/s (there is evidence that the speed is 2.6 km/s ). Impressive, isn't it?
The newest Russian anti-aircraft missile systems The S-300PMU-2 "Favorit" and the S-400 "Triumph" use a modernized 48N6E missile with a length of 7.25 m and a weight of 1800 kg (data from the anniversary book of the IKB "Fakel"). The S-300VM air defense system (Antey-2500) uses a truly gigantic 9M82M missile with a length of 9.913 m and a mass of 5800 kg. The mass of the first stage in the form of a powerful rocket accelerator is 4635 kg, the second - the rocket itself - 1271 kg (data from the website www.pvo.guns.ru). Thus, the weight and size characteristics of these missiles significantly exceed the dimensions of the THAAD anti-missile missile, although they have the same range of hitting targets - up to 200 km (S-300PMU-2 Favorit - 150 km).
As for the flight speed of Russian missiles, conflicting data are provided here. According to some sources, the speed of 48N6E is 1700 m/s, according to others - 2000 m/s. The maximum speed of 9M82M is 2400 m/s, average speed maintained at 1800 m/s. It's clear that Russian missiles inferior in speed to THAAD.
The unknown newest missile developed by the Fakel IKB, part of the Almaz-Antey air defense concern, should be identical in size to the 48N6E missile, since it will be used from standard TPK air defense systems of the S-300P series. This means that its length also exceeds 7 m, and its weight is close to 2 tons. The firing range of this missile is, according to the Air Force command, up to 400 km, and it intercepts ballistic targets at altitudes of up to 50 km (“near space”). Data is provided that the Triumph air defense system is capable of intercepting ballistic missiles with a launch range of up to 3,500 km, the warheads of which enter the atmosphere at a speed of up to 4.8 km/s. That is, the characteristics of the S-400 are presented at the THAAD level. True, whether a missile with such characteristics exists and whether it intercepts targets at such ranges and altitudes is unknown to mere mortals. There are no reports on this topic, but it is said that the tests are being carried out at the Ashuluk training ground. But, one feels that if such tests had taken place, Sergei Ivanov would not have failed to report them, and together with his second successor he organized a race for the number of successes.
Hit the target only with a direct hit
It is known for certain that on April 6, 2007, the THAAD system, during tests in the Hawaiian Islands (Pacific Missile Range), intercepted an R-17 class missile at an altitude of 100 km, and a little earlier intercepted the warhead of a HERA missile, which simulated a medium-range ballistic missile, being composed of second and third stages of the Minuteman-2 ICBM.
The high level of American technology in the field of detection and guidance systems made it possible to implement the concept of a direct hit by the combat stage of the anti-missile missile on the target. For us, this is not yet achievable. The Americans went for such a development because they experienced first-hand that Iraqi SCADs “hit” by a cloud of fragments were not destroyed, but only slightly changed their flight path. A direct hit from such a “deflected” missile directly into a barracks during the first Iraqi campaign in 1990 killed about 100 American troops. Since then, it has been their custom to hit a ballistic missile only with a direct hit, because only this can save the lives of American citizens.
All that remains to be seen is whether the Americans will have time to transfer these complexes to Iraq by the start of the IRANIAN military campaign.
The company proudly states on its website www.lockheedmartin.com/ that it "is a global leader in systems integration and development of aircraft and missile systems." defense systems and technology, including the first direct missile strike against an attacking ballistic missile, has significant experience in missile design and production, infrared guidance systems, command and control, communications and precision navigation, optics, and radar and signal processing. The company makes significant contributions to all major US missile programs and is involved in several global missile defense partnerships."
MOSCOW, December 27 – RIA Novosti, Vadim Saranov. Missiles began to fly into Saudi Arabia frequently. Recently, the UN Security Council condemned the attack by the Yemeni Houthis on Riyadh. The target of the attack was the royal palace of Al-Yamamah, but nothing happened. The missile was either shot down or deviated from its course. Against this background, Saudi Arabia intends to significantly strengthen its missile defense. The main candidates for the role of an “umbrella” are the American THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system and the Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system. Read about the advantages and disadvantages of competitors in the RIA Novosti material.
S-400 hits further, THAAD hits higher
Objectively, THAAD and the S-400 Triumph air defense system are conditional competitors. "Triumph" is primarily designed to destroy aerodynamic targets: aircraft, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles. THAAD, on the other hand, is a system originally designed to combat short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. "American" is capable of destroying targets at altitudes that are prohibitive for conventional air defense systems - 150 kilometers, and according to some reports, even 200 kilometers. The latest anti-aircraft missile 40N6E of the Russian Triumph does not work above 30 kilometers. However, according to experts, the indicator of the height of the lesion, especially if we're talking about on the fight against operational-tactical missiles is not critical.
“In theater missile defense, targets are destroyed on downward trajectories, and not in space,” Lieutenant General Aitech Bizhev, former deputy commander-in-chief of the Air Force for the unified air defense system of the CIS countries, told RIA Novosti. “In the late 1980s, in missile defense "In the capital, it was planned to use two S-300V2 regiments. At the Kapustin Yar training ground, they created a model of the defense of Moscow with the same geometric dimensions and launched targets from the stratosphere. All of them were destroyed at a distance of 120 kilometers."
By the way, the main danger to Saudi Arabia today is precisely the R-17 Scud operational-tactical missiles and the Qahir and Zelzal tactical missiles, created on the basis of the Soviet Luna-M complex.
© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea
© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea
Another key difference between the American and Russian complexes is the principle of operation. If the Triumph hits targets with fragments after detonating the missile warhead near the target, then the THAAD, deprived of the warhead, hits the missile directly with a kinetic block. Meanwhile, despite the apparent complexity of this solution, the Americans managed to achieve good results during the tests - the probability of destroying a target with one anti-missile missile is 0.9, if THAAD backs up a simpler complex, this figure will be 0.96.
The main advantage of Triumph when used as an anti-missile system is its higher range. For the 40N6E missile it is up to 400 kilometers, while for THAAD it is 200 kilometers. Unlike the S-400, which can fire 360 degrees, the THAAD, when deployed, has a field of fire of 90 degrees horizontally and 60 degrees vertically. But at the same time, the “American” has better vision— the detection range of its AN/TPY-2 radar is 1000 kilometers versus 600 kilometers for the Triumph.
Combine incompatible
As you can see, Saudi Arabia intends to build its missile defense on two completely different systems. This approach may seem somewhat strange, because when using them, serious compatibility problems may arise. However, according to experts, this is a completely solvable issue.
“These two systems cannot be controlled in an automated mode from a single command post,” military expert Mikhail Khodarenok told RIA Novosti. “They have completely different mathematics, completely different logic. But this does not exclude the possibility of them combat use separately. They can be deployed in different places or even within the defense of one object, if their tasks are divided into heights and sectors. They can simply complement each other perfectly if they are in the same group."
Saudi Arabia's desire to acquire both Russian and American systems may be dictated by other considerations. After Operation Desert Storm, during which French anti-aircraft missile systems in service with Iraqi air defense suddenly became inoperable, potential buyers began to be more cautious about purchasing weapons manufactured in the West.
“American weapons may contain hidden weapons,” says Mikhail Khodarenok. “For example, an F-16 of the Jordanian Air Force cannot shoot down an F-16 of the Israeli Air Force. That is, if they use American weapons, only the S-400, which is capable of working against conventional aerodynamic targets, can hit it. It is possible that this is the only reason they are buying the Russian system.”
The most important difference between THAAD and Triumph is the price. The cost of one THAAD battery, which consists of six launchers for eight interceptor missiles each, is about $2.3 billion. The innovative AN/TPY-2 radar costs another 574 million. The cost of an S-400 battalion with eight launchers of four missiles each is about $500 million. The Russian complex costs almost six times less, while the advantages of THAAD, at least for now, are not obvious.
The US military conducted a successful test of the THAAD missile defense system in Alaska, during which a medium-range ballistic missile was hit.
The Pentagon successfully tests the THAAD missile
Head of the US Department of Defense Missile Defense Agency, Lieutenant General Samuel Greaves stated that these tests showed the capabilities of the THAAD system and its ability to intercept and destroy modern ballistic missiles.
In addition, the Pentagon stated that these tests should not be linked to the situation on the Korean Peninsula, and this is quite significant, given that the United States recently delivered such systems to this region - formally to combat the “threat” posed by the missile program North Korea, but in fact – for the development of its global missile defense system.
It is also interesting that the distance between Alaska and Hawaii is 5 thousand kilometers, and this suggests - to use the terminology - that the THAAD system is capable of fighting not only medium-range ballistic missiles of the DPRK, but also missiles that are in service with Russia and China.
Expert at the Center for Strategies and Technologies Sergey Denisentsev in conversation with FBA "Economy Today" noted that the presence of such missiles on the territory of the Korean Peninsula, in any case, will seriously change the strategic balance of forces in this important region of the world.
In the coming years, the presence of THAAD will become a trump card in the hands of the Americans
Naturally, the home zone of domestic nuclear submarines strategically intended from the Pacific Fleet is located much further north, and the routes of Russian ground-based ballistic missiles run through the North Pole, but still this fact must be taken into account, as well as the fact that the actual characteristics of THAAD are higher than those originally stated.
“The fact is that any missile defense system changes the strategic balance of forces, and in this THAAD is also a threat and a destabilizing factor, and, if we are talking about South Korea, not so much for Russia as for China,” states Denisentsev.
It may be recalled here that the entire strategy of the PRC, including the construction of artificial islands in the South China Sea, is aimed at ensuring an acceptable level of operational freedom for its strategic forces, and in this regard, the deployment of THAAD in South Korea will be another important factor, which Beijing will have to constantly reckon with.
“As for the THAAD system itself in the context of its comparison with Russian analogues, our modern complexes such as S-300 and S-400 have similar functions, but you need to understand that these are anti-aircraft, not anti-missile systems. In practice, this is far from the same thing the same, since the fight against missiles is still a separate topic,” concludes Denisentsev.
The USA realized the advantages of the nineties
It must be recalled here that in times Cold War missile defense problems were regulated by the ABM Treaty, which was signed by Moscow and Washington in 1972 and was in force until 2002, when the United States unilaterally left this agreement.
At that time, our countries were in different situations - Russia was just beginning to move away from the nineties, and the United States began an active phase of developing almost ready-made anti-missile systems, as a result of which it should not be surprising that the Americans took the lead here.
“The THAAD system began to be developed in the United States much earlier than our analogues, so the level of technical readiness of this military weapon in the context of countering ballistic missiles is still higher than that of its Russian analogues,” summarizes Denisentsev.
In this regard, the first Russian missile defense system, where the fight against ballistic missiles will not be optional, but one of the main tasks, will be the promising S-500 complex.
This system will apply the principle of a separate solution for the destruction of ballistic and aerodynamic targets, and its main combat mission will be the fight against combat equipment of ballistic missiles, i.e. directly with nuclear warheads.
Any missile defense system changes the strategic balance of power in the world
Interestingly, this circumstance allowed the American publication National Interest call the S-500 a direct analogue of THAAD, although, in fact, the range of tasks of the Russian system is much wider.
“The Russian S-500 system is not ready yet, since the development of such a complex is a very complex process, but the Americans with THAAD already have everything working. This is not surprising, since they started working much earlier, attracted more forces and resources, and also conducted many tests before this event in the skies over Alaska,” states Denisentsev.
Thus, we can conclude that in the case of THAAD, the Americans realized their very serious advantage in time, although it must be understood that the presence of such a system will not change the strategic balance of power between Russia and the United States. At the same time, THAAD's presence in South Korea could have a significant impact on neighboring states.
“When we talk about Russia’s interests, several deployed THAAD systems will not change anything, but this, in turn, will become a factor for the United States to put pressure on others nuclear countries this region. However, if at some point near the borders of Russia the United States puts many such systems, and they are supplemented with other components, including, for example, space-based missile defense systems, then all this will become a threat to our country,” Denisentsev concludes.