Air defense of NATO ground forces. Complete failure of NATO air defense Testing and operation
NATO command the following purpose of the unified air defense system is definitely:
Ø to prevent the intrusion of aircraft assets of a possible enemy into the airspace of NATO countries in peacetime;
Ø to maximally prevent them from delivering strikes in the course of hostilities in order to ensure the functioning of the main political and military-economic centers, strike groups of the Armed Forces, RTS, aviation assets, as well as other objects of strategic importance.
To accomplish these tasks, it is considered necessary:
Ø provide advance warning to the command of a possible attack by continuously monitoring the airspace and obtaining intelligence data on the state of the enemy’s means of attack;
Ø cover from air strikes of nuclear forces, the most important military-strategic and administrative-economic facilities, as well as areas of concentration of troops;
Ø maintaining high combat readiness of the maximum possible number of air defense forces and means to immediately repel an attack from the air;
Ø organization of close interaction of air defense forces and means;
Ø in the event of a war - the destruction of enemy air attack means.
The creation of a unified air defense system is based on the following principles:
Ø covering not individual objects, but entire areas, bands
Ø allocation of sufficient forces and means to cover the most important directions and objects;
Ø high centralization of command and control of air defense forces and means.
The overall management of the NATO air defense system is carried out by the Supreme Commander of the NATO Allied Forces in Europe through his Deputy for the Air Force (he is also the Commander-in-Chief of the NATO Air Force), i.e. commander in chief The Air Force is the commander of the air defense.
The entire area of responsibility of the joint NATO air defense system is divided into 2 air defense zones:
Ø northern zone;
Ø southern zone.
Northern air defense zone occupies the territories of Norway, Belgium, Germany, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and the coastal waters of countries and is divided into three air defense regions ("North", "Center", "Northeast").
Each region has 1-2 air defense sectors.
Southern air defense zone occupies the territory of Turkey, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, the Mediterranean and Black Seas and is subdivided into 4 air defense areas
Ø "Southeast";
Ø "South-center";
Ø “Southwest;
Air defense areas have 2-3 air defense sectors. In addition, 2 independent air defense sectors have been created within the boundaries of the Southern Zone:
Ø Cypriot;
Ø Maltese;
For air defense purposes:
Ø fighters - interceptors;
Ø ADMS of long, medium and short range;
Ø anti-aircraft artillery (FOR).
A) armed NATO air defense fighters The following groups of fighters are composed:
I. group - F-104, F-104E (capable of attacking one target at medium and high altitudes up to 10000m from the rear hemisphere);
II. group - F-15, F-16 (capable of destroying one target from all angles and at all heights),
III. group - F-14, F-18, "Tornado", "Mirage-2000" (capable of attacking several targets from different angles and at all heights).
Air defense fighters are tasked with intercepting air targets at the highest possible strike heights from their base over enemy territory and outside the SAM zone.
All fighters are armed with cannons and missiles and are all-weather, equipped with a combined weapon control system designed to detect and attack air targets.
This system typically includes:
Ø Radar interception and aiming;
Ø calculating and deciding device;
Ø infrared sight;
Ø optical sight.
All radars operate in the range λ=3–3.5cm in pulsed (F–104) or pulsed Doppler mode. All NATO aircraft have a radar radiation receiver operating in the range λ = 3–11.5 cm. Fighters are based at airfields 120-150 km from the front line.
B) Fighter tactics
When performing combat missions, fighters use three ways to fight:
Ø interception from the position "On duty at the road";
Ø Interception from the “Air Duty” position;
Ø free attack.
"On duty at the a / d"- the main type of combat missions. It is used in the presence of a developed radar and provides energy savings, the presence of a full supply of fuel.
Flaws: displacement of the interception line to its territory when intercepting low-altitude targets
Depending on the threatening situation and the type of alert, the duty forces of air defense fighters can be in the following degrees of combat readiness:
1. Got. No. 1 - departure in 2 minutes, after the order;
2. Got. No. 2 - departure in 5 minutes, after the order;
3. Got. No. 3 - departure in 15 minutes, after the order;
4. Got. No. 4 - departure in 30 minutes, after the order;
5. Got. No. 5 - departure 60 minutes after the order.
The possible boundary of the meeting of the military-technical cooperation with a fighter from this position is 40–50 km from the front line.
"Air Watch" – used to cover the main group of troops in the most important objects. At the same time, the band of the army group is divided into duty zones, which are assigned to air units.
Duty is carried out at medium, low and high altitudes:
-In PMU - by groups of aircraft up to the link;
-In the SMU - at night - by single planes, change of cat. produced in 45–60 minutes. Depth - 100-150 km from the front line.
Flaws: -possibility of quick opponents of duty areas;
Ø are forced to adhere to defensive tactics more often;
Ø the possibility of creating superiority in forces by the enemy.
"Free Hunt" – for the destruction of air targets in a given area that do not have a continuous cover of the air defense system and a continuous radar field. Depth - 200–300 km from the front line.
Air defense and tactical fighters, equipped with radar for detection and aiming, armed with air-to-air missiles, use 2 methods of attack:
1. Attack from the front HEMISPHERE (under 45–70 0 to the target's course). It is used when the time and place of interception is calculated in advance. This is possible with longitudinal target wiring. It is the fastest, but requires high pointing accuracy both in place and in time.
2. Attack from the rear HEMISPHERE (in the aisles of the heading angle sector 110–250 0). It is used against all targets and with all types of weapons. It provides a high probability of hitting the target.
With a good weapon and moving from one method of attack to another, one fighter can perform 6–9 attacks , which makes it possible to break 5–6 BTA aircraft.
A significant disadvantage air defense fighters, and in particular the radar of fighters, is their work, based on the use of the Doppler effect. There are so-called "blind" heading angles (approach angles to the target), in which the fighter's radar is not able to select (select) the target against the background of interfering ground reflections or passive interference. These zones do not depend on the attacking fighter flight speed, but are determined by the target flight speed, heading angles, approach angles and the minimum radial component of the relative approach speed ∆Vbl., set by the performance characteristics of the radar.
Radar is capable of isolating only those signals from the target, the cat. have a certain ƒ min Doppler. Such ƒ min is for radar ± 2 kHz.
According to the laws of radar 
, where ƒ 0 is the carrier, C–V light. Such signals come from targets with V 2 =30–60 m/s. => 790–110 0, and 250–290 0, respectively.
The main air defense systems in the joint air defense system of NATO countries are:
Ø Long-range air defense systems (D≥60km) - "Nike-Ggerkules", "Patriot";
Ø Medium-range air defense systems (D = from 10-15km to 50-60km) - improved "Hawk" ("U-Hawk");
Ø Short-range air defense systems (D = 10–15 km) - Chaparel, Rapra, Roland, Indigo, Krosal, Javelin, Avenger, Adats, Fog-M, Stinger, Bloommap.
NATO anti-aircraft defenses principle of use subdivided into:
Ø Centralized use, applied according to the plan of the senior chief in zone , area and air defense sector;
Ø Troop air defense systems that are part of the ground forces according to the state and are used according to the plan of their commander.
To funds applied according to plans senior leaders include long-range and medium-range air defense systems. Here they work in automatic guidance mode.
The main tactical unit of anti-aircraft weapons is– division or equivalent parts.
Long-range and medium-range air defense systems, with a sufficient number of them, are used to create a zone of continuous cover.
With a small number of them, only individual, most important objects are covered.
Short-range air defense systems and FOR used to cover the ground forces, a / d, etc.
Each anti-aircraft weapon has certain combat capabilities for firing and hitting a target.
Combat capabilities - quantitative and qualitative indicators that characterize the capabilities of air defense units to perform combat missions at a specified time and in specific conditions.
The combat capabilities of the SAM battery are estimated by the following characteristics:
1. The dimensions of the zones of fire and destruction in the vertical and horizontal planes;
2. The number of simultaneously fired targets;
3. System reaction time;
4. The ability of the battery to conduct a long fire;
5. The number of launches during the shelling of a given target.
Specified characteristics can be predetermined only for a non-maneuvering target.
fire zone - a part of the space, at each point of which it is possible to point p.
Kill zone - part of the firing zone within which, the meeting p with the target and its defeat with a given probability is ensured.
The position of the affected area in the firing zone may change depending on the direction of the target's flight.
When the air defense system is operating in the mode automatic guidance the affected area occupies a position in which the bisector of the angle limiting the affected area in the horizontal plane always remains parallel to the direction of flight towards the target.
Since the target can be approached from any direction, the affected area can occupy any position, while the bisector of the angle limiting the affected area rotates following the turn of the aircraft.
Hence, a turn in the horizontal plane at an angle greater than half the angle limiting the affected area is equivalent to the exit of the aircraft from the affected area.
The affected area of any air defense system has certain boundaries:
Ø on H - lower and upper;
Ø on D from start. mouth - far and near, as well as restrictions on the heading parameter (P), which determines the lateral boundaries of the zone.
Lower limit of the affected area - determined Hmin firing, which provides a given probability of hitting the target. It is limited by the influence of the reflection of the radiated from the ground on the operation of the RTS and the angles of closing positions.
Position closing angle (α)– is formed in the presence of an excess of the terrain and local objects over the position of the batteries.
Top and Data Bounds zones of lesions are determined by the energy resource of the river.
near border the affected area is determined by the time of uncontrolled flight after launch.
Side borders the affected areas are determined by the heading parameter (P).
Heading parameter P - the shortest distance (KM) from the position of the battery and the projection of the aircraft track.
The number of simultaneously fired targets depends on the amount of radar irradiation (illumination) of the target in the batteries of the air defense system.
The reaction time of the system is the time elapsed from the moment an air target is detected to the moment the missile is admitted.
The number of possible launches on the target depends on the early detection of the target by the radar, the heading parameter P, H of the target and Vtarget, T of the system reaction and the time between missile launches.
Brief information about weapon guidance systems
I. Command telecontrol systems - flight control is carried out with the help of commands generated on the launcher and transmitted to fighters or missiles.
Depending on the method of obtaining information, there are:
Ø - command telecontrol systems of type I (TU-I);
Ø - command telecontrol systems of the II type (TU-II);
- target tracking device;
Missile tracking device;
Device for generating control commands;
Command radio link receiver;
Launchers.
II. homing systems -systems in which flight control p is carried out by control commands formed on board the rocket itself.
In this case, the information necessary for their formation is issued by the on-board device (coordinator).
In such systems, self-guided r are used, in the flight control of which the launcher does not take part.
According to the type of energy used to obtain information about the parameters of the movement of the target, systems are distinguished - active, semi-active, passive.
Active - homing systems, in the cat. the source of target exposure is installed on board the river. Reflection from the target signals are received by the onboard coordinator and serve to measure the parameters of the target's movement.
Semi-active - the TARGET radiation source is placed on the launcher. The signals reflected from the target are used by the onboard coordinator to change the mismatch parameters.
Passive - to measure the motion parameters of the TARGET, the energy emitted by the target is used. It can be thermal (radiant), light, radiothermal energy.
The homing system includes devices that measure the mismatch parameter: a calculating device, an autopilot and a steering path
III. TV guidance system - missile control systems, in the cat. flight control commands are formed on board the rocket. Their value is proportional to the deviation of the rocket from the equal-signal control created by the radar sights of the control point.
Such systems are called radio beam guidance systems. They are single beam and double beam.
IV. Combined guidance systems – systems, in a cat. missile guidance on targets is carried out sequentially by several systems. They can be used in long-range complexes. It can be a combination of the command system. remote control in the initial section of the missile's flight path and homing in the final one, or radio beam guidance in the initial section and homing in the final one. This combination of control systems ensures that missiles are guided to targets with sufficient accuracy at long ranges.
Let us now consider the combat capabilities of individual air defense systems of NATO countries.
a) Long range SAM
–SAM - "Nike-Hercules" - designed to hit targets at medium, high altitudes and in the stratosphere. It can be used to destroy ground targets with nuclear weapons at a distance of up to 185 km. It is in service with the armies of the USA, NATO, France, Japan, Taiwan.
Quantitative indicators
Ø fire zone- circular;
Ø D max the marginal zone of destruction (where it is still possible to hit the target, but with a low probability);
Ø The nearest border of the affected area = 11km
Ø Lower The boundary of the zone is pore-1500m and D=12km and up to H=30km with increasing range.
Ø V max p.–1500m/s;
Ø V max hit.r.–775–1200m/s;
Ø n max cancer–7;
Ø t guidance (flight) of the rocket–20–200s;
Ø Rate of fire-for 5min→5 missiles;
Ø t / ream. Mobile air defense system -5-10 hours;
Ø t / clotting - up to 3 hours;
Qualitative indicators
The control system of the N-G missile defense system is radio command with separate radar stacking behind the missile target. In addition, by installing special equipment on board, it can homing to a source of interference.
The following types of pulse radars are used in the battery management system:
1. 1 targeting radar operating in the range λ=22–24cm, type AN/FRS–37–D max rel.=320km;
2. 1 targeting radar s (λ=8.5–10cm) s D max rel.=230km;
3. 1 target tracking radar (λ=3.2–3.5cm)=185km;
4. 1 radar identified. range (λ=1.8cm).
A battery can fire only one target at a time, because only one target and one missile can be tracked to a target tracking radar and a missile at the same time, and one of such radars can be in batteries.
Ø Mass of conventional warhead.– 500kg;
Ø Nuclear warhead. (trot. equiv.)– 2–30kT;
Ø Start m cancer.–4800kg;
Ø Fuse type– combined (contact + radar)
Ø Damage radius at high altitudes:– OF BCH–35–60m; I. Warhead - 210-2140m.
Ø Probable Non-maneuvering defeats. goals 1 cancer. on effective. D–0,6–0,7;
Ø T reload PU-6 min.
Strong zones of the N-G air defense system:
Ø large D defeat and a significant reach in H;
Ø the ability to intercept high-speed targets "
Ø good noise immunity of all radar batteries in terms of angular coordinates;
Ø homing to the source of interference.
Weaknesses of the N-G air defense system:
Ø the impossibility of hitting a target flying at H> 1500m;
Ø with an increase in D → the accuracy of missile guidance decreases;
Ø highly susceptible to radar interference over the range channel;
Ø decrease in efficiency when firing at a maneuvering target;
Ø low rate of fire of the battery and the impossibility of firing more than one target at the same time
Ø low mobility;
SAM "Patriot"
- is an all-weather complex designed to destroy aircraft and ballistic missiles for operational-tactical purposes at low altitudes 
in conditions of strong enemy radio countermeasures.
(In service with the United States, NATO).
The main technical unit is a division consisting of 6 batteries of 6 fire platoons in each.
The platoon consists of:
Ø multifunctional radar with phased array;
Ø up to 8 launchers of missiles;
Ø truck with generators, power supply for radar and KPUO.
Quantitative indicators
Ø Firing zone - circular;
Ø Kill zone for a non-maneuvering target (see fig.)
Ø Far border:
on Nb-70km (limited by V targets and R and missiles);
at Nm-20km;
Ø The near boundary of the defeat (limited by t uncontrollable missile flight) - 3 km;
Ø The upper limit of the affected area. (limited by Ru missiles = 5 units) - 24 km;
Ø Minimum the boundary of the affected area - 60m;
Ø Vcancer. - 1750m/s;
Ø Vts.- 1200m/s;
Ø t pos. crayfish.
Ø tpol.cancer-60sec.;
Ø nmax. crayfish. - 30 units;
Ø reaction syst. - 15sec;
Ø Rate of fire:
One PU -1 cancer. after 3 sec.;
Different launchers - 1 cancer. after 1sec.
Ø tdep.. complex -. 30 minutes.
Qualitative indicators
Control system SAM "Periot" combined:
At the initial stage of the rocket flight, control is carried out by the command method of the 1st type, when the rocket approaches the target (for 8-9 seconds), a transition is made from the command method to met. guidance through a rocket (command guidance of the 2nd type).
The guidance system uses a radar with HEADLIGHTS (AN / MPQ-53). It allows you to detect and identify air targets, track up to 75-100 targets and provide data for guiding up to 9 missiles at 9 targets.
After the launch of the rocket, according to a given program, it enters the radar coverage area and its command guidance begins, for which, in the process of reviewing the space, all selected targets and those induced by the rocket are tracked. At the same time, 6 missiles can be aimed at 6 targets using the command method. In this case, the radar operates in a pulsed mode in the range l = 6.1-6.7 cm.
In this mode, the sector of view Qaz=+(-)45º Qum=1-73º. Beam width 1.7*1.7º.
The command guidance method stops when 8-9 seconds remain until R. meets C. At this point, there is a transition from the command method to the guidance method through the rocket.
At this stage, when irradiating C. and R., the radar operates in a pulse-Doppler mode in the wavelength range = 5.5-6.1 cm. In the guidance mode through the rocket, the tracking sector corresponds, the beam width with illumination is 3.4 * 3.4 .
D max update at \u003d 10 - 190 km
Start mr - 906 kg
The Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), funded by the US Department of Defense, released a report on the eve of the start of the NATO summit on what measures should be taken to protect the Baltic states from Russia. First of all - the so-called Suwalki corridor, which separates the Kaliningrad region from the territory of Belarus.
The authors of the report note, in particular, the significantly increased ability of the Russian armed forces to maneuver on the battlefield, the ability to conduct disinformation campaigns. The Russian armed forces are honing these skills in numerous exercises - one of the most ambitious was the Zapad-2017 maneuvers, which were also carried out on the territory of Belarus and the Kaliningrad region.
According to CEPA analysts, the aggravation in the Baltics (and a hypothetical attack by Russia through the Suwalki corridor) will also be accompanied by an aggravation of all conflicts in the post-Soviet space, from the Donbass and Transnistria to Nagorno-Karabakh.
However, apart from Russia's desire to "create a land bridge" across the Suwalki and thus strengthen its political influence in the region, no other clear motives for such a scenario (fraught with a full-scale nuclear war, given the provisions of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty) are given in the report. It should be noted that General Ben Hodges, who until recently was Commander of the NATO Allied Forces in Europe, acts as the author.
As measures to deter Russia, it is proposed, firstly, to strengthen the protective component in the Baltic States and redeploy closer to the Suwalki corridor and the Kaliningrad region short-range anti-missile systems M1097 Avenger. Secondly, to ensure the operational capabilities of NATO units in the region, create forward logistics points and fuel depots so that additional troops can be quickly transferred to the Baltic states from Germany and Poland.
Thirdly, it is proposed to reduce the response time to potential threats to Russia, as well as to strengthen the exchange of intelligence data between NATO member countries, as well as between NATO and partner countries that are not members of the alliance, such as Finland, Sweden and Ukraine. At the same time, the importance of restoring the competences of the member countries of the alliance in the field of Russian language proficiency and understanding of regional problems is emphasized. It is also proposed to instruct the units of the Special Operations Forces of NATO countries stationed in the Baltic States to train local law enforcement agencies in tactics to counter Russia's subversive actions.
In addition, they propose to place on the borders with Russia, instead of rotating every 90 days, a full-fledged field headquarters in the states of the division, which should "send a signal to contain Russia." In addition, it is proposed to establish a new NATO Close Operations Command (REOC), as well as give more authority to the NATO multinational division in the northeast, in Szczecin, Poland, in order to "transfer the decision-making initiative in the event of a Russian attack into the hands of the commanders of the units located right in the Baltics.
Anxious, and sometimes even alarmist, notes regarding NATO's potential to confront Russia in the Baltics have already become a familiar leitmotif of a significant part of publications on the topic of Russian-American relations in the Western media. Thus, in the American press, they complain that NATO troops, in the event of a conflict with Russia, may lose the first phase of the war due to bad roads and bureaucracy. While the main parts of the North Atlantic Alliance will get to the eastern borders, the Russian army will occupy the entire Baltic, which became clear from the results of the analysis of the latest exercises of the Saber Strike forces.
Thus, US heavy equipment was returning from exercises to its place of permanent deployment in Germany for four months by rail, and the soldiers of the unit at that time were left without vehicles. At the same time, it is specified that the equipment had to be unloaded and reloaded, since the rails on the railways in the Baltic states are wider than those in Western Europe. The movement was slowed down by the detention of the American military by the Hungarian border guards due to improper coupling of armored personnel carriers with wagons.
The build-up of NATO military activity in the EU can already be observed. International military exercises of the alliance Saber Strike 2018 ("Saber strike") began in Latvia. About three thousand soldiers from 12 countries take part in them, including the USA, Canada, Great Britain, Germany, Spain, Latvia, Albania and others. According to the Latvian Ministry of Defense, the purpose of the maneuvers, which will last until June 15, is to improve the quality of cooperation between members of the alliance and NATO's regional partners.
Atlantic Resolve, for which the Pentagon received four times more funds in 2017 - $ 3.4 billion - it is planned to expand the presence of NATO troops, in particular the United States, on the "eastern flank" to "intimidate" and contain Russia. At the end of the past 1750 soldiers and 60 aircraft units of the 10th Combat Aviation Brigade have already arrived in Germany to counter Russia, from where the units were distributed to Latvia, Romania and Poland.NATO plans to strengthen the groupings of troops along the entire western border of Russia - in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia , Poland, Bulgaria and Romania.
According to the European press, NATO also intends to increase the contingent of a rapid reaction force deployed mainly in Eastern Europe - representatives of 23 EU states signed a declaration of intent to take part in "permanent structural cooperation on security and defense issues", while the final decision on the composition grouping will be adopted in December this year. In particular, it is assumed that the task force will be equipped with 30 thousand military personnel, it will also include several hundred combat aircraft and ships. It is worth noting that at the moment the international rapid response teams stationed in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland are under the control of Germany, Great Britain, the USA and Canada.
According to a number of European military analysts, the increase in the degree of anti-Russian sentiment on the eve of the start of the 29th NATO summit is an attempt to torpedo Trump's course to increase the share of European spending in the alliance's budget structure - since at the moment the main financial burden of the military bloc is borne by the United States. The current American administration is inclined to change this order. Immediately, however, the bogey of the "Russian threat" reappears on the horizon, which can capture all nearby countries and spread its "authoritarian influence"...
Materials provided by: S.V.Gurov (Russia, Tula)
The promising mobile anti-aircraft missile system MEADS (Medium Extended Air Defense System) is designed to defend groups of troops and important objects from operational-tactical ballistic missiles with a range of up to 1000 km, cruise missiles, aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles of the enemy.
The development of the system is carried out by the Orlando (USA)-based joint venture MEADS International, which includes the Italian division of MBDA, the German LFK and the American company Lockheed Martin. The development, production and support of air defense systems is managed by the NAMEADSMO (NATO Medium Extended Air Defense System Design and Development, Production and Logistics Management Organization) organization created in the NATO structure. The US finances 58% of the costs of the program. Germany and Italy provide 25% and 17%, respectively. According to the initial plans, the United States intended to purchase 48 MEADS air defense systems, Germany - 24 and Italy - 9.
The conceptual development of the new air defense system began in October 1996. In early 1999, a $300 million contract was signed to develop a prototype of the MEADS air defense system.
According to the statement of the first deputy inspector of the German Air Force, Lieutenant General Norbert Finster, MEADS will become one of the main elements of the country's and NATO's missile defense system.
The MEADS complex is the main candidate for the German Taktisches Luftverteidigungssystem (TLVS) - a new generation air and missile defense system with a flexible network architecture. It is possible that the MEADS complex will become the basis of the national air defense / missile defense system in Italy. In December 2014, the Polish Armaments Inspectorate informed that the MEADS International project will participate in the competition for the Narew short-range air defense system, designed to defend against aircraft, helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles and cruise missiles.
Compound
The MEADS system has a modular architecture, which makes it possible to increase the flexibility of its application, produce it in various configurations, provide high firepower with a reduction in maintenance personnel and reduce material support costs.
The composition of the complex:
- launcher (photo1, photo2, photo3, photo4 Thomas Schulz, Poland);
- interceptor missile;
- combat control point (PBU);
- multifunctional radar station;
- detection radar.
All nodes of the complex are located on off-road vehicle chassis. For the Italian version of the complex, the chassis of the Italian ARIS tractor with an armored cab is used, for the German one - the MAN tractor. C-130 Hercules and Airbus A400M aircraft can be used to transport MEADS air defense systems.
The mobile launcher (PU) of the MEADS air defense system is equipped with a package of eight transport and launch containers (TLCs) designed to transport, store and launch guided interceptor missiles. PU provides the so-called. batch loading (see photo1, photo2) and is characterized by a short transfer time to the firing position and reloading.
Lockheed Martin's PAC-3MSE interceptor missile is expected to be used as a means of destruction as part of the MEADS air defense system. The PAC-3MSE differs from its prototype - an anti-missile, by a 1.5-fold increase in the affected area and the possibility of using it as part of other air defense systems, including shipborne ones. The PAC-3MSE is equipped with a new Aerojet double-acting main engine with a diameter of 292 mm, a two-way communication system between the missile and the PBU. To increase the effectiveness of defeating maneuvering aerodynamic targets, in addition to using a kinetic warhead, it is possible to equip the rocket with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead of directed action. The first test of the PAC-3MSE took place on May 21, 2008.
It was reported on the conduct of research and development work on the use of guided missiles and air-to-air missiles, upgraded for ground launch, as part of the MEADS complex.
The PBU is designed to control an open architecture network-centric air defense system and ensures the joint operation of any combination of detection tools and launchers combined into a single air defense and missile defense system. In accordance with the "plug and play" concept, the means of detection, control and combat support of the system interact with each other as nodes of a single network. Thanks to the capabilities of the control center, the system commander can quickly turn on or off such nodes, depending on the combat situation, without turning off the entire system, ensuring quick maneuver and concentration of combat capabilities in threatened areas.
The use of standardized interfaces and an open network architecture provides the PBU with the ability to control detection tools and launchers from various air defense systems, incl. not included in the MEADS air defense system. If necessary, the MEADS air defense system can interact with complexes, etc. The PBU is compatible with modern and advanced control systems, in particular, with NATO's Air Command and Control System (NATO's Air Command and Control System).
A set of communication equipment MICS (MEADS Internal Communications Subsystem) is designed to organize the joint operation of MEADS air defense systems. MICS provides secure tactical communication between radars, launchers and control units of the complex through a high-speed network built on the basis of the IP protocol stack.
Multifunctional three-coordinate X-band pulse-Doppler radar provides detection, classification, identification of nationality and tracking of air targets, as well as missile guidance. The radar is equipped with an active phased antenna array (see). The rotation speed of the antenna is 0, 15 and 30 rpm. The station ensures the transmission of correction commands to the interceptor missile via the Link 16 data exchange channel, which allows the missile to be redirected to trajectories, as well as the selection of the most optimal launcher from the system to repel an attack.
According to the developers, the multifunctional radar of the complex is highly reliable and efficient. During the tests, the radar provided the search, classification and tracking of targets with the issuance of target designation, suppression of active and passive interference. The MEADS air defense system can simultaneously fire at up to 10 air targets in a difficult jamming environment.
The composition of the multifunctional radar includes a system for determining the nationality "friend or foe", developed by the Italian company SELEX Sistemi Integrati. The antenna of the "friend or foe" system (see) is located in the upper part of the main antenna array. The MEADS air defense system became the first American complex that allows the use of cryptographic means of other states in its composition.
The mobile detection radar is being developed for MEADS by Lockheed-Martin and is a pulse-Doppler station with an active phased array, operating both in a stationary position and at a rotation speed of 7.5 rpm. To search for aerodynamic targets in the radar, a circular view of the airspace is implemented. The design features of the radar also include a high-performance signal processor, a programmable probing signal generator, and a digital adaptive beamformer.
The MEADS air defense system has an autonomous power supply system, which includes a diesel generator and a distribution and conversion unit for connecting to an industrial network (frequency 50 Hz / 60 Hz). The system was developed by Lechmotoren (Altenstadt, Germany).
The main tactical unit of the MEADS air defense system is an anti-aircraft missile battalion, which is planned to include three firing and one headquarters batteries. The MEADS battery includes a detection radar, a multifunctional radar, a PBU, up to six launchers. The minimum system configuration includes one copy of the radar, launcher and PBU.
Tactical and technical characteristics
Testing and operation
01.09.2004 NAMEADSMO has signed a $2 billion and €1.4 billion ($1.8 billion) contract with joint venture MEADS International for the R&D phase of the MEADS SAM program.
01.09.2006 The PAC-3MSE interceptor missile was chosen as the main means of destruction of the MEADS complex.
05.08.2009 The preliminary design of all the main components of the complex has been completed.
01.06.2010 When discussing the draft US defense budget for FY2011. The Senate Armed Forces Commission (SASC) has expressed concern about the cost of the MEADS program, which is $1 billion over budget and 18 months behind schedule. The Commission recommended that the US Department of Defense stop funding the development of MEADS if the program does not pass the stage of protection of the working draft. In a response from US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to the commission, it was reported that the program schedule had been agreed, and the cost of developing, manufacturing and deploying MEADS had been estimated.
01.07.2010 Raytheon has proposed a modernization package for the Patriot air defense systems in service with the Bundeswehr, which will improve their performance to the level of the MEADS air defense system by 2014. According to Raytheon, a phased modernization process would save from 1 to 2 billion euros without reducing the combat readiness of the German armed forces. The German Ministry of Defense decided to continue the development of the MEADS air defense system.
16.09.2010 The MEADS air defense system development program has successfully passed the stage of defending the working draft. The project was recognized as meeting all the requirements. The results of the defense were sent to the countries participating in the program. The estimated cost of the program was $19 billion.
22.09.2010 As part of the implementation of the MEADS program, a work plan was presented to reduce the costs of the life cycle of the complex.
27.09.2010 The possibility of joint operation of the MEADS PBU with the NATO air defense command and control complex was successfully demonstrated. The unification of NATO's layered missile defense facilities was carried out on a special test bench.
20.12.2010 At the Fusaro air base (Italy), for the first time, a PBU was demonstrated, located on the chassis of the Italian tractor ARIS. Five more PBUs, planned for use at the testing and certification stages of the complex, are in the production stage.
14.01.2011 LFK (Lenkflugkorpersyteme, MBDA Deutschland) announced the delivery of the first MEADS SAM launcher to the joint venture MEADS International.
31.01.2011 As part of the work on the creation of the MEADS complex, tests of the first multifunctional radar station were successfully completed.
11.02.2011 The US Department of Defense announced its intention to stop funding the MEADS project after FY2013. The reason was the proposal of the consortium to increase the development time of the complex by 30 months in excess of the originally announced 110. The extension of the time will require an increase in US funding for the project by $974 million. The Pentagon estimates that total funding will rise to $1.16bn and production start will be delayed to 2018. However, the US DoD decided to continue the development and testing phase within the budget established in 2004 without entering the production phase.
15.02.2011 In a letter sent by the German Ministry of Defense to the Bundestag budget committee, it was noted that due to the possible termination of the joint development of the complex, the acquisition of the MEADS air defense system is not planned in the foreseeable future. The results of the program implementation can be used in the framework of national programs for the creation of air defense / missile defense systems.
18.02.2011 Germany will not continue the MEADS air defense / missile defense system program after the development phase is completed. According to a representative of the German Defense Ministry, it will not be able to finance the next stage of the project if the United States withdraws from it. It was noted that the official decision to close the MEADS program has not yet been made.
01.04.2011 MEADS International Business Development Director Marty Coyne reported on his meetings with representatives of a number of countries in Europe and the Middle East who expressed their intention to take part in the project. Among the potential participants in the project are Poland and Turkey, which are interested in purchasing modern air defense / missile defense systems and gaining access to technologies for the production of such systems. This would allow the completion of the MEADS development program, which was in danger of being closed after the US military department refused to participate in the production phase.
15.06.2011 Lockheed Martin has delivered the first set of communication equipment MICS (MEADS Internal Communications Subsystem), designed to organize the joint operation of MEADS air defense systems.
16.08.2011 Testing of the software for the combat command, control, control, communications and intelligence complex in Huntsville (Alabama, USA) has been completed.
13.09.2011 With the help of an integrated training complex, a simulated launch of the MEADS SAM interceptor rocket was carried out.
12.10.2011 MEADS International has started comprehensive testing of the first MEADS MODU at a test facility in Orlando (Florida, USA).
17.10.2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation has delivered MICS communications equipment kits for use as part of the MEADS complex.
24.10.2011 The first launcher of the MEADS air defense system arrived at the White Sands missile range for comprehensive testing and preparation for flight tests scheduled for November.
30.10.2011 The US DoD has signed Amendment #26 to the base memorandum, which provides for the restructuring of the MEADS program. The amendment provides for two test launches to characterize the system prior to the completion of the MEADS design and development contract in 2014. According to a statement by representatives of the US Department of Defense, the approved completion of the development of MEADS will allow the US defense department to use the technologies created under the project in the implementation of programs for the development of advanced weapons systems.
03.11.2011 The directors of national armaments of Germany, Italy and the United States have approved an amendment to the contract to provide funding for two tests to intercept targets for the MEADS system.
10.11.2011 At the Pratica di Mare air base, a successful virtual simulation of the destruction of aerodynamic and ballistic targets using the MEADS air defense system was completed. During the tests, the combat control center of the complex demonstrated the ability to organize an arbitrary combination of launchers, combat control, command, control, communications and intelligence into a single network-centric air defense and missile defense system.
17.11.2011 The first flight test of the MEADS system as part of the PAC-3 MSE interceptor missile, a lightweight launcher and a combat control center was successfully completed at the White Sands missile range. During the test, a missile was launched to intercept a target attacking in the rear half-space. After completing the task, the interceptor missile self-destructed.
17.11.2011 Information has been published on the start of negotiations on Qatar's entry into the MEADS air defense system development program. Qatar has expressed interest in using the facility to secure the 2022 FIFA World Cup.
08.02.2012 Berlin and Rome are pressuring Washington to continue US funding for the MEADS development program. On January 17, 2012, the participants of the international consortium MEADS received a new proposal from the United States, which actually provided for the termination of funding for the program as early as 2012.
22.02.2012 Lockheed Martin Corporation announced the start of comprehensive testing of the third MEADS PBU in Huntsville (Alabama, USA). PBU tests are planned for the whole of 2012. Two PBUs are already involved in testing the MEADS system at Pratica di Mare (Italy) and Orlando (Florida, USA) airbases.
19.04.2012 Commencement of comprehensive testing of the first copy of the MEADS multifunctional air defense radar at the Pratica di Mare air base. Earlier it was reported about the completion of the first stage of testing the station at the facility of SELEX Sistemi Integrati SpA in Rome.
12.06.2012 The acceptance tests of the autonomous power supply and communication unit of the MEADS air defense system, designed for the upcoming comprehensive tests of the multifunctional radar station of the complex at the Pratica di Mare airbase, have been completed. The second copy of the block is being tested at the technical center of self-propelled and armored vehicles of the German armed forces in Trier (Germany).
09.07.2012 The first MEADS mobile test kit has been delivered to the White Sands missile range. A set of test equipment provides real-time virtual tests of the MEADS complex for intercepting targets without launching an interceptor missile for various air attack scenarios.
14.08.2012 On the territory of the Pratica di Mare airbase, the first comprehensive tests of the multifunctional radar were carried out together with the combat control center and launchers of the MEADS air defense system. It is reported that the radar has demonstrated key functionality, incl. the possibility of a circular view of the airspace, the capture of a target and its tracking in various scenarios of a combat situation.
29.08.2012 A PAC-3 interceptor missile at the White Sands missile range successfully destroyed a target simulating a tactical ballistic missile. As part of the test, two targets imitating tactical ballistic missiles and an MQM-107 unmanned aircraft were involved. A salvo launch of two PAC-3 interceptor missiles completed the task of intercepting a second target, a tactical ballistic missile. According to published data, all test tasks were completed.
22.10.2012 On the territory of the Pratica di Mare air base, the next stage of testing the system for determining the nationality of the MEADS complex has been successfully completed. All system operation scenarios were tested in conjunction with the American "friend or foe" identification system Mark XII / XIIA Mode 5 of the ATCBRBS (Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System) airspace control system. The total volume of certification tests was 160 experiments. After integrating the system with the MEADS multifunctional radar, additional tests were performed.
29.11.2012 The MEADS air defense system provided detection, tracking and interception of the MQM-107 target with an air-breathing engine on the territory of the White Sands missile range (New Mexico, USA). During the tests, the complex included: a command and control center, a light launcher for PAC-3 MSE interceptor missiles and a multifunctional radar.
06.12.2012 The Senate of the US Congress, despite the request of the President of the United States and the Department of Defense, decided not to allocate funds for the MEADS air defense program in the next fiscal year. The Senate-approved defense budget did not include the $400.8 million needed to complete the program.
01.04.2013 The US Congress decided to continue funding the MEADS air defense system development program. As Reuters reported, Congress approved a bill guaranteeing the allocation of funds to cover current financial needs until September 30, 2013. This bill provides for the allocation of $ 380 million to complete the development and testing phase of the complex, which will avoid cancellation of contracts and negative consequences on an international scale.
19.04.2013 The upgraded detection radar was tested in joint operation as part of a single set of MEADS air defense systems. During the tests, the radar ensured the detection and tracking of a small aircraft, the transmission of information to the MEADS PBU. After its processing, the PBU issued target designation data to the multifunctional radar of the MEADS complex, which carried out additional search, recognition and further tracking of the target. The tests were carried out in the all-round view mode in the Hancock airport area (Syracusa, New York, USA), the distance between the radars was more than 10 miles.
19.06.2013 A press release from Lockheed Martin reports on the successful testing of the MEADS air defense system as part of a unified air defense system with other anti-aircraft systems in service with NATO countries.
10.09.2013 The first launcher of the MEADS air defense system on the chassis of a German truck was delivered to the USA for testing. Tests of two launchers are planned for 2013.
21.10.2013 During tests at the White Sands missile range, the MEADS multifunctional radar for the first time successfully captured and tracked a target simulating a tactical ballistic missile.
06.11.2013 During the tests of the MEADS air defense system, to assess the capabilities of the all-round defense complex, two targets were intercepted, simultaneously attacking from opposite directions. The tests took place on the territory of the White Sands missile range (New Mexico, USA). One of the targets simulated a class ballistic missile, the QF-4 target simulated a cruise missile.
21.05.2014 The system for determining the nationality "friend or foe" of the MEADS complex received an operational certificate from the US Department of Defense Airspace Control Administration.
24.07.2014 Demonstration tests of the MEADS air defense system at the Pratica di Mare airbase have been completed. During two-week tests, the complex's ability to work in various architectures, incl. under the control of higher control systems were demonstrated to the German and Italian delegations.
23.09.2014 Six-week operational tests of the multifunctional radar from the MEADS air defense system at the Pratica di Mare airbase (Italy) and at the German air defense center of the MBDA concern in Freinhausen have been completed.
07.01.2015 The MEADS air defense system is being considered as a candidate for compliance with the requirements for next-generation air and missile defense systems in Germany and Poland.
Not so long ago, Lieutenant General Viktor Poznikhir, Chief of the Operations Directorate of the Russian General Staff, told reporters that the main goal of creating the American missile defense system is to significantly neutralize Russia's strategic nuclear potential and almost completely eliminate the Chinese missile threat. And this is far from the first sharp statement by Russian high-ranking officials on this score; few US actions cause such irritation in Moscow.
Russian military and diplomats have repeatedly stated that the deployment of the American global missile defense system will upset the delicate balance between nuclear states that has been established since the Cold War.
The Americans, in turn, argue that global missile defense is not directed against Russia, its goal is to protect the "civilized" world from rogue states, such as Iran and North Korea. At the same time, the construction of new elements of the system continues near the Russian borders - in Poland, the Czech Republic and Romania.
Expert opinions on missile defense in general and the US missile defense system in particular differ greatly: some see America's actions as a real threat to Russia's strategic interests, while others speak of the ineffectiveness of US missile defense against the Russian strategic arsenal.
Where is the truth? What is the US anti-missile system? What does it consist of and how does it work? Does Russian missile defense exist? And why is a purely defensive system causing such an ambiguous reaction from the Russian leadership - what's the catch?
History of missile defense
Missile defense is a whole range of measures aimed at protecting certain objects or territories from being hit by missile weapons. Any missile defense system includes not only systems that directly destroy missiles, but also systems (radar and satellites) that provide missile detection, as well as powerful computers.
In the mass consciousness, the missile defense system is usually associated with countering the nuclear threat posed by ballistic missiles with a nuclear warhead, but this is not entirely true. In fact, missile defense is a broader concept, missile defense is any kind of protection against enemy missile weapons. It includes active protection of armored vehicles from ATGMs and RPGs, and air defense systems capable of destroying enemy tactical ballistic and cruise missiles. So it would be more correct to divide all missile defense systems into tactical and strategic ones, as well as to single out self-defense systems against missile weapons into a separate group.
Rocket weapons first began to be massively used during World War II. The first anti-tank missiles appeared, MLRS, German V-1 and V-2 killed the inhabitants of London and Antwerp. After the war, the development of rocket weapons went at an accelerated pace. It can be said that the use of missiles has radically changed the way warfare is fought. Moreover, very soon missiles became the main means of delivering nuclear weapons and became the most important strategic tool.
Appreciating the experience of the Nazis in the combat use of V-1 and V-2 missiles, the USSR and the USA almost immediately after the end of World War II began to create systems capable of effectively combating the new threat.
In the United States in 1958, they developed and adopted the MIM-14 Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft missile system, which could be used against enemy nuclear warheads. Their defeat also occurred due to the nuclear warhead of the anti-missile, since this air defense system was not particularly accurate. It should be noted that the interception of a target flying at great speed at an altitude of tens of kilometers is a very difficult task even at the current level of technology development. In the 1960s, it could only be solved with the use of nuclear weapons.
A further development of the MIM-14 Nike-Hercules system was the LIM-49A Nike Zeus complex, its testing began in 1962. Zeus anti-missiles were also equipped with a nuclear warhead, they could hit targets at an altitude of up to 160 km. Successful tests of the complex were carried out (without nuclear explosions, of course), but still the effectiveness of such a missile defense system was a very big question.
The fact is that in those years the nuclear arsenals of the USSR and the USA were growing at an unthinkable pace, and no missile defense could protect against the armada of ballistic missiles launched in the other hemisphere. In addition, in the 60s, nuclear missiles learned to throw out numerous false targets, which were extremely difficult to distinguish from real warheads. However, the main problem was the imperfection of the anti-missiles themselves, as well as target detection systems. The deployment of the Nike Zeus program was supposed to cost the American taxpayer $10 billion, a gigantic amount at the time, and this did not guarantee sufficient protection against Soviet ICBMs. As a result, the project was abandoned.
In the late 60s, the Americans launched another missile defense program, which was called Safeguard - "Precaution" (originally it was called Sentinel - "Sentry").
This missile defense system was supposed to protect the deployment areas of American silo-based ICBMs and, in case of war, provide the possibility of launching a retaliatory missile strike.
The Safeguard was armed with two types of anti-missiles: the heavy Spartan and the light Sprint. The Spartan anti-missiles had a radius of 740 km and were supposed to destroy enemy nuclear warheads while still in space. The task of the lighter Sprint missiles was to "finish" those warheads that could get past the Spartans. In space, warheads were supposed to be destroyed using streams of hard neutron radiation, more effective than megaton nuclear explosions.
In the early 70s, the Americans began the practical implementation of the Safeguard project, but they built only one complex of this system.
In 1972, one of the most important documents in the field of nuclear arms control, the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, was signed between the USSR and the USA. Even today, almost fifty years later, it is one of the cornerstones of the global nuclear security system in the world.
According to this document, both states could deploy no more than two missile defense systems, the maximum ammunition of each of them should not exceed 100 anti-missiles. Later (in 1974) the number of systems was reduced to one unit. The United States covered the ICBM deployment area in North Dakota with the Safeguard system, and the USSR decided to protect the capital of the state, Moscow, from a missile attack.
Why is this treaty so important for the balance between the largest nuclear states? The fact is that approximately from the mid-60s it became clear that a large-scale nuclear conflict between the USSR and the USA would lead to the complete destruction of both countries, so nuclear weapons became a kind of deterrent tool. Having deployed a sufficiently powerful missile defense system, any of the opponents could be tempted to strike first and hide from the "response" with the help of anti-missiles. The refusal to defend their own territory in the face of imminent nuclear destruction guaranteed an extremely cautious attitude of the leadership of the signatory states to the "red" button. This is also why NATO's current deployment of missile defenses is such a concern in the Kremlin.
By the way, the Americans did not begin to deploy the Safeguard missile defense system. In the 70s, they got Trident sea-based ballistic missiles, so the US military leadership considered it more appropriate to invest in new submarines and SLBMs than to build a very expensive missile defense system. And Russian units still defend the skies of Moscow today (for example, the 9th anti-missile defense division in Sofrino).
The next stage in the development of the American missile defense system was the SDI program (Strategic Defense Initiative), initiated by the fortieth US President Ronald Reagan.
It was a very large-scale project for a new US missile defense system that was in complete contradiction to the 1972 Treaty. The SDI program provided for the creation of a powerful, layered missile defense system with space-based elements, which was supposed to cover the entire territory of the United States.
In addition to anti-missiles, this program provided for the use of weapons based on other physical principles: lasers, electromagnetic and kinetic weapons, railguns.
This project was never realized. Numerous technical problems arose before its developers, many of which have not been resolved to this day. However, the developments of the SDI program were later used to create the US national missile defense, the deployment of which continues to this day.
Immediately after the end of World War II, the creation of protection against missile weapons was also taken up in the USSR. Already in 1945, specialists from the Zhukovsky Air Force Academy began work on the Anti-Fau project.
The first practical development in the field of missile defense in the USSR was System A, work on which was carried out in the late 50s. A whole series of tests of the complex was carried out (some of them were successful), but due to the low efficiency of System A, it was never put into service.
In the early 60s, the development of a missile defense system for the protection of the Moscow Industrial District began, it was called A-35. From that moment until the very collapse of the USSR, Moscow was always covered by a powerful anti-missile shield.
The development of the A-35 was delayed; this missile defense system was put on combat duty only in September 1971. In 1978, it was upgraded to the A-35M modification, which remained in service until 1990. The radar of the Danube-3U complex was on combat duty until the beginning of the 2000s. In 1990, the A-35M missile defense system was replaced by the A-135 Amur. The A-135 was equipped with two types of anti-missiles with a nuclear warhead and a range of 350 and 80 km.
The A-135 system should be replaced by the latest A-235 Samolet-M missile defense system, which is now at the testing stage. It will also be armed with two types of anti-missiles with a maximum range of 1,000 km (according to other sources, 1,500 km).
In addition to the aforementioned systems, in the USSR, at different times, work was also carried out on other projects for protection against strategic missile weapons. One can mention the Chelomeev missile defense system "Taran", which was supposed to protect the entire territory of the country from American ICBMs. This project involved installing several powerful radar stations in the Far North that would control the most possible trajectories of American ICBMs - through the North Pole. It was supposed to destroy enemy missiles with the help of the most powerful thermonuclear charges (10 megatons) mounted on anti-missiles.
This project was closed in the mid-60s for the same reason as the American Nike Zeus - the missile and nuclear arsenals of the USSR and the USA grew at an incredible pace, and no missile defense could protect against a massive strike.
Another promising Soviet missile defense system that never entered service was the S-225 complex. This project was developed in the early 60s, later one of the S-225 anti-missiles was used as part of the A-135 complex.
American missile defense system
Currently, several missile defense systems (Israel, India, Japan, the European Union) are deployed or are being developed in the world, but all of them have a short or medium range. Only two countries in the world have a strategic missile defense system - the United States and Russia. Before turning to the description of the American strategic missile defense system, a few words should be said about the general principles of operation of such systems.
Intercontinental ballistic missiles (or their warheads) can be shot down in different parts of their trajectory: in the initial, intermediate or final stages. Hitting a rocket on takeoff (Boost-phase intercept) looks like the simplest task. Immediately after the launch, the ICBM is easy to track: it has a low speed and is not covered by decoys or interference. With one shot, you can destroy all the warheads that are installed on the ICBM.
However, interception at the initial stage of the missile's trajectory also has significant difficulties, which almost completely negate the above advantages. As a rule, the deployment areas of strategic missiles are located deep in enemy territory and are reliably covered by anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense systems. Therefore, it is almost impossible to approach them at the required distance. In addition, the initial stage of the missile's flight (acceleration) is only one or two minutes, during which it is necessary not only to detect it, but also to send an interceptor to destroy it. It's very difficult.
Nevertheless, the interception of ICBMs at the initial stage looks very promising, so work on the means of destroying strategic missiles during acceleration continues. Space-based laser systems look the most promising, but there are no operational systems of such weapons yet.
Missiles can also be intercepted in the middle section of their trajectory (Midcourse intercept), when the warheads have already separated from the ICBM and continue to fly in outer space by inertia. Mid-segment interception also has both advantages and disadvantages. The main advantage of destroying warheads in space is the large time interval available to the missile defense system (according to some sources, up to 40 minutes), but the interception itself is associated with many complex technical issues. Firstly, warheads are relatively small, have a special anti-radar coating and do not emit anything into space, so they are very difficult to detect. Secondly, to further complicate the work of missile defense, any ICBM, except for the warheads themselves, carries a large number of decoys that are indistinguishable from the real ones on the radar screens. And thirdly: anti-missiles capable of destroying warheads in space orbit are very expensive.
Warheads can also be intercepted after their entry into the atmosphere (Terminal phase intercept), or in other words, at their last stage of flight. It also has its pros and cons. The main advantages are: the ability to deploy a missile defense system on its territory, the relative ease of tracking targets, and the low cost of interceptor missiles. The fact is that after entering the atmosphere, lighter decoys are eliminated, which makes it possible to more confidently identify real warheads.
However, interception at the final stage of the trajectory of warheads also has significant disadvantages. The main one is the very limited time that the missile defense system has - on the order of several tens of seconds. The destruction of warheads at the final stage of their flight is, in fact, the last line of missile defense.
In 1992, US President George W. Bush initiated a program to protect the United States from a limited nuclear strike - this is how the non-strategic missile defense project (NMD) was born.
The development of a modern national missile defense system began in the United States in 1999 after the signing of the relevant bill by President Bill Clinton. The goal of the program was declared to be the creation of such a missile defense system that could protect the entire territory of the United States from ICBMs. In the same year, the Americans conducted the first test under this project: a Minuteman missile was intercepted over the Pacific Ocean.
In 2001, the next owner of the White House, George W. Bush, said that the missile defense system would protect not only America, but also its main allies, the first of which was named the United Kingdom. In 2002, after the NATO summit in Prague, the development of a military-economic justification for the creation of a missile defense system for the North Atlantic alliance began. The final decision on the creation of a European missile defense was taken at the NATO summit in Lisbon, held at the end of 2010.
It has been repeatedly emphasized that the purpose of the program is to protect against rogue states like Iran and North Korea, and it is not directed against Russia. Later, a number of Eastern European countries joined the program, including Poland, the Czech Republic, and Romania.
Currently, NATO missile defense is a complex complex consisting of many components, which includes satellite systems for tracking ballistic missile launches, ground and sea missile launch detection systems (RLS), as well as several systems for destroying missiles at different stages of their trajectory: GBMD, Aegis ("Aegis"), THAAD and Patriot.
GBMD (Ground-Based Midcourse Defense) is a ground-based complex designed to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles in the middle section of their trajectory. It includes an early warning radar that monitors the launch of ICBMs and their trajectory, as well as silo-based anti-missiles. Their range is from 2 to 5 thousand km. To intercept ICBM warheads, the GBMD uses kinetic warheads. It should be noted that at the moment GBMD is the only fully deployed US strategic missile defense system.
The kinetic warhead for the rocket was not chosen by chance. The fact is that in order to intercept hundreds of enemy warheads, massive use of anti-missiles is necessary, the operation of at least one nuclear charge in the path of warheads creates a powerful electromagnetic pulse and is guaranteed to blind missile defense radars. However, on the other hand, a kinetic warhead requires much greater pointing accuracy, which in itself is a very difficult technical problem. And taking into account the equipping of modern ballistic missiles with warheads that can change their trajectory, the effectiveness of interceptors is even more reduced.
So far, the GBMD system can "boast" 50% of accurate hits - and then during the exercises. It is believed that this missile defense system can only work effectively against monoblock ICBMs.
Currently, GBMD anti-missiles are deployed in Alaska and California. It is possible that another system deployment area will be created on the US Atlantic coast.
Aegis ("Aegis"). Usually, when people talk about American missile defense, they mean the Aegis system. Back in the early 1990s, the idea was born in the United States to use the Aegis shipborne CICS for missile defense, and to adapt the excellent Standard anti-aircraft missile, which was launched from a standard Mk-41 container, to intercept medium and short-range ballistic missiles.
In general, the placement of elements of the missile defense system on warships is quite reasonable and logical. In this case, missile defense becomes mobile, gets the opportunity to operate as close as possible to enemy ICBM deployment areas, and, accordingly, shoot down enemy missiles not only in the middle, but also in the initial stages of their flight. In addition, the main direction of the flight of Russian missiles is the area of the Arctic Ocean, where there is simply nowhere to place anti-missile silos. 
In the end, the designers managed to place more fuel in the anti-missile and significantly improve the homing head. However, according to experts, even the most advanced modifications of the SM-3 anti-missile will not be able to intercept the latest maneuvering warheads of Russian ICBMs - they simply do not have enough fuel for this. But these anti-missiles are quite capable of intercepting a conventional (non-maneuvering) warhead.
In 2011, the Aegis missile defense system was deployed on 24 ships, including five Ticonderoga-class cruisers and nineteen Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. In total, the US military plans to equip 84 US Navy ships with the Aegis system by 2041. Based on this system, the ground-based Aegis Ashore system has been developed, which is already deployed in Romania and will be deployed in Poland by 2019.
THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense). This element of the American missile defense system should be attributed to the second echelon of the US national missile defense. This is a mobile complex, which was originally developed to deal with medium and short-range missiles, it cannot intercept targets in outer space. The warhead of the THAAD missiles is kinetic.
Part of the THAAD systems are located on the US mainland, which can only be explained by the ability of this system to fight not only against medium and short-range ballistic missiles, but also to intercept ICBMs. Indeed, this missile defense system can destroy warheads of strategic missiles in the final section of their trajectory, and it does this quite effectively. In 2013, the American national missile defense exercise was held, in which the Aegis, GBMD and THAAD systems took part. The latter showed the greatest efficiency, shooting down 10 targets out of ten possible.
Of the minuses of THAAD, one can note its high price: one interceptor missile costs $30 million.
PAC-3 Patriot. "Patriot" is a tactical-level anti-missile system designed to cover military groups. The debut of this complex took place during the first American war in the Persian Gulf. Despite the extensive PR campaign of this system, the effectiveness of the complex was found to be not very satisfactory. Therefore, in the mid-90s, a more advanced version of the Patriot appeared - PAC-3.
.The most important element of the American missile defense system is the SBIRS satellite constellation, designed to detect ballistic missile launches and track their trajectories. The deployment of the system began in 2006 and should be completed by 2019. Its full complement will consist of ten satellites, six geostationary and four in high elliptical orbits.
Does the American missile defense system threaten Russia?
Can a missile defense system protect the United States from a massive nuclear strike from Russia? The unequivocal answer is no. The effectiveness of the American missile defense system is assessed by experts in different ways, but it will definitely not be able to ensure the guaranteed destruction of all warheads launched from Russian territory.
The ground-based GBMD system has insufficient accuracy, and so far only two such complexes have been deployed. The shipborne Aegis missile defense system can be quite effective against ICBMs at the booster (initial) stage of their flight, but it will not be able to intercept missiles launched from the depths of Russian territory. If we talk about the interception of warheads in the middle leg of the flight (outside the atmosphere), then it will be very difficult for SM-3 anti-missiles to deal with the maneuvering warheads of the latest generation. Although obsolete (non-maneuverable) blocks may well be hit by them.
Domestic critics of the American Aegis system forget one very important aspect: the most deadly element of the Russian nuclear triad are ICBMs deployed on nuclear submarines. The missile defense ship may well be on duty in the area where missiles are launched from nuclear submarines and destroy them immediately after launch.
Destroying warheads in the mid-flight (after their separation from the missile) is a very difficult task, it can be compared with an attempt to hit another bullet flying towards it with a bullet.
At present (and in the foreseeable future), the American missile defense system will be able to protect US territory from only a small number of ballistic missiles (no more than twenty), which is still a very serious achievement, given the rapid spread of missile and nuclear technologies in the world.
If you have any questions - leave them in the comments below the article. We or our visitors will be happy to answer them.
Said Aminov, editor-in-chief of the Vestnik PVO website (PVO.rf)
Basic provisions:
Today, a number of companies are actively developing and promoting new air defense systems, which are based on air-to-air missiles used from ground launchers;
Given the large number of aircraft missiles in service with different countries, the creation of such air defense systems can be very promising.
The idea of creating anti-aircraft missile systems based on aircraft weapons is not new. Back in the 1960s. The United States created Chaparral self-propelled short-range air defense systems with the Sidewinder aircraft missile and the Sea Sparrow short-range air defense system with the AIM-7E-2 Sparrow aircraft missile. These complexes were widely used and were used in combat operations. At the same time, a ground-based Spada air defense system (and its shipborne version of Albatros) was created in Italy, using Aspide anti-aircraft guided missiles similar in design to Sparrow.
Today, the United States has returned to the design of "hybrid" air defense systems based on the Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM aircraft missile. The SLAMRAAM air defense system, which has been created for a long time, designed to complement the Avenger complex in the US Army and Marine Corps, can theoretically become one of the best-selling in foreign markets, given the number of countries armed with AIM-120 aircraft missiles. An example is the US-Norwegian NASAMS air defense system, which has already gained popularity, also created on the basis of AIM-120 missiles.
The European group MBDA is promoting vertical launch air defense systems based on the French MICA aircraft missile, and the German company Diehl BGT Defense is promoting IRIS-T missiles.
Russia also does not stand aside - in 2005, the Tactical Missile Weapons Corporation (KTRV) presented at the MAKS air show information on the use of an air defense medium-range missile RVV-AE. This missile with an active radar guidance system is designed for use from fourth-generation aircraft, has a range of 80 km and was exported in large quantities as part of the Su-30MK and MiG-29 family fighters to China, Algeria, India and other countries. True, information on the development of the anti-aircraft version of the RVV-AE has not been received recently.
Chaparral (USA)
The Chaparral self-propelled all-weather air defense system was developed by Ford based on the Sidewinder 1C (AIM-9D) aircraft missile. The complex was adopted by the US Army in 1969, and since then it has been modernized several times. In combat, Chaparral was first used by the Israeli army in the Golan Heights in 1973, and subsequently used by Israel in 1982 during the Israeli occupation of Lebanon. However, by the early 1990s. The Chaparral air defense system was hopelessly outdated and was decommissioned by the United States, and then by Israel. Now it has remained in operation only in Egypt, Colombia, Morocco, Portugal, Tunisia and Taiwan.
Sea Sparrow (USA)
The Sea Sparrow is one of the most massive short-range ship-based air defense systems in the NATO navies. The complex was created on the basis of the RIM-7 missile, a modified version of the AIM-7F Sparrow air-to-air missile. Tests began in 1967, and since 1971 the complex began to enter service with the US Navy.
In 1968, Denmark, Italy and Norway came to an agreement with the US Navy on joint work to modernize the Sea Sparrow air defense system as part of international cooperation. As a result, a unified air defense system for NATO surface ships NSSMS (NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System) was developed, which has been in serial production since 1973.
Now a new anti-aircraft missile RIM-162 ESSM (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles) is being offered for the Sea Sparrow air defense system, the development of which began in 1995 by an international consortium led by the American company Raytheon. The consortium includes companies from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Spain, Greece, Holland, Italy, Norway, Portugal and Turkey. The new missile can be launched from both inclined and vertical launchers. The RIM-162 ESSM anti-aircraft missile has been in service since 2004. The modified RIM-162 ESSM anti-aircraft missile is also planned to be used in the US SLAMRAAM ER land-based air defense system (see below).
RVV-AE-ZRK (Russia)
In our country, research work (R&D) on the use of aircraft missiles in air defense systems began in the mid-1980s. In the Klenka Research Institute, specialists from the Vympel State Design Bureau (today part of the KTRV) confirmed the possibility and expediency of using the R-27P missile as part of the air defense system, and in the early 1990s. Research work "Yelnik" showed the possibility of using an air-to-air missile of the RVV-AE (R-77) type in an air defense system with a vertical launch. A model of a modified missile under the designation RVV-AE-ZRK was demonstrated in 1996 at the Defendory international exhibition in Athens at the stand of the Vympel State Design Bureau. However, until 2005, there were no new references to the anti-aircraft version of the RVV-AE.
Possible launcher of a promising air defense system on an artillery carriage of an S-60 anti-aircraft gun GosMKB "Vympel"
During the MAKS-2005 air show, the Tactical Missiles Corporation presented an anti-aircraft version of the RVV-AE missile without external changes from an aircraft missile. The RVV-AE missile was placed in a transport and launch container (TPK) and had a vertical launch. According to the developer, the missile is proposed to be used against air targets from ground launchers that are part of anti-aircraft missile or anti-aircraft artillery systems. In particular, layouts for placing four TPKs with RVV-AE on the S-60 anti-aircraft gun cart were distributed, and it was also proposed to upgrade the Kvadrat air defense system (an export version of the Kub air defense system) by placing TPKs with RVV-AE on the launcher.
Anti-aircraft missile RVV-AE in a transport and launch container in the exposition of the Vympel State Design Bureau (Tactical Missiles Corporation) at the MAKS-2005 exhibition Said Aminov
Due to the fact that the anti-aircraft version of the RVV-AE almost does not differ from the aircraft version in terms of equipment and there is no launch accelerator, the launch is carried out using a sustainer engine from a transport and launch container. Because of this, the maximum launch range has decreased from 80 to 12 km. The anti-aircraft version of the RVV-AE was created in cooperation with the Almaz-Antey air defense concern.
After MAKS-2005, there were no reports on the implementation of this project from open sources. Now the aviation version of the RVV-AE is in service with Algeria, India, China, Vietnam, Malaysia and other countries, some of which also have Soviet artillery and air defense missile systems.
Pracka (Yugoslavia)
The first examples of the use of aircraft missiles in the role of anti-aircraft missiles in Yugoslavia date back to the mid-1990s, when the Bosnian Serb army created an air defense system on the chassis of a TAM-150 truck with two rails for Soviet-designed R-13 infrared-guided missiles. It was a "handicraft" modification and does not appear to have had an official designation.
A self-propelled anti-aircraft gun based on R-3 missiles (AA-2 "Atoll") was first shown to the public in 1995 (Source Vojske Krajine)
Another simplified system, known as Pracka ("Sling"), was an infrared-guided R-60 missile on an improvised launcher based on the carriage of a towed 20 mm M55 anti-aircraft gun. The actual combat effectiveness of such a system seems to have been low, given such a disadvantage as a very short launch range.
Towed handicraft air defense system "Sling" with a missile based on air-to-air missiles with an infrared homing head R-60
The beginning of the NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999 prompted the engineers of this country to urgently create anti-aircraft missile systems. Specialists from the VTI Military Technical Institute and the VTO Air Test Center quickly developed the Pracka RL-2 and RL-4 self-propelled air defense systems armed with two-stage missiles. Prototypes of both systems were created on the basis of the chassis of a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun with a 30-mm double-barreled gun of the Czech production type M53 / 59, more than 100 of which were in service with Yugoslavia.
New versions of the Prasha air defense system with two-stage missiles based on the R-73 and R-60 aircraft missiles at an exhibition in Belgrade in December 2004. Vukasin Milosevic, 2004
The RL-2 system was created on the basis of the Soviet R-60MK missile with the first stage in the form of an accelerator of a similar caliber. The booster appears to have been created by a combination of a 128mm multiple rocket launcher engine and large cross-mounted tail fins.
Vukasin Milosevic, 2004
The RL-4 rocket was created on the basis of the Soviet R-73 rocket, also equipped with an accelerator. It is possible that boosters for RL-4
were created on the basis of Soviet 57-mm unguided aircraft missiles of the S-5 type (a package of six missiles in a single body). An unnamed Serbian source, in an interview with a representative of the Western press, stated that this air defense system was successful. The R-73 missiles significantly outperform the R-60 in homing head sensitivity and reach in range and altitude, posing a significant threat to NATO aircraft.
Vukasin Milosevic, 2004
It is unlikely that the RL-2 and RL-4 had a great chance of independently conducting successful firing at suddenly appeared targets. These SAMs depend on air defense command posts or a forward observation post to have at least some idea of the direction to the target and the approximate time of its appearance.
Vukasin Milosevic, 2004
Both prototypes were built by VTO and VTI staff, and there is no information in the public domain about how many (or if any) test runs were made. The prototypes remained in service throughout the 1999 NATO bombing campaign. Anecdotal reports suggest that the RL-4 may have been used in combat, but there is no evidence that RL-2 missiles were fired at NATO aircraft. After the end of the conflict, both systems were withdrawn from service and returned to VTI.
SPYDER (Israel)
Israeli companies Rafael and IAI have developed and are promoting SPYDER short-range air defense systems based on Rafael Python 4 or 5 and Derby aircraft missiles, respectively, with infrared and active radar guidance. For the first time, the new complex was presented in 2004 at the Indian arms exhibition Defexpo.
Experienced launcher of the SPYDER air defense system, on which Rafael worked out the Jane "s complex
SAM SPYDER is capable of hitting air targets at ranges up to 15 km and at altitudes up to 9 km. The SPYDER is armed with four Python and Derby missiles in the TPK on the Tatra-815 off-road chassis with an 8x8 wheel arrangement. Rocket launch inclined.
Indian version of the SPYDER air defense system at the Bourges air show in 2007 Said Aminov
Derby, Python-5 and Iron Dome rockets at Defexpo-2012
The main export customer of the SPYDER short-range air defense system is India. In 2005, Rafael won the corresponding tender of the Indian Air Force, while the competitors were companies from Russia and South Africa. In 2006, four SPYDER SAM launchers were sent to India for testing, which were successfully completed in 2007. The final contract for the supply of 18 SPYDER systems for a total of $ 1 billion was signed in 2008. It is planned that the systems will be delivered in 2011-2012 Also, the SPYDER air defense system was purchased by Singapore.
SAM SPYDER Singapore Air Force
After the end of hostilities in Georgia in August 2008, evidence appeared on Internet forums that the Georgian military had one battery of SPYDER air defense systems, as well as their use against Russian aircraft. So, for example, in September 2008, a photograph of the head of the Python 4 rocket with serial number 11219 was published. Later, two photographs appeared, dated August 19, 2008, of a SPYDER air defense missile launcher with four Python 4 missiles on the chassis captured by Russian or South Ossetian military Romanian made Roman 6x6. Serial number 11219 is visible on one of the missiles.
Georgian SAM SPYDER
VL MICA (Europe)
Since 2000, the European concern MBDA has been promoting the VL MICA air defense system, the main armament of which is MICA aircraft missiles. The first demonstration of the new complex took place in February 2000 at the Asian Aerospace exhibition in Singapore. And already in 2001, tests began at the French training ground in Landes. In December 2005, the MBDA concern received a contract to create the VL MICA air defense system for the French armed forces. It was planned that these complexes would provide object air defense of air bases, units in the combat formations of the ground forces and be used as shipboard air defense. However, to date, the purchase of the complex by the armed forces of France has not begun. The aviation version of the MICA missile is in service with the French Air Force and Navy (they are equipped with Rafale and Mirage 2000 fighters), in addition, MICA is in service with the Air Force of the United Arab Emirates, Greece and Taiwan (Mirage 2000).
Model of the ship launcher VL MICA air defense system at the LIMA-2013 exhibition
The land version of the VL MICA includes a command post, a three-coordinate detection radar and three to six launchers with four transport and launch containers. VL MICA components can be installed on standard off-road vehicles. Anti-aircraft missiles of the complex can be with an infrared or active radar homing head, completely identical to aviation options. The TPK for the land version of the VL MICA is identical to the TPK for the ship modification of the VL MICA. In the basic configuration of the ship's VL MICA air defense system, the launcher consists of eight TPKs with MICA missiles in various combinations of homing heads.
Model of self-propelled launcher SAM VL MICA at the exhibition LIMA-2013
In December 2007, VL MICA air defense systems were ordered by Oman (for three Khareef project corvettes under construction in the UK), subsequently these complexes were purchased by the Moroccan Navy (for three SIGMA project corvettes under construction in the Netherlands) and the UAE (for two small missile corvettes contracted in Italy project Falaj 2) . In 2009, at the Paris Air Show, Romania announced the acquisition of the VL MICA and Mistral complexes for the country's Air Force from the MBDA concern, although deliveries to the Romanians have not begun so far.
IRIS-T (Europe)
As part of the European initiative to create a promising short-range aviation missile to replace the American AIM-9 Sidewinder, a consortium of countries led by Germany created the IRIS-T missile with a range of up to 25 km. The development and production is carried out by Diehl BGT Defense in partnership with enterprises in Italy, Sweden, Greece, Norway and Spain. The missile was adopted by the participating countries in December 2005. The IRIS-T missile can be used from a wide range of fighter aircraft, including Typhoon, Tornado, Gripen, F-16, F-18 aircraft. Austria was the first export customer for IRIS-T, and South Africa and Saudi Arabia later ordered the missile.
Layout self-propelled launcher Iris-T at the exhibition in Bourges-2007
In 2004, Diehl BGT Defense began developing a promising air defense system using the IRIS-T aircraft missile. The IRIS-T SLS complex has been undergoing field tests since 2008, mainly at the Overberg test site in South Africa. The IRIS-T missile is launched vertically from a launcher mounted on the chassis of an off-road light truck. The detection of air targets is provided by the Giraffe AMB all-round radar developed by the Swedish company Saab. The maximum range of destruction exceeds 10 km.
In 2008, a modernized launcher was demonstrated at the ILA exhibition in Berlin
In 2009, Diehl BGT Defense introduced an upgraded version of the IRIS-T SL air defense system with a new missile, the maximum range of which should be 25 km. The missile is equipped with an advanced rocket engine, as well as automatic data transmission and GPS navigation systems. Tests of the improved complex were carried out at the end of 2009 at the South African test site.
Launcher of the German air defense system IRIS-T SL 25.6.2011 at the Dubendorf Miroslav Gyürösi airbase
In accordance with the decision of the German authorities, it was planned to integrate the new version of the air defense system into the promising MEADS air defense system (created jointly with the United States and Italy), as well as to ensure interaction with the Patriot PAC-3 air defense system. However, the announced withdrawal of the United States and Germany in 2011 from the MEADS air defense program makes the prospects of both MEADS itself and the IRIS-T anti-aircraft missile variant planned for integration into its composition extremely uncertain. The complex can be offered to the countries-operators of IRIS-T aircraft missiles.
NASAMS (USA, Norway)
The concept of an air defense system using the AIM-120 aircraft missile was proposed in the early 1990s. by the American company Hughes Aircraft (now part of Raytheon) when creating a promising air defense system under the AdSAMS program. In 1992, the AdSAMS complex was tested, but in the future this project was not developed. In 1994, Hughes Aircraft signed a contract to develop NASAMS (Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System) air defense systems, the architecture of which largely repeated the AdSAMS project. The development of the NASAMS complex together with Norsk Forsvarteknologia (now part of the Kongsberg Defense group) was successfully completed, and in 1995 its production for the Norwegian Air Force began.
The NASAMS air defense system consists of a command post, a Raytheon AN / TPQ-36A three-coordinate radar and three transportable launchers. The launcher carries six AIM-120 missiles.
In 2005, Kongsberg was awarded a contract to fully integrate Norwegian NASAMS air defense systems into NATO's integrated air defense control system. The modernized air defense system under the designation NASAMS II entered service with the Norwegian Air Force in 2007.
SAM NASAMS II Ministry of Defense of Norway
For the Spanish ground forces in 2003, four NASAMS air defense systems were delivered, and one air defense system was transferred to the United States. In December 2006, the Dutch ground forces ordered six upgraded NASAMS II air defense systems, deliveries began in 2009. In April 2009, Finland decided to replace three divisions of Russian Buk-M1 air defense systems with NASAMS II. The estimated cost of the Finnish contract is 500 million euros.
Now Raytheon and Kongsberg are jointly developing the HAWK-AMRAAM air defense system, using AIM-120 aircraft missiles on universal launchers and Sentinel detection radars in the I-HAWK air defense system.
High Mobility Launcher NASAMS AMRAAM on FMTV Raytheon chassis
CLAWS / SLAMRAAM (USA)
Since the early 2000s in the United States, a promising mobile air defense system is being developed based on the AIM-120 AMRAAM aircraft missile, similar in its characteristics to the Russian medium-range missile RVV-AE (R-77). Raytheon Corporation is the lead developer and manufacturer of rockets. Boeing is a subcontractor and is responsible for the development and production of the SAM fire control command post.
In 2001, the US Marine Corps signed a contract with Raytheon Corporation to create the CLAWS (Complementary Low-Altitude Weapon System, also known as HUMRAAM) air defense systems. This air defense system was a mobile air defense system, based on a launcher based on an HMMWV off-road army vehicle with four AIM-120 AMRAAM aircraft missiles launched from inclined rails. The development of the complex was extremely delayed due to the repeated curtailment of funding and the lack of clear views from the Pentagon on the need to acquire it.
In 2004, the US Army ordered Raytheon to develop the SLAMRAAM (Surface-Launched AMRAAM) air defense system. Since 2008, tests of the SLAMRAAM air defense system at the test sites began, during which interaction with the Patriot and Avenger air defense systems was also tested. At the same time, the army eventually abandoned the use of the light HMMWV chassis, and the latest version of SLAMRAAM was already being tested on the chassis of an FMTV truck. In general, the development of the system was also sluggish, although it was expected that the new complex would enter service in 2012.
In September 2008, information appeared that the UAE had applied for the purchase of a certain number of SLAMRAAM air defense systems. In addition, this air defense system was planned to be acquired by Egypt.
In 2007, Raytheon Corporation proposed to significantly improve the combat capabilities of the SLAMRAAM air defense system by adding two new missiles to its armament - an AIM-9X infrared-guided short-range aircraft missile and a longer-range SLAMRAAM-ER missile. Thus, the modernized complex should have been able to use two types of short-range missiles from one launcher: AMRAAM (up to 25 km) and AIM-9X (up to 10 km). Due to the use of the SLAMRAAM-ER missile, the maximum range of the complex's destruction increased to 40 km. The SLAMRAAM-ER missile is being developed by Raytheon on its own initiative and is a modified ESSM ship-based anti-aircraft missile with a homing head and a control system from the AMRAAM aircraft missile. The first tests of the new SL-AMRAAM-ER rocket were carried out in Norway in 2008.
Meanwhile, in January 2011, information appeared that the Pentagon had finally decided not to acquire the SLAMRAAM air defense system for either the army or the marines due to budget cuts, despite the lack of prospects for modernizing the Avenger air defense system. This, apparently, means the end of the program and makes its possible export prospects doubtful.
Tactical and technical characteristics of air defense systems based on aircraft missiles
| Name of air defense system | Developer company | anti-aircraft missile | Type of homing head | Range of destruction of air defense systems, km | Range of destruction of the aviation complex, km |
| Chaparral | Lockheed Martin (USA) | Sidewinder 1C (AIM-9D) - MIM-72A | IR AN/DAW-2 rosette scan (Rosette Scan Seeker) - MIM-72G | 0.5 to 9.0 (MIM-72G) | Up to 18 (AIM-9D) |
| SAM based on RVV-AE | KTRV (Russia) | RVV-AE | ARL | 1.2 to 12 | 0.3 to 80 |
| Pracka-RL-2 | Yugoslavia | R-60MK | IR | n/a | Up to 8 |
| Pracka-RL-4 | R-73 | IR | n/a | up to 20 | |
| SPYDER | Rafael, IAI (Israel) | Python 5 | IR | 1 to 15 (SPYDER-SR) | Up to 15 |
| Derby | ARL GOS | 1 to 35 (up to 50) (SPYDER-MR) | Up to 63 | ||
| VL Mica | MBDA (Europe) | IR Mica | IR GOS | To 10 | 0.5 to 60 |
| RF Mica | ARL GOS | ||||
| SL-AMRAAM / CLAWS / NASAMS | Raytheon (USA), Kongsberg (Norway) | AIM-120AMRAAM | ARL GOS | 2.5 to 25 | up to 48 |
| AIM-9X Sidewinder | IR GOS | To 10 | Up to 18.2 | ||
| SL-AMRAAMER | ARL GOS | Up to 40 | No analogue | ||
| Sea Sparrow | Raytheon (USA) | AIM-7F Sparrow | PARL GOS | Under 19 | 50 |
| ESSM | PARL GOS | Up to 50 | No analogue | ||
| IRIS-TSL | Diehl BGT Defense (Germany) | IRIS-T | IR GOS | Up to 15 km (estimated) | 25 |
