American thaad system. THAAD missile defense system

Story

THAAD missile launch

R&D to create anti- missile complex(PRK) THAAD was started in 1992 by Lockheed (now a division of Lockheed-Martin Corporation).

At the beginning of 1995 prototypes mobile launcher, GBR-T multifunctional radar and command post were deployed at the White Sands training ground in New Mexico. In the same year, flight tests of experimental samples of the anti-missile system of this complex began.

Initially, it was planned to use 20 experimental samples of anti-missile missiles during flight tests. Due to the introduction of changes to the design of the main elements of the set of changes (to ensure resistance to PF nuclear weapons), which required additional costs of $80 million, the number of launches was reduced to 14, and 6 interceptor missiles were transferred to the reserve category.

As of April 1, 1998 (see table), seven launches were carried out, and the remaining 7 launches were planned to be carried out in the period 1998-1999, in order to begin full-scale development of the PRK in 1999, and put it into service in 2006.

In May 2004, production of 16 pre-production interceptor missiles began for flight testing.

In January 2006, a contract was signed with Lockheed Martin for the supply of the first 2 THAAD systems with 48 missiles for them.

Currently, 39 test launches are known, 31 of which were considered successful. It is important to note that the tests are carried out only on simulators of the mass-produced but obsolete R-17 missiles (according to NATO classification SS-1 Scud), developed in the mid-1950s, which do not have the means to overcome missile defense. THAAD intercepted a target ballistic missile simulating a Scud missile at an altitude of over 50 kilometers.

On October 16, 2009, the second THAAD interceptor battery began service at Fort Bliss.

In March 2011, the US Missile Defense Agency awarded Lockheed Martin a contract for the supply of six THAAD mobile missile defense systems. The 3rd and 4th batteries will be formed from the new complexes. One THAAD battery includes three launchers with 24 interceptor missiles, a command center and an X-band radar.

On October 6, 2011, the 12th test of the THAAD system was conducted since the program began in 2005. The first operational test of the system was carried out, intercepting missiles at high altitude at the final stage of their trajectory. One short-range missile and one medium-range ballistic missile were intercepted. Tests were carried out in the area Hawaiian island Kauai. The tests involved the Alpha missile defense battery from the 4th artillery regiment of the 11th US air defense artillery brigade. She was transferred to the training ground along with her equipment from Fort Bliss, Texas. The personnel deployed the equipment and provided control of the missile defense system. Control was carried out by the air defense and missile defense command of the 94th Army. To ensure greater realism of the tests, the day and time of the tests were not communicated to the brigade personnel.

Operating principle

The THAAD complex uses the so-called “kinetic interception” concept - only the kinetic energy of the hardware unit is used to hit the target; there is no dedicated warhead. Thanks to the high kinetic energy of the hardware, the THAAD system should be significantly more effective against the warheads of older ballistic missiles (such as the P-17) than the Patriot PAC-1.2 (the fragmentation part of which could not destroy the Scud warhead). One missile can destroy only a single target, the trajectory of which is known with a given accuracy.

Some experts note that the direct hit concept limits the ability of this complex to counter complex ballistic targets (SBC), and the ability to counter non-ballistic (maneuvering) targets is questionable.

THAAD anti-missile

The THAAD anti-missile missile is a single-stage solid-fuel missile. The solid propellant engine was developed by Pratt & Whitney. Uncooled IR seeker, operating in the middle (3.3 - 3.8 µm) and far (7 - 10 µm) sections of the IR range, command-inertial control system.

Rocket characteristics

  • Starting weight: 900 kg
  • Length: 6.17 m
  • Maximum case diameter: 0.37 m
  • Range: up to 200 km
  • Interception altitude: up to 150 km,
  • Speed: up to 3 km/s

Radar

Price

The cost of the AN/TPY-2 radar is $574 million. In 2011, 22 missiles were purchased for the amount of $1 billion, in 2012 - 42 anti-missile missiles for the amount of $999 million, in 2013 it is planned to purchase 36 missiles, spending $777 million on them (for the USA).

In service

Potential operators

see also

Notes

Sources

Literature

  • Rudov V. American anti-missile system THAAD (Russian) // Foreign military review . - M.: “Red Star”, 1998. - V. 618. - No. 9. - P. 21-25. - ISSN 0134-921X.

Links

  • The United States successfully tested the THAAD missile defense system - Air Defense and Missile Defense Information Portal
The template card for this article is not filled out. ((rocket card)).

MOSCOW, December 27 – RIA Novosti, Vadim Saranov. Missiles began to fly into Saudi Arabia frequently. Recently, the UN Security Council condemned the attack by the Yemeni Houthis on Riyadh. The target of the attack was the royal palace of Al-Yamamah, but nothing happened. The missile was either shot down or deviated from its course. Against this background, Saudi Arabia intends to significantly strengthen its missile defense. The main candidates for the role of “umbrella” are the American THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system and the Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system. Read about the advantages and disadvantages of competitors in the RIA Novosti material.

S-400 hits further, THAAD hits higher

Objectively, THAAD and the S-400 Triumph air defense system are conditional competitors. "Triumph" is primarily designed to destroy aerodynamic targets: aircraft, cruise missiles, unmanned vehicles. THAAD, on the other hand, is a system originally designed to combat short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. "American" is capable of destroying targets at altitudes that are prohibitive for conventional air defense systems - 150 kilometers, and according to some reports, even 200 kilometers. The latest anti-aircraft missile 40N6E of the Russian Triumph does not work above 30 kilometers. However, according to experts, the destruction altitude indicator, especially when it comes to combating operational-tactical missiles, is not critical.

“In theater missile defense, targets are destroyed on downward trajectories, and not in space,” Lieutenant General Aitech Bizhev, former deputy commander-in-chief of the Air Force for the unified air defense system of the CIS countries, told RIA Novosti. “In the late 1980s, in missile defense "In the capital, it was planned to use two S-300V2 regiments. At the Kapustin Yar training ground, they created a model of the defense of Moscow with the same geometric dimensions and launched targets from the stratosphere. All of them were destroyed at a distance of 120 kilometers."

By the way, main danger For Saudi Arabia today they are precisely the R-17 Scud operational-tactical missiles and the Qahir and Zelzal tactical missiles, created on the basis of the Soviet Luna-M complex.

© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea

© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea

Another key difference between the American and Russian complexes is the principle of operation. If the Triumph hits targets with fragments after detonating the missile warhead near the target, then the THAAD, deprived of the warhead, hits the missile directly with a kinetic block. Meanwhile, despite the apparent complexity of this solution, the Americans managed to achieve good results during the tests - the probability of destroying a target with one anti-missile missile is 0.9, if THAAD backs up the complex with a simpler system, this figure will be 0.96.

The main advantage of Triumph when used as an anti-missile system is its higher range. For the 40N6E missile it is up to 400 kilometers, while for THAAD it is 200 kilometers. Unlike the S-400, which can fire 360 ​​degrees, the THAAD, when deployed, has a field of fire of 90 degrees horizontally and 60 degrees vertically. But at the same time, the “American” has better vision - the detection range of its AN/TPY-2 radar is 1000 kilometers versus 600 kilometers for the “Triumph”.

Combine incompatible

As you can see, Saudi Arabia intends to build its missile defense on two completely different systems. This approach may seem somewhat strange, because when using them, serious compatibility problems may arise. However, according to experts, this is a completely solvable issue.

“These two systems cannot be controlled in an automated mode from a single command post,” military expert Mikhail Khodarenok told RIA Novosti. “They have completely different mathematics, completely different logic. But this does not exclude the possibility of their combat use separately. They can be deployed in different places or even within the defense of one object, if their tasks are divided into heights and sectors, they can simply complement each other perfectly, being in the same group."

Saudi Arabia's desire to acquire both Russian and American systems may be dictated by other considerations. After Operation Desert Storm, during which the French air defense forces in Iraq anti-aircraft missile systems suddenly found themselves inoperable, potential buyers began to be more cautious about purchasing weapons manufactured in the West.

“There may be some hidden bugs in American weapons,” says Mikhail Khodarenok. “For example, an F-16 of the Jordanian Air Force cannot shoot down an F-16 of the Israeli Air Force. That is, if American weapons are used in Saudi Arabia, only the S-400, which It is also capable of working for conventional aerodynamic purposes. It is possible that this is the only reason they are buying the Russian system.”

The most important difference between THAAD and Triumph is the price. The cost of one THAAD battery, which consists of six launchers for eight interceptor missiles each, is about $2.3 billion. The innovative AN/TPY-2 radar costs another 574 million. The cost of an S-400 battalion with eight launchers of four missiles each is about $500 million. The Russian complex costs almost six times less, while the advantages of THAAD, at least for now, are not obvious.

MOSCOW, December 27 – RIA Novosti, Vadim Saranov. Missiles began to fly into Saudi Arabia frequently. Recently, the UN Security Council condemned the attack by the Yemeni Houthis on Riyadh. The target of the attack was the royal palace of Al-Yamamah, but nothing happened. The missile was either shot down or deviated from its course. Against this background, Saudi Arabia intends to significantly strengthen its missile defense. The main candidates for the role of “umbrella” are the American THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system and the Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system. Read about the advantages and disadvantages of competitors in the RIA Novosti material.

S-400 hits further, THAAD hits higher

Objectively, THAAD and the S-400 Triumph air defense system are conditional competitors. "Triumph" is primarily designed to destroy aerodynamic targets: aircraft, cruise missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles. THAAD, on the other hand, is a system originally designed to combat short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. "American" is capable of destroying targets at altitudes that are prohibitive for conventional air defense systems - 150 kilometers, and according to some reports, even 200 kilometers. The latest anti-aircraft missile 40N6E of the Russian Triumph does not work above 30 kilometers. However, according to experts, the destruction altitude indicator, especially when it comes to combating operational-tactical missiles, is not critical.

“In theater missile defense, targets are destroyed on downward trajectories, and not in space,” Lieutenant General Aitech Bizhev, former deputy commander-in-chief of the Air Force for the unified air defense system of the CIS countries, told RIA Novosti. “In the late 1980s, in missile defense "In the capital, it was planned to use two S-300V2 regiments. At the Kapustin Yar training ground, they created a model of the defense of Moscow with the same geometric dimensions and launched targets from the stratosphere. All of them were destroyed at a distance of 120 kilometers."

By the way, the main danger to Saudi Arabia today is precisely the R-17 Scud operational-tactical missiles and the Qahir and Zelzal tactical missiles, created on the basis of the Soviet Luna-M complex.

© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea

© AP Photo/U.S. Force Korea

Another key difference between the American and Russian complexes is the principle of operation. If the Triumph hits targets with fragments after detonating the missile warhead near the target, then the THAAD, deprived of the warhead, hits the missile directly with a kinetic block. Meanwhile, despite the apparent complexity of this solution, the Americans managed to achieve good results during the tests - the probability of destroying a target with one anti-missile missile is 0.9, if THAAD backs up the complex with a simpler system, this figure will be 0.96.

The main advantage of Triumph when used as an anti-missile system is its higher range. For the 40N6E missile it is up to 400 kilometers, while for THAAD it is 200 kilometers. Unlike the S-400, which can fire 360 ​​degrees, the THAAD, when deployed, has a field of fire of 90 degrees horizontally and 60 degrees vertically. But at the same time, the “American” has better vision - the detection range of its AN/TPY-2 radar is 1000 kilometers versus 600 kilometers for the “Triumph”.

Combine incompatible

As you can see, Saudi Arabia intends to build its missile defense on two completely different systems. This approach may seem somewhat strange, because when using them, serious compatibility problems may arise. However, according to experts, this is a completely solvable issue.

“These two systems cannot be controlled in an automated mode from a single command post,” military expert Mikhail Khodarenok told RIA Novosti. “They have completely different mathematics, completely different logic. But this does not exclude the possibility of their combat use separately. They can be deployed in different places or even within the defense of one object, if their tasks are divided into heights and sectors, they can simply complement each other perfectly, being in the same group."

Saudi Arabia's desire to acquire both Russian and American systems may be dictated by other considerations. After Operation Desert Storm, during which French anti-aircraft missile systems in service with Iraqi air defense suddenly became inoperable, potential buyers began to be more cautious about purchasing weapons manufactured in the West.

“There may be some hidden bugs in American weapons,” says Mikhail Khodarenok. “For example, an F-16 of the Jordanian Air Force cannot shoot down an F-16 of the Israeli Air Force. That is, if American weapons are used in Saudi Arabia, only the S-400, which It is also capable of working for conventional aerodynamic purposes. It is possible that this is the only reason they are buying the Russian system.”

The most important difference between THAAD and Triumph is the price. The cost of one THAAD battery, which consists of six launchers for eight interceptor missiles each, is about $2.3 billion. The innovative AN/TPY-2 radar costs another 574 million. The cost of an S-400 battalion with eight launchers of four missiles each is about $500 million. The Russian complex costs almost six times less, while the advantages of THAAD, at least for now, are not obvious.

4. US missile defense

4.1 US global missile defense segments

Figure 1. Purpose of US missile defense elements

In 2002, the United States decided to create a national US missile defense system, the main weapon of which would be interceptor missiles long range GBI - GBI (Ground Based Interceptors), and regional missile defense (also known as theater missile defense), the basis of which was to be systems designed to intercept medium- and shorter-range missiles.
Based on the concept of building a national missile defense system, it should include the following segments:


Figure 2. Transportation of the GBI missile defense

First segment- defense in the middle section of the trajectory - received the name GMD (Ground Missile Defense). It should be based on anti-missile systems for the transatmospheric interception of ICBM warheads based on GBI anti-missile missiles. It included two positional areas for the deployment of GBI interceptor missiles - in Alaska and California. It was envisaged that the ground echelon would be supplemented by a third position area located in Europe, but these plans were not destined to come true.


Figure 3. US guided missile destroyers

Second segment- defense in the ascending sector, including the active section. Within the framework of this segment, the following are being developed: a multifunctional sea- and land-based missile defense system “Aegis” with “Standard” interceptor missiles of various modifications placed on cruisers, destroyers of the Navy, as well as in silos, capable of intercepting both medium-range missiles, so do ICBMs. Navy ships equipped with Aegis sea-based systems can freely navigate the World Ocean and actually carry “forward-based missile defense systems” on board, blocking ballistic missiles in the middle and final stages of their flight trajectory. Space systems are also being considered - complexes based on space-based lasers SBL and kinetic interceptors Brilliant Pebbles ("Brilliant Pebbles"), as a legacy from SDI.


Figure 4. THAAD complex on a mobile platform

Third segment- PRO of the final section. Complexes in this segment are currently being developed for protection against short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. These include the ground-based THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 systems, as well as the sea- and ground-based Aegis systems. The groundwork accumulated in the field of missile defense formed the technological basis for the creation of a global layered defense system against ballistic missiles BMD (Ballistic Missile Defense), the creation of which became one of the main elements of the US military-technical policy. As a conditional starting point for the beginning of work on the creation of the BMD system, we can take George W. Bush's statement on December 17, 2002 about the beginning of its deployment, which followed the US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty in June 2002 and the restructuring of the program and budget of the Missile Defense Agency.

It is assumed that the presence of these three segments will make it possible to cover all stages of the flight of ballistic missiles and will allow them to be intercepted at any part of the flight path. Also, many experts indicate that the mega-system being created will be capable of not only intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles, but also shooting down satellites, fighting medium-range missiles, and also being a nuclear attack system, but more on these “delights” of the US missile defense system being created a little later.

Let's take a closer look at all three segments of the system being created and start with the long-range GBI interceptors.

4.1.1 Long-range heavy GBI interceptor missiles for the GBMD system.

The GBMD system began deployment in 2005 as the first truly operational anti-missile system to destroy enemy missiles and warheads in the mid-trajectory. Its basis is a ballistic missile with a firing range of 2000 - 5000 km.
A little clarification is required here: the GBI anti-missile missile is actually a solid-fuel Minuteman-2 ballistic missile with a kinetic interceptor installed instead of a nuclear warhead. Theoretically, it is possible to install on such a missile defense nuclear warhead and turn it into a weapon of nuclear attack.


Figure 6. Kinetic interceptor EKV of the GBI complex

Kinetic interceptor is a small spaceship, capable of targeting a warhead in space, as well as maneuvering. This interceptor will destroy a warhead by direct collision with the attacked warhead. A kinetic counter-attack method of destruction, when the speed of the target and the anti-missile missile relative to each other is 10-15 kilometers per second, guarantees its destruction in case of a hit. However, this requires very precise targeting. An accuracy of 50-200 meters, as for anti-missiles with a neutron warhead, is no longer enough.

It was the GBI missiles that were supposed to become the basis of Euro-missile defense, which would make it possible not only to destroy ICBMs launching from the European part of Russia, but also, if desired, to launch a nuclear strike, for example, on Moscow with a flight time of about 3 minutes. however, plans to locate the GBI in Europe were not destined to come true, as there followed an extremely harsh reaction from our country, both officially and, probably, unofficially. The Barack Obama administration revised plans to deploy missile defense in Europe, replacing the GBI system with a sea and ground version of Aegis with SM-3 interceptors. In addition, the development of the European missile defense system was somewhat extended in time, divided into several stages.

Plans for the period until 2025 include the creation of a third missile defense region of the continental United States, covering the industrial centers of the Atlantic coast;

Bringing the total number of GBMD missile defense missiles in the United States to 56 (28 in Alaska, 14 in California and 14 in Atlantic coast); in the future, up to 100 interceptor missiles.


4.1.2 Mobile interceptors of the "Aegis" system ("Aegis" - Aegis) land and sea based. SM-3 rocket.


Fig 7. Launch of the SM-3 rocket from the vertical cell Mk. 41

The Aegis system is a multifunctional combat information and control system (MBICS), consisting of an integrated network of sensors and computers, as well as strike weapons in the form of the first generation Standard missile 2 (SM-2) interceptor missiles and more advanced Standard interceptor missiles missile 3 (SM-3), launched using universal vertical launch systems Mk 41 located below the main deck of such cruisers and destroyers. Currently, such missile cells are carried by the Ticanderoga missile cruiser and the "class" missile destroyers. "Arleigh Burke""Officially, 24 destroyers and one missile cruiser are now involved in the construction of the Aegis system, but the launch cells Mk 41 They are universal and are used for a large list of US weapons, and are also installed on a huge number of ships of the US and NATO countries, which allows them to quickly reorient ships to solve missile defense problems.

MBIUS Aegis was originally developed in the 70s. last century with the aim of destroying aircraft and anti-ship missiles. The first such system was installed on US Navy warships in 1983.


Fig. 8. Universal vertical cells Mk. 41

In subsequent years this program has repeatedly undergone deep modernization in order to increase the effectiveness of its information, reconnaissance and strike-combat components. The implementation of a long-term program for the installation and modernization of this system is entrusted simultaneously to the Navy and the US Missile Defense Agency, which is the lead agency responsible for the development, creation and deployment of the US missile defense system on a global scale.

The EPAP program provides for the deployment of not only a maritime, but also a land-based version of the Aegis MBIUS - the so-called system Aegis Ashore missile defense. Such interceptor missiles and corresponding radars will appear by 2015 in Romania, where each division will have missile defense system software in version 5.0, SPY-1 radar and 24 SM-3 Block IB interceptor missiles, which will allow the United States to cover the southern part European continent. In 2018, a ground-based version of Aegis with software 5.1 and SM-3 Block IB and Block IIA interceptor missiles will be deployed on the territory of Poland in order to control the space of the northern part of Europe.


Fig 9. What Aegis Ashore will look like

One should also take into account the fact that ships with the Aegis system can be used not only to intercept ballistic missiles, but also be used as anti-satellite weapons, which has already been proven by the destruction of the American satellite.

Graphically, the stages of modernization of the SM-3 missile are presented in the image from the manufacturer, which shows that in the fourth phase of improvement of the SM-3 missile, it will be capable of shooting down missiles of almost any range.


Figure 10. Stages of development of SM-3 missile defense capabilities

However, the danger of Aegis is not only that it is being actively improved, but also that the number of carriers of this system is constantly increasing.

The US Department of Defense is committed to involving warships of NATO allies in providing missile defense in Europe. This was announced on February 28, 2012 by the acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy James Miller. “Some of our allies have naval capabilities that can be modernized and included in the NATO missile defense system,” he noted. - The Alliance should develop concepts for international cooperation in the field of sea-based missile defense, providing for the exchange of radar data and cooperation in the destruction of missiles. This may become the basis for the formation of a group of countries with sea-based missile defense components.” According to Miller, at the summit of leaders of the North Atlantic Alliance, which is scheduled to take place on May 20-21, 2012 in Chicago, it may be “announced that a group of allies will clarify the possibility of implementing one or more initiatives in the field of missile defense.”

In November 2011, plans were announced to re-equip the air defense radar into long-range missile defense radar on four frigates Netherlands. These are the ships De Zeven Provincien (F-802), which has 32 launch silos, as well as the same type Tromp (F-803), De Ruyter (F-804) and Evertsen (F-805), which were introduced into the Dutch Navy in 2002 -2005

As stated, this step was taken as a “national contribution to NATO’s missile defense capabilities.” Some US NATO allies also have ships equipped with missile defense systems: three ships have Germany and three - Denmark. She showed interest in modifying several of her ships for this system. France. They have their own sea-based missile defense systems UK and Spain. Washington does not object to the ships of these European states being armed with SM-3 interceptor missiles.

At the same time, missile defense potential is being built up in the Asia-Pacific region. They contribute to it Australia, which plans to build three Hobart-class destroyers (the first of which will be delivered to the Navy in 2013), as well as Japan - six Kongo-class destroyers will be converted to the Aegis system, although previously it was planned to modernize four ships. South Korea's sea-based anti-missile defenses (KDX-III class destroyers) have already joined this process; it is possible that the US navy will participate in the anti-missile project Taiwan And Saudi Arabia.

It should be noted that Japan, which seems to be neutral in words, but in reality has already become a bloc country, is actively participating in work to improve the most promising types of SM-3 interceptor missiles. In particular, Japanese engineers have found special technical solutions that make it possible to adjust the rocket's trajectory at high speeds. In fact, Tokyo is being drawn into an anti-missile arms race, which is causing reasonable concern in many countries around the world, including in the Asia-Pacific region. Washington achieved the creation of two profile structures in the field of missile defense: “trilateral forums” with the participation of Australia, the United States and Japan, as well as the United States, South Korea and Japan. In March 2012, speaking at a political science forum in Washington, US Deputy Secretary of Defense Madeleine Creedon announced Washington’s readiness to create a broad regional missile defense infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region, similar to the European missile defense system. Following her, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke in favor of strengthening cooperation on the development of the US missile defense system with the Gulf states.


By the end of 2011, the US Navy already had a total of 24 cruisers and destroyers equipped with the Aegis MBIUS. The total number of SM-3 interceptor missiles in the US Navy was 111 units.
By 2025, it is planned to increase the number of ships with an anti-missile version of the Aegis system to 32 units, and it is also planned to integrate an Aegis-based missile defense system into the Japanese fleet.

4.1.3 THAAD and Patriot PAC-3 ground-based systems


Figure 11. Launch of an anti-missile missile from the THAAD complex

These systems are designed to directly cover protected objects from warheads arriving from space at the final stage of their trajectory.

American mobile anti-missile system(PRK) long-range interception THAAD(Theater High Altitude Area Defense) is designed to destroy operational-tactical missiles (OTR, firing range up to 1000 km) and medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBM, up to 3500 km) at altitudes of 40 -150 km and ranges up to 200 km.

R&D for its creation has been carried out since 1992 by Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space with a group of industrial enterprises, among which Raytheon is responsible for the development of a multifunctional radar. They have one of the highest priorities within the theater missile defense program and are at the stage of confirming the technical feasibility of the chosen concept.

At the beginning of 1995, prototypes of the launcher, the GBR-T multifunctional radar station and the command post (CP) of this complex were deployed at the White Sands missile defense test site (New Mexico), and flight tests of experimental samples of its anti-missile missile (AM) began. .

Since 2000, the program has been in preparation for serial production engineering and manufacturing development (EMD). In May 2004, production of 16 interceptor missiles began for flight testing at Lockheed Martin's new plant in Pike County, Alabama.


Figure 11. THAAD kinetic interceptor

The head part of the anti-missile missile is made in the form of a detachable homing kinetic interception stage, designed to destroy ballistic targets through a direct hit.

Anti-aircraft missile system "Patriot" PAC-3 (Patriot Advanced Capability-3)- one of the latest options for modernizing the famous Patriot air defense system and is designed to intercept warheads of tactical ballistic and cruise missiles, including those made using stealth technology.


Figure 12. Launch of the Patriot anti-aircraft missile

The first was carried out under the leadership of Ratheon and included the development of an improved MIM-109 anti-aircraft missile with an active homing head, a high-explosive fragmentation warhead and an engine length increased by 0.76 m. The dimensions and weight of the MIM-109 rocket were almost identical to the MIM-104 rocket, and at the same time, the available overloads of the new rocket reached 40 g.

The second option, proposed by Loral Vought Systems, includes the use of a highly maneuverable ERINT (Extended Range Interceptor) direct-impact interceptor missile in the Patriot PAC-3 complex.

In August 1994, the competition commission chose the second option and a contract worth $515 million was signed with Loral Vought Systems. and duration of action is 47 months. The ERINT missile defense system was created, first of all, as an interceptor of the lower line of missile defense in the theater of military operations, in addition to the upper line interceptor - the THAAD missile. Features of the PAC-3 are the use of an active homing warhead and a relatively short range - up to 15-20 km for ballistic targets and up to 40-60 km for aerodynamic targets. At the same time, to maximize the capabilities and minimize the cost of performing a combat mission, the PAC-3 battery includes missiles of earlier versions of the PAC-2.

These systems (THAAD and Patriot) will be deployed both in the USA and Europe, as well as in South Korea, which allows us to assert that the global missile defense system considers not only the Russian Federation, but also the PRC as the main adversary.


An interesting point in the creation of a global US missile defense system was that the leadership of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) repeatedly noted that main feature creating a BMD system is refusal to pre-develop its architecture. It should be determined and refined as development and testing of its major components are completed. In order to accelerate the creation of a missile defense system, since 2004 the BMD program has been implemented in stages, in two-year blocks, which are “capability packages” of the system (or its individual components) created over previous years.

The refusal to pre-develop a missile defense architecture, as well as the US's many years of dedicated work to create it, indicates several things:

1. US missile defense will be built regardless of any technical and technological problems
2. US missile defense has the highest priority over the development of other military systems
3. US missile defense will be implemented in any case

4.2 Phases of US global missile defense deployment


Figure 13. Four phases of US global missile defense development

After Barack Obama came to power, the United States began to adjust its plans. The talk was about creating a more mobile and flexible system that would mainly provide interception of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. The main weapon is now considered not the massive silo-based GBI interceptor, but the more compact and lightweight SM-3, which has one significant advantage - mobility.

In September 2009, US President Barack Obama made a special statement on missile defense. He announced the Pentagon’s readiness to continue to develop the missile defense system on a global scale, as well as to adjust plans for the deployment of a third positional area of ​​the missile defense system on the territory of Poland and the Czech Republic, previously advocated by the previous American administration. At the same time, the White House unveiled a program for deploying missile defense facilities in Europe. It is planned that the deployment of anti-missile systems will take place in four stages.

First phase(planned for completion around 2011) provides for the deployment (in Europe) of already established and proven missile defense systems, including sea-based Aegis systems, SM-3 interceptors (Block-IA) and AN/TPY-2 radar detection system with so as to be able to repel regional ballistic missile threats to Europe.

Second phase(to be completed by 2015). It is planned to deploy a more powerful modification of the SM-3 interceptor (Block-IB) in sea- and land-based versions, as well as more advanced sensors necessary to expand the protected area from short- and medium-range missile threats.

Third phase, which is due to end in 2018, involves the development and deployment of an improved SM-3 (Block IIA).

Fourth phase The missile defense system is scheduled to be completed by 2020. It involves the deployment of SM-3 (Block IIB) to better counter mid- and long-range missile threats and possible future intercontinental ballistic missile threats against the United States. It is assumed that until the first ground-based objects appear, US Navy ships with interceptor missiles on board will be on combat duty off the coast of Europe.

At the NATO summit held in November 2010 in Lisbon, the US proposed “phased adaptive approach” to the development of its missile defense systems in Europe was approved.

As stated earlier, it was decided that the NATO missile defense system will be created in the period 2011-2021, and its final configuration will be determined taking into account the reality of missile threats, the availability of technology and other factors. It will be based on elements of the US global missile defense system (positional areas of interceptor missiles in the Czech Republic and Poland, as well as Aegis anti-missile ships in the Mediterranean, North and, not excluded, in the Black and Barents Seas).

4.3 Reconnaissance and target designation means of the US global missile defense system. Satellites and radar


Figure 14. SBIRS satellite

SBIRS (Space-Based Infrared System)- an American two-component integrated space system for early detection of ballistic missile launches (ESRN) of a new generation. In addition to monitoring space launches, the system is designed to determine their flight trajectory, identify combat units and decoys, issue target designations for interception, as well as conduct reconnaissance over the territory of military operations in the infrared range.

Work on its creation began in the mid-90s and was supposed to be completed in 2010, however, as of 2016, only three upper echelon satellites in elliptical orbits (HEO) and two geostationary satellites (GEO) were launched into orbit.

In 1991, the US Department of Defense, analyzing Iraq's launches of short-range ballistic missiles during the Persian Gulf War, concluded that existing missile defense (BMD) and space launch warning systems required improvements to provide operational information about missile launches short and medium range.

In 1994, the US Department of Defense explored the possibility of combining various space-based infrared systems for missile defense needs. The result of this study was the decision to create a replacement SBIRS system existing system PRO - DSP (English: Defense Support Program - Defense Support Program). The DSP system was created in 1970 as a strategic surveillance and early warning system for long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

As of 2013, the US Department of Defense has five DSP satellites of the SEWS (Satellite Early Warning System) missile attack warning system. The satellites are deployed in geosynchronous orbits and make it possible to record rocket launches in 40-50 seconds, as well as determine their flight trajectories in the active phase.

The SBIRS early warning system should replace SEWS. It will provide missile detection in less than 20 seconds after launch and will allow the identification of warheads and decoys in the middle part of the trajectory.

The SBIRS program was designed as a complex system of independent components and consists of the following systems:

SBIRS High - a constellation of satellites with infrared equipment on board in geostationary (SBIRS-GEO) and high-elliptical (SBIRS-HEO) orbits;

SBIRS Low - a constellation of satellites in low Earth orbit;


Figure 15. Mobile radar SBX

Radar

In August 2003, it was decided to reactivate the naval base on Adak Island in the Aleutian ridge, closed in 1996, to support the key element of the missile defense system being created - the floating SBX radar. A powerful phased array radar was installed on a modernized oil platform capable of moving at speeds of up to 4 knots. On January 2, 2007, its towing began from the naval base of Pearl Harbor to the Aleutian Islands.

According to data presented at the end of February 2007 by the director of the US Missile Defense Agency, Lieutenant General Henry Obering, the US missile defense system at that time already included facilities located in North America, Western Europe and the Far East:

4 early warning radars: Cobra Dane(Shemia Island, Aleutian Islands); Beale(California); Fylingdales(Great Britain); Thule(Greenland, Denmark);

Sea-based radar SBX, stationed in Pacific Ocean in the Alaska area;

Forward-based radar FBX-T on the island of Honshu (Japan);


Figure 16. Scheme of targeting and control of the American global missile defense system

On March 15, 2013, US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced that the United States intends to deploy a second centimeter-wave radar station in Japan. Mobile radar will become an important component not only of the defense system for American territory, but also regional missile defense system in Asia, which the United States is creating together with Japan and South Korea.

Some results:

Having briefly examined the elements of the US missile defense system, we can conclude that a global combat system, capable in the future of solving a huge range of defensive and offensive tasks: air defense and missile defense of entire regions from aircraft and cruise missiles, protection from medium-range missiles in Europe and South-East Asia, protection from ICBMs in all phases of flight, destruction of satellites and space stations, participating in a beheading nuclear strike etc.

The talk that interceptors in Europe are a myth and a waste of budgets is completely unfounded.

The US missile defense system is a most dangerous distributed combat system, the final task of which is to give the US global advantage and the ability to dictate its will any country on our planet.

In the last third part, we will look at how our country’s only missile defense system was built and now exists, as well as what steps our country is taking and will take in order not to burn in the atomic flame from our “partners.”

In modern realities, countries around the world are paying increasing attention to air and missile defense issues. An army that is armed with systems that allow it to provide reliable protection for troops and ground targets from air strikes receives a huge advantage in modern conflicts. Interest in air defense and missile defense systems is growing, and this topic accompanied by a large flow of news. The most discussed of them are Turkey’s purchase of a Russian anti-aircraft missile system and Saudi Arabia’s statements about its desire to purchase this system, after which the United States almost immediately approved a deal to sell its THAAD anti-missile system to the kingdom.

Saudi Arabia's interest in such a system is understandable. On December 19, 2017, Saudi air defense intercepted in the south of Riyadh a Burkan-2 ballistic missile launched by the Houthis from Yemen, which was similar to the one that was shot down near the capital of the kingdom on November 4, 2017. It is not known for certain whether the missile was actually shot down or whether it simply deviated from its course and fell in an uninhabited area. It is reported that no one was injured as a result of the incident. The Houthis themselves admitted the fact of the attack. missile strike. According to the group, the target of the launch was the royal palace of al-Yamamah in the capital of Saudi Arabia.

This attack was the second carried out from Yemen in several years. last months. A military conflict continues in Yemen, the scale of which is comparable to the fighting in Syria. Saudi Arabia acts as the main ideologist of the military operation, which is being carried out on the territory of a neighboring state. The ballistic missile used by the Houthis is an Iranian-made Burkan-2. The missile has a detachable warhead (unlike the Burkan-1 missile, which is a modernized Soviet R-17). Judging by her tactical and technical characteristics, this ballistic missile can actually reach Riyadh, as well as the country's numerous oil fields. On December 23, 2017, the UN Security Council condemned this rocket attack on the Saudi capital by Yemeni rebels.

Today, the Soviet-made R-17 Scud operational-tactical missiles, as well as the Qahir and Zelzal tactical missiles, created on the basis of another Soviet Luna-M missile system, also pose a threat to Saudi Arabia. The Houthis also quite actively use these missiles to attack the territory of the kingdom, in some cases they actually lead to a large number casualties among the military. The Houthis also use converted missiles from the S-75 air defense systems, which are not intended for striking ground targets.

Against this background, Riyadh's interest in modern systems Air defense and missile defense are quite understandable. Saudi Arabia is showing substantive interest in the American mobile system THAAD missile defense, options for purchasing the modern S-400 Triumph air defense system from Russia were also voiced. It is believed that the issue of supplying Russian air defense systems was discussed during a personal meeting between the King of Saudi Arabia and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in October 2017, where a positive decision was reached on their sale.

This news has generated interest in comparing the two systems THAAD and S-400. However, this comparison is not correct, since we are talking about systems with different specializations. American system THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) is a mobile ground-based anti-missile system designed for high-altitude, trans-atmospheric destruction of medium-range ballistic missiles. At the same time, the Russian S-400 anti-aircraft missile system is designed primarily to destroy aerodynamic targets (airplanes, helicopters, drones, cruise missiles), its capabilities against ballistic targets are limited in range and altitude. At the same time, of course, the Russian system is more universal. THAAD's capabilities in combating maneuverable targets and aircraft are minimal, and such use of a missile defense system would be tantamount to hammering nails with a “microscope,” especially considering the cost of American interceptor missiles.

The THAAD mobile ground-based anti-missile system, designed for high-altitude, trans-atmospheric interception of medium-range missiles when creating a zoned missile defense system in the theater of operations, has been developed in the United States since 1992. The developer of the system is Lockheed Martin Corporation. The cost of R&D to create an anti-missile system is estimated at approximately $15 billion. Currently, the THAAD anti-missile system is in service with the United States and the United Arab Emirates. In 2017, a battery of the THAAD complex was deployed in South Korea, and they are also planned to be deployed in Japan. The US explained the appearance of the THAAD complex in South Korea by the need to protect the country from the missile threat from the DPRK, while China and Russia reacted extremely negatively to this step.

The THAAD anti-missile system was originally designed to combat medium and short-range ballistic missiles. The system is capable of destroying ballistic targets at an altitude prohibitive for conventional air defense systems - 150 kilometers and a distance of up to 200 kilometers. With the help of this mobile complex it is possible to create the first line of zonal missile defense. The characteristics of this anti-missile system allow it to sequentially fire at one ballistic target with two anti-missiles according to the “launch-evaluate-launch” principle, that is, the second missile is launched if the first one fails to hit the target. In the event that the second missile cannot hit the ballistic target, the conventional air defense system comes into play - the Patriot air defense system, which receives target designations from the THAAD system radar for the missile that has penetrated. According to calculations by American experts, the probability of hitting a ballistic missile with such a layered missile defense system is more than 0.96 (while the probability of hitting a target with one THAAD anti-missile missile is estimated at 0.9).

The THAAD anti-missile consists of a warhead and an engine, the only (separable) stage is a solid propellant starting engine. The characteristics of this engine make it possible to accelerate the missile to a speed of 2800 m/s, which made it possible to re-fire a ballistic target with a second interceptor missile. The missile's warhead is a highly maneuverable direct-hit interceptor, also called a Kill Vehicle.

All this makes clear the differences between THAAD and the S-400 and the obvious tension of comparing these two systems. The newest anti-aircraft missile 40N6E of the Russian Triumph complex is the longest-range missile of the complex; the range of targets hit with its use increases to 400 kilometers, but we are talking about aerodynamic targets. The range of destruction of ballistic targets using the S-400 complex is limited to 60 km, and the flight altitude of the targets hit is limited to 30 km. At the same time, experts note that the destruction altitude indicator, when it comes to intercepting operational-tactical missiles, is not a critical indicator. “In theater missile defense, targets are destroyed on downward trajectories, and not in space,” said Lieutenant General Aitech Bizhev, former deputy commander-in-chief of the Air Force for the unified air defense system of the CIS countries, in an interview with RIA Novosti.

It is easy to see that the American THAAD has a noticeable advantage in the range and altitude of hitting ballistic targets, which is due to the tasks for which it was created - defeating medium-range ballistic missiles. At the same time, the Russian S-400 air defense system with a shorter altitude range is armed with missiles with a longer range to hit all types of aerodynamic targets - at a range of up to 400 kilometers and tactical ballistic targets at a range of up to 60 kilometers, flying at speeds of up to 4800 m/s.

The second important difference between THAAD and S-400 is the method of hitting a target.. An American missile hits a target with kinetic impact, that is, it hits the missile itself. Her combat unit- This is a highly maneuverable interceptor. It is a technically complex device that searches, captures and hits targets using only kinetic energy high speed impact. One of the main features of this interceptor is the gyro-stabilized multispectral infrared homing head (IR-GOS). In addition to the IR seeker, the THAAD single-stage missile interceptor is equipped with a command-inertial control system, a power supply, a computer, as well as its own maneuvering and orientation propulsion system. At the same time, anti-aircraft missiles of the Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system hit air targets due to a cloud of fragments formed after the missile warhead explodes in close proximity to the target.

A common feature of all modern complexes Air defense and missile defense is the requirement placed on them to destroy the combat load of attack weapons of a potential enemy. The result of target interception should be, for example, to ensure that the attacking missile’s payload does not drop directly in the area of ​​the defended object. Eliminate completely this opportunity is possible only if the target’s payload is destroyed in the process of intercepting it with an anti-aircraft missile. This result can be achieved in two ways: a direct hit by a missile into the warhead compartment of the target, or by combining a small miss and effective impact on the target with a cloud of fragments from the warhead of an anti-aircraft guided missile. In the USA, the first approach was chosen for THAAD, in Russia, the second approach was chosen for the S-400.

It is also worth noting the fact that the S-400 can fire at 360 degrees, while the THAAD has a limited field of fire. For example, Russian anti-aircraft missiles 9M96E and 9M96E2, optimized to combat modern high-precision weapons, cruise missiles and ballistic targets, including subtle ones, use a “cold” vertical launch. Immediately before the launch of their propulsion engine, the missiles are thrown out of the container to a height of more than 30 meters. After rising to this height, the anti-aircraft missile, using a gas-dynamic system, is inclined towards a given target.

An important difference between the two complexes is their radar.. The American system has better vision. The detection range of the AN/TPY-2 radar is 1000 kilometers versus 600 kilometers for the S-400 complex. The AN/TPY-2 multifunctional radar operates in the X-band and consists of 25,344 active PPMs. This is an active phased array radar (AFAR). AFAR consists of active radiating elements, each of which consists of a radiating element and an active device (transceiver module - RPM). Very a high resolution and the vigilance of the American radar is achieved by a huge number of PPMs and a complex signal processing algorithm. At the same time, an American radar costs a pretty penny; the cost of an innovative radar can exceed $500 million.

AN/TPY-2 radar

Experts believe that Saudi Arabia, despite the decision to purchase the THAAD missile defense system, may also purchase Russian S-400 systems. It will be impossible to control these systems from a single command post in an automated mode, but this does not exclude their combat use separately. The systems can be deployed in different places of the country or even as part of the protection of one important facility, while solving different problems and thus complementing each other, military expert Mikhail Khodarenok noted in an interview with RIA Novosti.

According to him, Saudi Arabia's desire to buy both American and Russian systems may be dictated by various considerations. For example, after Operation Desert Storm, during which French anti-aircraft missile systems in service with Iraqi air defense suddenly became inoperable, potential buyers treat weapons purchased in the West with some caution. Mikhail Khodorenok notes that in American weapons there may be “bookmarks”, for example, the F-16 of the Jordanian Air Force cannot shoot down the F-16 of the Israeli Air Force. In this case, purchasing the S-400 can help diversify risks. If American tactical ballistic or medium-range missiles are used to strike Saudi Arabian territory, the S-400 will be able to shoot them down.

Experts believe that the contract between Saudi Arabia and the United States is not an alternative to the contract with Russia on the S-400, since both systems are not mutually exclusive, but complement each other, they can be used autonomously. As an air defense weapon against aerodynamic targets, the S-400 is significantly superior American complexes Air defense Patriot.

Price can also play a role. The cost of an S-400 division with 8 launchers is about $500 million. So in December 2017, details of the contract for the supply of S-400 Triumph air defense systems to Turkey became known. Ankara should receive 4 S-400 divisions for a total amount of about $2.5 billion. At the same time, the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Office stated that the cost of the deal with Saudi Arabia for the supply of THAAD missile defense systems is about $15 billion. As part of the contract, the kingdom will receive from the United States 44 launchers, 16 control posts, 7 radars, as well as 360 interceptor missiles for this complex.



Similar articles