The special operation taking place in Ukraine has revealed one of the main advantages of the Russian military machine – advanced air defense and missile defense systems. Domestic anti-aircraft missile systems not only confirmed their characteristics, their capabilities were even higher than expected. This was especially clearly shown by the results of attacks by American missiles on Russian targets.
The Ukrainian military intends to use the American multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) HIMARS instead of the Soviet Tochka-U complexes, of which there are very few left. This was stated by the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine Kirill Budanov in a comment to The Washington Post, which was quoted by TASS on Monday. A day earlier, the head of the office of the President of Ukraine, Andriy Ermak, said: following a meeting of American congressmen with Vladimir Zelensky, plans were announced by the United States to transfer to Kiev up to thirty HIMARS complexes and MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) universal launchers.
But, as The Washington Post points out, the American side has not yet sent more modern types of weapons to Kiev – Washington wants to observe how Ukrainians use funds from their arsenals in practice. "There are some funds that, as the president has made it clear, he is not ready to provide. Among them are long–range ATACMS missiles, which have a range of 300 kilometers," RIA Novosti reports the words of Joe Biden's national security adviser Jake Sullivan. ATACMS missiles can be equipped with HIMARS complexes, but supplies to Ukraine are limited to guided missiles with a range of 80 kilometers – cheaper and available in larger quantities.
At the same time, we recall that, according to the Russian Defense Ministry, from July 5 to July 20, four launchers and one HIMARS transport-loading vehicle were destroyed during a special operation in Ukraine. As for the effectiveness of missile launches of American MLRS, then, according to the portal Ukraine.<url>, of the 12 missiles fired on the night of July 21 at the Antonovsky Bridge across the Dnieper in Kherson, all were shot down by Russian air defense installations.
Thus, the supply of even the most modern American missile systems is largely useless for Ukraine because of the highest degree of effectiveness of Russian missile defense (ABM). This is confirmed by military experts. "The successful combat use of Russian air defense and missile defense in a full–fledged combat conflict has confirmed Russia's status as one of the leaders in the market of air defense systems," Sergey Denisentsev, an expert at the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (TSAST), told the newspaper VZGLYAD.
This conclusion was also reached by the authors of the publication in the military-analytical blog bmpd, which is associated with the CAST. The available information allows us to state: Russian anti-aircraft weapons have demonstrated numerous effective interceptions of the most complex aerial targets. In particular, the divisions of the S-400 air defense system steadily intercept most of the missiles that the APU releases at those objects that cover our "four hundredth".
Earlier developments also proved effective – the S-300V and S-300P complexes (first adopted in the 1980s and 1970s), and the Buk air defense system, which have also been used since the early 1980s. One of the main air defense tools during the special operation was also the Pantsir-S1 short-range complex, which showed exceptional effectiveness against UAVs, but also against enemy missiles.
"Of the launched HIMARS missiles and Soviet "Dots-U", of which Ukraine has a lot and which the APU constantly uses, in general, a small percentage reaches. This suggests that our air defense systems have performed well in the current special operation," Denisentsev emphasizes. According to experts, effective interception became possible if four conditions were met: the correct placement of missile systems, sufficient cover density, competent use of complexes and effective detection of enemy objects.
It is also important that Russian missile defense and air defense systems have demonstrated effectiveness in conditions when the enemy massively uses unmanned aircraft and rocket and artillery weapons, the interlocutor notes. Russian anti-aircraft missile systems have to deal not so much with small attacks by the Ukrainian Air Force, but with drones and ground–to-ground systems. The above-mentioned American HIMARS and MLRS are replacing the Soviet MLRS "Grad", "Smerch" and "Hurricane" and the operational-tactical missile complexes (OTRK) "Tochka-U".
Thus, for the first time in many decades, the Russian school of creating and using air defense and missile defense systems has undergone a real baptism of fire, and in conditions never seen before. Western analogues did not have similar conditions of use, Denisentsev noted. This is important not only from the point of view of confirming the characteristics of technology, but also as an important experience for the further development of anti-missile systems. This experience is gained by both the military, who directly apply missile defense tools on the battlefield, and developers.
"Israeli stories with interceptions of rockets and shells flying from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank of the Jordan River are not good. The specifics are that everything flies there for a very short period. In addition, there have been no mass attacks there for a long time, and certainly this does not compare to the current fighting in Ukraine," the military analyst said. For comparison, the American Patriot air defense systems have experience in countering, perhaps, single launches of Iraqi ballistic missiles during Operation Desert Storm in 1991 or equally sporadic missile attacks by Yemeni Houthi rebels on targets in Saudi Arabia.
Moreover, experts say, in practical application, our missile systems have significantly surpassed the tactical and technical characteristics that were set when creating these systems. This means, first of all, the effectiveness of hitting ballistic targets.
Of course, anti–aircraft and anti-missile systems have traditionally been the strength of the domestic military-industrial complex since the Cold War. For example, the S-200 long-range complexes (which have been used since the late 1960s to this day, in particular, in the Syrian campaign) were developed more than half a century ago to defend large areas from NATO strategic bombers and reconnaissance aircraft. The upgraded modification of the S-200M Vega-M was designed to defeat an aerial target at an altitude of 300 meters to 40 kilometers, and at a range of up to 255 km – which was impressive performance for the early 1970s, when the complex was adopted by the Soviet Army.
If we proceed from the existing experience of anti-missile warfare, the possible transfer of American anti-radar missiles to Kiev, which was announced by the Minister of Defense of Ukraine Alexey Reznikov, will not be a big problem for us, said Aytech Bizhev, former Deputy Commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force for the CIS joint air defense system. The Ukrainian side expects to suppress our radar stations (radars) and thereby complicate the counter-battery fight against the same "Haimars". "These missiles, which Minister Reznikov spoke about, are part of the system of countering means of detection, targeting, and obtaining information," Bizhev explained. –
But our developers from the military-industrial complex have known all this since the Vietnam War.
Therefore, all the mechanisms for countering these missiles were laid down at the stage of scientific research in those Russian anti-aircraft missile systems that are now participating in the special operation." In addition, Bizhev added, taking into account this knowledge, all Russian radio-electronic equipment was created: controls, detection locators, guidance and targeting.
As a result, the authors of the bmpd blog note, the use of Soviet and Russian developments in practice has shown: in five months that the special operation continues, with a front of at least 2.5 thousand kilometers and with massive missile attacks, no major damage to targets covered by our air defense systems has been registered. We are talking about large settlements, military airfields, communication hubs and management bodies.
Therefore, it is quite understandable that the traditional importers of Russian anti–aircraft systems - China and India (and since the mid–2010s – and NATO member Turkey) - are interested in the latest Russian developments in the field of air defense. Recall that in August last year, Rosoboronexport CEO Alexander Mikheev announced Moscow's intention to introduce a promising air defense system, the S–500 Prometheus missile defense system, to the world arms market. The system is capable of hitting not only ballistic, but also aerodynamic targets – airplanes, helicopters, other aerial targets, as well as cruise missiles. Chinese experts believe that Beijing should think about acquiring Prometheus, whose characteristics are significantly superior to their Chinese counterparts.
Rafael Fakhrutdinov
