Войти

Will not destroy a single missile. Poland pointed out the weakness of the air defense system

1386
0
+1
Image source: © AP Photo / Evan Vucci

Expert Pekarski: Polish air defense could not prevent the fall of the missile in PrzevodowThe Polish air defense has great opportunities to monitor what arrives in the country's airspace, defense expert Michal Pekarski told GW.

The situation is worse with the defeat of targets. Warsaw will receive modern Patriot and CAMM anti-aircraft systems only within ten years.

Marcin RybakShould the Polish air defense system have intercepted and destroyed the missile that fell in Przevodow?

Wyborcza talks about this with Dr. Michal Piekarski, an expert on military defense and security from the Institute of International Studies at the University of Wroclaw.

Gazeta Wyborcza: A rocket hit the Polish territory in the village of Przevodow of the Hrubieszowski Powiat and killed two people. Is this evidence of the poor performance of our air defense or an accident that we could not influence in any way?Michal Pekarsky: Such things happen.

This, of course, was not a deliberate act. It was probably a Russian missile that went off course, or a Ukrainian air defense missile that did not hit the target and did not self-destruct.

According to the latest data, the second version is the most likely.– Such accidents happen.

Rockets are complex devices, they often fail. There are cases when air defense missiles did not hit the target and destroyed buildings not on enemy territory, but on their own.

Shouldn't our air defense have intercepted it? Maybe this is proof that it doesn't work well? After all, we border on a country where military operations are continuing.– That's not quite true.

We are not at war. The rules of air defense in peacetime are regulated by the relevant laws. When an object flies into our airspace, we first need to determine what it is. On the radar, it's just a dot. We have to determine whether it is an airplane, a missile, whether it is our object or, possibly, an object that threatens us in any way.

Another issue is the decision on the use of weapons. In peacetime, this is a last resort. And one more question is the possibility of intercepting this missile. She hit an unprotected area. If it destroyed some critical infrastructure and the air defense - ours or the allied one stationed in Poland – did not react, then one could say that something was not working. This rocket flew in our airspace for too short a time to implement this entire decision-making process.

If we had a war, would it be different?– Then the rules of use of weapons work.

In peacetime, first they find out, check, identify and, possibly, as a last resort, use weapons. When there is a war, and we see an object that looks like a hostile one that can threaten us, then we hit it. And then we explain and check.

Regardless of whether it is wartime or peacetime, as I have heard, even the best air defense does not protect every part of the territory.–That's right.

Our air defense is currently under restoration, we are in the process of purchasing modern weapons. But even if we had it, in this particular situation we would have too little time to react. The shell landed just a few kilometers from the border, in a place where there were no vital objects for defense.

Okay, but let's imagine that there is a war going on, this projectile is flying. We see that it will fall on some grain warehouse. Are we protecting it or are we deciding to let the rocket destroy it because there is nothing unimportant about this object?– When we see that a missile will not hit an important target, we need to think about attacking it or not touching it.

This is how the famous Israeli "Iron Dome" system works. When she sees a rocket falling somewhere in the desert, the system does not destroy her. If someone happened to be there, it would be an accident. We need to think about how we have enough missiles in a situation where there is a threat to really important objects.

What is the state of our air defense? When will we be able to say that we are really safe?– We have great opportunities to monitor what arrives in our airspace.

We have good radar systems – both stationary and mobile radars on automobile chassis. NATO early warning planes are also flying over Poland. Our fighters are equipped with radars that can detect targets flying over Poland. The situation is worse with their defeat. We have modern mobile complexes Grom and Piorun. We also have old Soviet anti-aircraft systems, dating back to the 60s – early 70s. We are waiting for the delivery of medium- and longer-range Patriot and CAMM anti-aircraft systems. We will receive them within 10 years. Only then will it be possible to say that we are really safe.

The rights to this material belong to
The material is placed by the copyright holder in the public domain
Original publication
InoSMI materials contain ratings exclusively from foreign media and do not reflect the editorial board's position ВПК.name
  • The news mentions
Страны
Проекты
Do you want to leave a comment? Register and/or Log in
ПОДПИСКА НА НОВОСТИ
Ежедневная рассылка новостей ВПК на электронный почтовый ящик
  • Discussion
    Update
  • 25.09 06:39
  • 1
Страны Западной Африки запустят спутники с помощью Роскосмоса
  • 25.09 03:57
  • 595
Израиль "готовился не к той войне" — и оказался уязвим перед ХАМАС
  • 25.09 03:54
  • 4953
Without carrot and stick. Russia has deprived America of its usual levers of influence
  • 24.09 22:33
  • 2
Глава "Хезболлы" после взрывов в Ливане заявил, что Израиль пересек все "красные линии"
  • 24.09 18:00
  • 0
Ответ на "Как отбить у НАТО желание заблокировать Петербург и Калининград"
  • 24.09 16:20
  • 0
Что нужно знать о правдивости заявлений литовских властей
  • 24.09 11:40
  • 1
ВМС Индии намерены обзавестись вторым авианосцем собственной постройки
  • 24.09 11:30
  • 1
How to discourage NATO from blocking St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad
  • 24.09 09:28
  • 1
Названы особенности российского комплекса «Рубеж-МЭ»
  • 24.09 03:54
  • 1
The Russian Su-35 fighter is no joke (The National Interest, USA)
  • 24.09 03:36
  • 0
Ответ на "Противники мнимые и реальные"
  • 24.09 03:27
  • 1
Air Defense: Thoughts out loud (part 2)
  • 24.09 01:36
  • 1
О поражении (в смысле - выводе из строя) танков
  • 23.09 23:16
  • 2
Industrial design: harmony of beauty and functionality
  • 23.09 22:19
  • 0
Ответ на "«Снаряд прошил весь танк и вышел через корму»"