I was once asked in a television
interview: "Which anti-aircraft missile system is better: Russia's S-300
or the U.S. Patriot?" A concise answer was needed, and I said that the
S-300 was better. Was I right?
If you look at the performance
characteristics of the systems, then the answer was correct. In
conflicts such as Iran - Iraq, India - Pakistan, where forces were
relevantly equal, the answer was correct as well. However, when it comes
to a possible attack of the U.S. or Israel against the "third world"
countries, such as Iran, Syria and others, Russia's S-300 will certainly
fail. Why?
It will happen for the reason that we
already had during the Great Patriotic War. In June 22, 1941, our tanks
KV and T-34 were much better than the German vehicles, but the losses
among our tanks in autumn and summer campaigns in 1941 were larger than
those of Nazi Germany. German tanks were acting in close coordination
with infantry, artillery, air force and were supplemented with excellent
radio stations.
Two Iraqi wars, the war in Yugoslavia
and other conflicts showed that the Americans were striving for absolute
predominance in aviation and electronic means of warfare. They have
dozens of AWACS and 30-40 spacecraft of all types. Do I have to explain
that a division or two of S-300 (S-400) can not act alone against such
an armada?If so, should the countries of the
"third world" surrender to the mercy of Uncle Sam? It is about time
Russian generals should study the history of USA's postwar campaigns.
Here is the list: Korea, Vietnam, the first Iraq war, the Yugoslav war.
The Americans won in the last two cases, albeit partially. The Yankees
and the "enlightened explorers" deployed a huge amphibious fleet in the
Persian Gulf in 1991 and planned to land two U.S. marine divisions and
an English brigade on the coast of Iraq. Alas, all those good fellows
spent the Iraqi campaign in the holds of landing vessels. The reason was
simple: Iraqi, or rather, old Soviet mines.
During the Korean War in 1951, the
American armada of ships could not land its commandos for two weeks.
Again, it was because of old Soviet and tsarist (!) mines.
In 1991, NATO aircraft bombed Belgrade
and other Yugoslav cities, as well as power plants, hospitals,
television stations, and even the Chinese Embassy. The Yugoslavs
capitulated and agreed to withdraw troops from Kosovo under NATO's
control. And then came the hour of shame for the USAF and NATO. The
Yugoslavs withdrew about 90% of their military equipment unharmed:
tanks, armored vehicles, multiple rocket launchers, air defense missile
systems, etc. Western journalists had only one question - where did NATO
bombs fall?
Nowadays, thanks to the technological
development, including the development of hand-held computers, the
possibilities of sea mines have become literally limitless. There are
self-propelled mines. To transport them, one can use old torpedoes: a
533-mm torpedo can deliver a mine to a distance of 30-35 km from the
place of release. A 650-mm torpedo can cover the distance of 50-60 km or
more.
There are missiles that act like mines.
They are launched from the sea floor, at an angle, in the direction of
the bottom of a moving vessel. There are torpedoes that act like mines.
They can be placed at a depth of up to 1 km, "sleep" there for about 12
months, and then "wake up" when needed.
Finally, there self-burying mines that can bury themselves in the sand or mud, leaving a thin invisible antenna sticking out.
All of these mines, except for
self-burying ones, used to be produced in the USSR. However, during the
last 22 years, we have seen no news about the production of new mines.
Everyone has heard of Soviet missile
systems BM-13, Katyusha. All our generals and historians celebrate their
advantage over German 15- and 21-cm missile launchers. Indeed, the
effectiveness of the massive use of BM-13 complexes was unquestionable.
However, North Korea was not happy with
Katyushas in 1951-1953. They preferred six-barrel 15-cm mortars, known
as Vanyusha. The latter could be rolled back into the cave or trench
after an attack. What did they have to do with such big complexes as
Katyusha? Vanyusha's accuracy was much higher too.
Let's take the MLRS Smerch that has a
range of 70 km. This is great! But its combat vehicle, loaded with
missiles, weighs 43.7 tons. A missile is 7.6 meters long and it weighs
800 kilos. Everything can be tolerated if one has advantage in the air.
And if not? Why not cutting, or rather, disassembling a Smerch into four
parts? One would not need a huge vehicle, such as MAZ-543M, to
transport the system. Off-road vehicles or even camels would be enough.
The same can be done to air defense
complexes. Ask any American general, what dominance in the air means. It
is unlikely that he will be satisfied with a possibility of stealth
bombers or supersonic F-16 flying freely over battlefield. The Yankees
prefer widebody aircraft, such as AWACS, or AC-130 military transport
vehicles, etc.
Why not making a separable version of
the Tor missile to be able to combat them? A missile like that weighs
165 kilos. If disassembled into two parts, it could be transported
quickly to any location to be assembled there again.
Why not creating new anti-aircraft
missile systems that would be more powerful than Igla-1? Its outdated
infrared guidance system may not work all the time. It can not hit
aircraft flying from the direction of the sun, for example.
More importantly, one should increase
the range of MANPADS at least twice. They need to be able to strike
aircraft not only during take-off, but also under cruise condition. To
achieve this, one may replace the solid-propellant engine with a more
powerful solid fuel ramjet engine. This can be done for 3M9 Tor missiles
or Era MANPADS that were developed in the 1970s. If it makes them
heavier, it could be possible to disassemble them into two modules,
weighing 30 kilos each.
Demountable Tor systems and heavy
MANPADS will deprive enemy of air superiority even under the condition
of superiority in attack aircraft, electronic warfare equipment and
dozens of satellites.
No comments:
Post a Comment