How soon will an absolutely insurmountable air defense system provide full protection to its country, its citizens and its armed forces? In fact, thanks to the rapid technological progress, we can say that we are approaching it, especially in the person of one country - Israel. With constantly challenging unfriendly and often aggressive neighbors at hand, it is a leader in this area, which is also greatly facilitated by a highly creative and responsive defense industry that maintains its country's comprehensive ground-based air defense system in constant combat readiness.
Due to the fact that Iran and some Arab countries openly call for the complete erasure of Israel from the world map, the 70-year-old Jewish state has no other alternative but to defend itself with its beak and claws from these frantic and motivated opponents, both from ICBMs and and from homemade rockets collected by terrorists in the garage. The situation is similar with South Korea, which, thanks to the presence on its soil of a large number of American troops and a dense belt of Patriot missiles, is protected from any further expansionist and unpredictable military actions of its aggressive and militant brother - North Korea. The urgency of this issue was re-emphasized when North Korea unannounced a new ballistic missile capable of reaching Alaska, adding to this public attacks directed at the American people and at President Donald Trump in particular. In fairness, I must say that Trump did not remain in debt …
After another series of North Korean missile launches, the US military tested a missile defense system in May 2017, aimed at improving South Korea's defense against attacks by northerners. The tests, carried out at Vandenberg Air Base in California, were recognized by the US authorities as successful after an upgraded long-range Patriot interceptor missile hit its target - a mock intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).
Today, many experts believe North Korea is developing an ICBM capable of reaching the US mainland. If the last communist (not formal, but real) regime on earth launches a missile towards the United States, South Korea or Japan, the Americans will certainly try to shoot it down. But is this task so simple?
NORAD - First Radar Defense Belt
Since the philosophy of A2 / D2 (anti-access / area-denial - blocking access / blocking the zone; "blocking access" means the ability to slow down or prevent the deployment of enemy forces in the theater of operations or forcing him to create a bridgehead for an operation much further away from the desired deployment location; "blocking the zone "Covers actions to restrict freedom of maneuver, reduce operational efficiency and increase the risks associated with operations of friendly forces in theater of operations) is becoming a new American mantra, drop by drop in the minds of the NATO military, let's discuss the state of this shield of democracy, from which it all began about 60 years back. The North American Aerospace Defense Command, known as NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command), created in 1958 to defend North America against surprise attacks by Soviet missiles, became the first integrated air defense system of constant combat readiness. In 1960, it included 60 squadrons of fighters (50 American and 10 Canadian) on combat duty, capable of intercepting objects in the air within 15 minutes after takeoff, while any unknown aircraft entering North American airspace could be detected in within 5 minutes by long-range radars located in the Arctic. NORAD justified its existence, keeping in check all the encroachments of enemy aircraft, but this was only the first decade, until the space age began, when satellites began to surf the universe and revolutionized communication systems, and intercontinental ballistic missiles contributed to a change in the priorities of air defense, previously consisted in response on traditional bombers.
The real game-changing ICBM threat pushed the US to take another step forward in building a strengthened air defense, culminating in the so-called SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) program, which Ronald Reagan first announced in March 1983. The goal of the newly created missile defense system was to protect the United States from attacks by ballistic strategic nuclear weapons (ICBMs or submarine-launched ballistic missiles) of a potential adversary. The system, which soon received the second name "Star Wars", was supposed to combine ground units and missile defense platforms deployed in orbit. This initiative was more focused on strategic defense than on the doctrine of advancing strategic offensive - in the mass consciousness, the doctrine of "mutual assured destruction". The SDI Implementation Organization was created in 1984 to oversee SDI and its powerful space-based missile defense component. These ambitious American defensive systems effectively marked the beginning of the end of the USSR. The United States ultimately won the arms race and remained the world's only superpower for a while.
If SDI's space-based missile defense component is successfully developed, the United States could solve several major problems. If the interceptors were placed in orbit, then some of them could be positioned over the Soviet Union permanently. In this case, attacking missiles, they would have to fly only in a downward trajectory, so they could be much smaller and cheaper compared to interceptor missiles, which had to be launched from the ground. In addition, it would be much easier to track ICBMs due to their significant infrared radiation, and to hide these signatures would require the creation of large missiles instead of small radar traps. In addition, each interceptor missile would shoot down one ICBM, while the MIRV with individual guidance units would not have time to complete its task. Considering all this, as well as the fact that an interceptor missile is a relatively cheap means, the advantage would clearly be on the side of the defense, which would be further strengthened with the advent of network-centric destruction systems.
Brian Lehani, head of radar warning at NORAD, believes that the "systems of systems" approach to radar development helps NORAD today "scan the skies and stay ahead of the threat." The mission of the service is to integrate new platforms into NORAD's radar infrastructure, as well as to upgrade existing over-the-horizon and long-range radar platforms.
In a statement, US Missile Defense Agency director Jim Siring called the US Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) cruise missile defense system "vital to defend our country." Recent tests have "demonstrated that we have a powerful, credible deterrent to real threats." The system's performance was also confirmed during the first test launch of a real anti-missile based on an ICBM layout. Previous tests of the system were carried out in 2014. In the past, intercepting ICBMs has been extremely difficult, in fact akin to the fact that one bullet hits another from a great distance. Since 1999, the GMD missile hit its targets in only 9 of 17 launches, there were also many problems with the mechanical subsystems. Based on these numbers, the US missile defense shield appears to be only 50% effective … or 50% ineffective, whatever you like.
Based on statistics, even taking into account the latest tests, experts doubt the progress of the GMD system. Not long ago, Philip Coyle, a senior fellow at the Center for Arms Control, noted that the interception tests "were successful twice in a row, which inspires a bit of optimism," but added that only two of the last five were successful. “At school, 40% is not a passing grade,” Coyle said. “Looking at the test logs, we cannot rely on this missile defense program to protect the United States from North Korean missiles. And especially when it comes to nuclear missiles …"
In 2016, a Pentagon report was published with a similar conclusion. "GMD has shown its limited ability to defend American soil against a small number of simple medium-range missiles or ICBMs launched from North Korea or Iran." Since 2002, American missile defense has cost the country a pretty penny, roughly $ 40 billion. In the 2018 budget proposal to the Trump administration, the Pentagon requested an additional $ 7.9 billion for the Missile Defense Agency, including $ 1.5 billion for the GMD system.
According to American officials, the United States is developing additional ways to disrupt missile attacks, including conducting a cybersecurity assessment. A Pentagon spokesman said the latest tests are just "one piece of a broader missile defense strategy that we can use to combat potential threats." The American THAAD anti-missile system is also designed to combat short, medium and long-range missile threats. Like much of the recent missile defense testing, the program aims to intercept North Korean missiles on the march leg. In March 2017, THAAD complexes were deployed in South Korea; it happened shortly before former President Park Geun-hye left her office. South Korea's new president, Moon Hu Ying, has launched an investigation after the latest American trials. As the country's new president, Moon has pledged to take a more friendly stance towards North Korea, calling for a national dialogue between the two countries. North Korea, meanwhile, has shifted its focus to the United States.
"The THAAD complex is evidence that the United States is a peace breaker and destroyer, indifferent to regional stability." Total stalemate …
Over the past 15 years, the US Department of Defense has spent more than $ 24 billion acquiring a combination of systems to neutralize guided missiles that threaten America's allies. Despite the perseverance of the Department of Defense, these investments did not lead to the creation of a full-fledged air and missile defense system with sufficient capabilities to deal with the volleys of large numbers of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and other high-precision guided weapons that could be carried out by Uncle Sam's current enemies.
According to many Washington experts, this state of affairs was partly due to the Department of Defense's decades-long emphasis on deploying costly long-range surface-to-air interceptors capable of destroying small salvo launches of anti-ship cruise missiles or ballistic missiles launched by nations such as Iran and North Korea. This is also due to the fact that the American military has never dealt with an enemy with high-precision weapons for engaging distant targets. However, in future conflicts, Washington's most likely opponents will most likely use a large number of guided land, air and sea-based weapons in order to overcome the underdeveloped air defense systems that protect American military bases and troops.
Discussions are currently underway on recent US air and missile defense initiatives that could enhance the country's ability to counter successive missile launches that threaten its ability to project its military power around the world. And this applies not only to intercontinental ballistic missiles. In particular, the process of mastering by the armed forces of their high-precision guided weapons and their capabilities to counter high-precision strikes is studied in order to assess promising operational concepts and combat potential for air defense and missile defense.
Europe and NADGE
Immediately after the creation of the Joint Air Defense Command of the North American continent, NORAD, in December 1955, the NATO military committee approved the development of the so-called NATO air defense system NADGE (NATO Air Defense Ground Enviroment). The system was to be based in four air defense areas of responsibility coordinated by SACEUR or the Supreme Commander of the NATO Armed Forces in Europe. Anti-aircraft missile systems for the new air defense system were provided by all members of the Alliance, for the most part they were Nike Ajax systems. It is worth noting that one of the world's first anti-aircraft missile systems MIM-3 Nike Ajax was adopted in 1954.
The predecessor of the American Patriot and Aster, the Nike Ajax anti-aircraft missile system, was created to combat conventional bombers flying at high subsonic speeds and altitudes over 15 km. Nike was initially deployed in the United States to defend against attacks by Soviet bombers, and later these complexes were deployed to defend American bases abroad, and were also sold to several allies, including Belgium, France, West Germany and Italy. Some complexes remained in service until the 90s, along with the newer Nike Hercules systems. Like modern Patriot or SAMP / T systems, the Nike Ajax complex consisted of several radars, computers, missiles and their launchers. The launch sites were divided into three main areas: Administrative Zone A, Missile Launcher Zone L, and IFC Integrated Fire Control Zone with radar and operations center. The IFC zone was located at a distance of 0.8-15 km from the launch pad, but within line of sight, so that the radars could see the missiles during launch.
The early warning zone, created in 1956, was expanded to almost all of Western Europe, it included 16 radar stations. This part of the system was built by 1962, it integrated existing national radars and was coordinated with French stations. In 1960, NATO countries agreed in case of war to subordinate all their air defense forces to the command of SACEUR. These forces included command and control systems, radar systems, surface-to-air missile launchers, and interceptor aircraft.
The development of a unified European air defense system continued. By 1972, NADGE was transformed into NATINADS, consisting of 84 radars and associated control centers (CRCs). In the 80s, the NATINADS system was replaced by the AEGIS (Airborne Early Warning / Ground Environment Integration Segment) integrated missile guidance system (approx.this AEGIS system should not be confused with the homonymous name of the US Navy's AEGIS (Aegis) ship-based integrated multifunctional combat system). It became possible to integrate the EC-121 aircraft and later the E-3 AWACS early warning and control aircraft, as well as display the received radar image and other information on the system displays. In the NATO AEGIS system, information was processed on Hughes H5118ME computers, which replaced the H3118M computers installed at NADGE positions in the late 60s and early 70s. Thus, with the increase in computer power, the data processing capabilities of the NATINADS system have increased. The H5118M had an impressive 1 megabyte of memory and could process 1.2 million instructions per second, while the previous model had only 256 kilobytes of memory and a clock rate of 150 thousand instructions per second.
In West Germany, NATINADS / AEGIS was supplemented by a command and control system called the German Air Defense Ground Environment (GEADGE). The renewed radar network of the southern part of West Germany and the Danish coastal radar system CRIS (Coastal Radar Integration System) were added to the common European system. To combat equipment obsolescence, NATO launched the AEGIS Site Emulator (ASE) program in the mid-1990s, in which NATINADS / AEGIS workstations with proprietary hardware (5118ME computers and various IDM-2, HMD-22 and IDM operator consoles) -80) were replaced by commercial servers and workstations, which also reduced the cost of operating the system.
In the early years of the 21st century, the initial capabilities of the ASE program were expanded with new hardware and software. It became possible to run emulator programs for different sites on the same hardware, so the system was renamed Muiti-AEGIS Site Emulator (MASE). In the near future, the MASE system will be replaced by the NATO Air Command and Control System (ACCS). Meanwhile, in connection with the changing political environment, the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance and the financial crisis, most of its member countries are trying to cut defense budgets. As a result, most of the morally and physically obsolete stations of the NATINADS system are gradually being decommissioned. Due to the fact that the defense budgets of European countries today rarely exceed 1% of GDP (with the exception of France, Great Britain and some Eastern European countries), it is necessary to develop an official concept for updating the European air defense system. US President Donald Trump, who constantly calls on Europeans to double their military spending, as the US is no longer going to pay for the defense of the Old World, can indirectly help accelerate the process.
