Experts told where the missing Tomahawks went. Experts told where the missing "Tomahawks" went to & nbsp But I will answer - both statements are incorrect

06.03.2020

According to official Pentagon data, two US Navy Orly Burke-class destroyers fired 59 Tactical Tomahawk sea-launched cruise missiles (SLCMs) at targets in Syria (36 by the Ross destroyer, 23 by the Porter destroyer), of which 58 flew to the target. According to the official data of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, only 23 SLCMs reached their goal - the Syrian Air Force Shayrat airbase. 6 MiG-23 aircraft under repair and several airfield facilities were destroyed, and the base resumed operation just a day later. The US costs for this strike are about 30 times higher than the damage they inflicted on the Syrian Armed Forces. The latter, however, should not be surprising - Western armies have been fighting like this for a long time, hammering nails with microscopes. But the story with the number of launched and flown "Tomahawks" is very surprising. Moreover, 59 Tomahawks for one, and by no means the largest air base, is an abnormally large number.

One could not believe the data of the Russian Ministry of Defense, but they are fully confirmed by the filming (including satellite) of Shayrat. Indeed, from 7 to 9 aircraft were destroyed (3 MiG-23s and 4-6 Su-22s, all of them were hopelessly outdated 20 years ago), the destruction at the base does not even pull on 23 missiles, it looks more like there were about 15 of them. But we will still proceed from the number 23. Where did the other 36 go? The option that in the US Navy 60% of the SLCMs (the main striking means of the fleet) are faulty can be discarded immediately, as absolutely unrealistic.

One of the versions is that they were not launched at all, the White House and the Pentagon deliberately deceived humanity for the sake of demonstrating that very “coolness”, only Porter actually shot back. The weakness of this version is that in our time lies do not work well, because they are very quickly exposed thanks to total informatization. Almost all the world's media have already cited Russian data that only 23 SLCMs reached the target, asking the same question: where did the rest go? And here one cannot do without another version - they were still shot down.

When various “couch experts” write that the strike on Shayrat demonstrated the incapacity of Russian air defense, this is either complete incompetence or propaganda. The S-400 and S-300V air defense systems deployed in Syria cover Khmeimim and Tartus. The SLCM flying to Shayrat passed too far from their positions, with a huge heading parameter and, most importantly, under the radio horizon and behind the folds of the terrain. Our air defense systems could not hit them in any way, such a task could not be assigned to them.

But this could well have been done by the Su-35S and / or Su-30SM fighters. EPR (electron paramagnetic resonance) "Tomahawk" is very small in the front hemisphere, but by no means in the upper hemisphere. Radar fighters can see the missile perfectly against the background of land or water. In addition, at night, an engine torch becomes an additional unmasking sign of SLCMs in the infrared and visible ranges. The Americans themselves warned us about missile launches, it was quite easy to determine their approximate trajectories. It is even easier to shoot down the discovered "Tomahawk", because it cannot provide any counteraction to the fighter. SLCMs can be destroyed with an air-to-air missile, from a cannon, and also by “silencing” electronic warfare.

It is likely that initially the Americans intended to limit themselves to 36 SLCMs from the Ross (obviously, they made up the full ammunition load of the Tomahawks of this destroyer). It was they who were shot down by Russian fighters. From the destroyers, this was observed “live” on the screens of their own radars, but they did not dare to counteract in any way. After the Russian fighters, with a sense of accomplishment and with spent ammunition and fuel, went to the airfield, the Porter fired its Tomahawk ammunition. Due to the lack of fighters, ours could no longer do anything about it, because they did not have time to refuel and hang up new missiles, and there was simply no additional squad of forces.

If this version is correct, we can say that both sides demonstrated their capabilities to each other, and both sides have the right to believe that they did it successfully, "cooling" the opponent. At the same time, Moscow, of course, will not report its success, even if we really shot down the Tomahawks. Indeed, in this case, in the United States, they will begin to demand from Trump to hit Russian forces, which will lead to an uncontrolled escalation "up to". Therefore, only a diplomatic hysteria was arranged in the public space. Well, the Americans, for their part, are more profitable to remain silent.

It is necessary to note one more circumstance. Just at the time of the American strike on Syria, Chinese leader Xi Jinping met with Trump at his estate in Florida. He did not condemn the actions of the United States in a word; the position of the PRC as a whole turned out to be neutral and conciliatory. At the same time, Xi Jinping and Trump said that the visit was extremely successful and that China-US relations have excellent prospects. As a result, against the backdrop of yet another sharp aggravation of Russian-American relations, Beijing seized the initiative in relations with Washington. Once again, he demonstrates to Washington his "moderation and accuracy" against the backdrop of Moscow's "aggressiveness". As a result, Trump's anti-Chinese position is very easily transformed into an anti-Russian one. Unless, of course, the American president gets another momentary impulse.

After the attack with rusty axes, all the analysts began vying with each other to shout that ours could not bring down this junk. On the day when there was an attack with these antediluvian missiles, I remember a report on the Business FM radio, where two analysts told one after another what a super modern weapon it was and that it could not fail to hit. They say this is all our General Staff is lying and we must listen to the Americans. I have long known from many of our media the phrase "our General Staff" is not the General Staff of the Russian Federation, but still, I will try to write an article for 15 years sitting in the kitchen, going to work.

I am not an analyst or a blogger, I just used Yandex. So there are two pictures.

First, from a serious edition of RBC according to Almaz Antey.

And it’s true, what bunnies, what 36 missiles shot down by our best air defense system, it doesn’t cover anything at all. Some miserable 60km.

Now the second picture, just to understand the radii (I don’t want to draw with a compass myself)

We follow the hands)). Pay attention to the red circle S400 250km and where Damascus is located.

Now we look at the characteristics of the C400.

Types of targets hit:

strategic aviation aircraft of the B-1B, FB-111, B-52 types;
specialized electronic warfare aircraft such as EF-111A, EA-6;
reconnaissance aircraft type TR-1;
early warning aircraft type E-3A, E-2C;
tactical aircraft of the F-15, F-16, F-22 type;
aircraft manufactured using the Stealth technology of the B-2, F-117A type;
strategic cruise missiles of the "Tomahawk", ALKM type;
aeroballistic missiles such as SREM, ASALM;
medium-range ballistic missiles;
operational-tactical ballistic missiles.

Do you want to tell me where in the top picture where (c) RBC has a range of 60 km?

Yes, this is also a characteristic of the S400

Only the rusty antediluvian tomgahk piece of iron (adopted in 1983, developed since the early 1970s, no longer produced) is not a ballistic target, it is an ordinary aerodynamic target that easily knocks down the C400.

And let's remember the chronology of this missile attack with this junk?

First, the data poured in that there was a volley of 59 rusty pieces of iron. And the sketches began, "aaaa everything is gone", "aaaa Putn merged Syria", "aaaa C400 / C300 shit nothing will help", "aaaa it's expensive to shoot down this junk C400, Putin will not go for it", "aaaa the whole airfield is in ruins" , "ahhh Putin did not warn anyone, everything was lost, Syria is being drained especially today," etc.

Then it turns out that 36 missiles did not fly, what do we hear? "There is no confirmation of the General Staff of the Russian Federation that they were shot down, which means AAAA everything is gone, everyone is lying, etc., see above."

And now we turn on the logic:

1. We were warned about this attack (the deployment time of the C400 is 3 minutes, but it is generally worth deployed)

2. C400, with its radius and height, captures these targets with a margin.

3. number of targets simultaneously fired 36 pieces.

4. 36 pieces did not fly.

5. Why does the General Staff of the Russian Federation say that we shot down these 36 pieces of expensive rusty blanks? (They themselves fell and we have nothing to do with it)

6. Will they still produce these rusty rockets if there is a possibility for a bunch of bucks to just fall before they reach it.

7. What will happen to the officers of the US Navy, who did not fly more than half of the missiles? (Russians say they weren't shot down)

For those who still doubt the reliability of our weapons. I propose to solve the problem.

How much rusty junk the C400 can destroy if there is a reload. The reload time is taken from the technical characteristics, and the time spent by rusty axes is calculated independently based on the speed of the target and the radius of destruction of the C400.

For especially stubborn next task.

How much of the most rusty iron can be brought down by the entire group of the Russian Federation, which is now in the Mediterranean Sea and in Syria. (Well, there are also Shells, if anything, and a couple of frigates on the way)

Well, and most importantly, no matter how much junk falls, everything will fall due to old age, because "it's expensive to spend modern high-precision ammunition on this rubbish," he himself falls

I'll add a comrade's comment from the discussion:

Kamrady SibVat, comrade. Suh, Kir23... certainly right, but I'll allow myself...:

Less than 2 hours notice, but "we" knew.

LW - 1 hour flight in a straight line through the Lebanese "Northern Gate", cf. height 50 m.

PURPOSE (actual) - the destruction of AVB Shayrat (AA squadron in a group parking lot - 800x200 km 2 - coefficient of importance (Kv) 4.37. SAM battery - 800x300 km 2 - Sq. -3.44 ..., take-off, hangars. BP warehouses and fuel...).

Volley - sequential launch from destroyers USS Porter and Ross 03:42 - 03:56 Moscow time by 62 strategic SLCM RGM / UGM-109C / D Block III Tomahawk (with cluster, high-explosive fragmentation and penetrating warheads) Declared range: 1850 km, actual, in ordinary equipment - up to 1600, but since P800 "Onyx" (i.e. 800 km), then they were forced to launch from Crete - 900 km.

59 units left the ship's launchers. To AVB Shayrat (2 baht 136 air defense brigades of the SAR Armed Forces)

It flew to the ground - 23.

Before AVB Shayrat - 16, at least 3 did not explode, somehow lost their target - the work of electronic warfare.

RESULT

Task not completed: so-called. the combat effectiveness of the super-high-precision hypermassed missile "strike" of the US Armed Forces SLCMs is negligible (10% of the SLCMs exploded in the perimeter of the airbase, and caused damage ... negligible minimal: 6 hit decommissioned MiGs did not count, and the rest of the equipment, etc. was evacuated, GDP and warehouses are intact - a couple of shelters, a couple of pits on the second GDP, they cleaned up and flew again). Add to this a 5-fold overexpenditure of CR (for temporary disabling of the AVB, 10 - 15 CR are necessary and sufficient). And after the completion of the object air defense, the effectiveness will be ZERO.

The fire show spent (wasted) 2% of the US Armed Forces CR. Keep it up! - the rocks of North Korea are waiting for a reason to occupy their native southern land in a day.

THE BATTLE POWER of a group of means of destruction is characterized exclusively by the realized part of its combat capabilities, and in this case it is VOID

BEFFICIENT EFFICIENCY of a massive missile strike (MRU) by strategic "high-precision" SLCMs of the US BB against Russian air defense in the SAR tends to zero zero

THE STRATEGIC GOAL of the United States / Israel and the gentry (dominance in the air with everything that follows) is UNREACHABLE.

Well, I'll add:

Even if I don’t understand something and ours didn’t shoot down anything.

Quite weighty arguments speak for this:

1. Launch marks from 36 or more missiles in the night sky would be visible far away, and someone would put such a fire show on the net.

2. Taking into account the radio horizon, the range is still the same as in the RBC article.

There are other options where 36 missiles could have gone:

1 - they fell - then it's generally rubbish.

2 - they were helped to fall by means of electronic warfare

3 - they were shot down by aircraft, but not Syrian, because at night it seems like as soon as ours fly.

On April 7, the United States of America launched a missile attack on the Syrian Shayrat air base, thereby realizing its old threats to official Damascus, first voiced back in 2013.

According to the statement of the Russian Ministry of Defense, on April 7, from the Mediterranean Sea near the island of Crete, two destroyers of the US Navy launched a missile attack on the Syrian Shayrat air base, located 20 kilometers from the Lebanese border. The strike was carried out by 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

A US Defense Department spokesman issued a statement to CNN just 50 minutes after the strike, saying that 58 of the 59 missiles reached their target and "substantially destroyed or destroyed" the target.

Air strike oddities

Within an hour of the news of the attack on Shayrat, the Western media reported that the American side had given its Russian counterparts advance warning of the impending strike exactly half an hour in advance (as noted, this was done at 3:42 local time). Later, information appeared that the Americans had notified official Damascus of their intentions.

According to the Russian Ministry of Defense and military correspondents who visited the air base after the strike, the Americans were able to destroy 5 Su-22M3 fighter-bombers, 1 Su-22M4 fighter-bomber, 3 MiG-23ML multipurpose fighters, 1 radar station, 1 rocket launcher Iranian-made M-600 "Tishreen", a warehouse for logistics, an educational building and a canteen.

It is also reported that only 23 missiles flew to the air base, the location of the remaining 36 Tomahawks has not been established to date. It is known that as a result of a missile strike, 7 Syrian army servicemen were killed, more than 10 received burns and shrapnel wounds. As usual, civilians were also injured during the actions of the American army - two rockets landed in the neighboring settlements of Al-Hamrat (4 dead) and Al-Manzul (7 injured).

Despite the presence of a very voluminous base of factual materials, many aspects of the missile strike and its consequences were undeservedly ignored or did not receive wide coverage in the media.

First, the very fact that the Americans had warned their Russian colleagues of their intentions before the attack drew attention. This nuance alone casts doubt on the competence of a whole galaxy of analysts who made very emotional statements in the vein of “the cast is being removed, the client is leaving.”

It seems obvious that if the Americans had a desire to inflict maximum military and political damage on Russia, provoke Moscow into rash retaliatory actions, or inflict irreparable damage on the Syrian army, Washington would strike suddenly, without warning. Which, as you know, did not happen.

Secondly, if the statements of the American military and politicians are to be believed, Washington informed Moscow about the impending strike half an hour before the release of their first Tomahawk mine. That is, the Russian military and their Syrian colleagues had about 40 minutes at their disposal to carry out the evacuation. Based on the list of equipment hit during the strike, as well as on the basis of morning photographs from the airfield, the evacuation from the military base was carried out successfully.

It should also be noted here that among the dead Syrian army personnel there is not a single member of the flight crews or personnel serving the airfield and equipment. All the dead served in the 2nd division of the 136th air defense brigade, which provided airfield cover. This fact indicates that the Syrian "rocketmen" were preparing to strike, and it is likely that the "disappearance" of a part of the Tomahawks is their merit.

Thirdly, even if the 36 "lost" Tomahawks are left out of the discussion, the effectiveness of this strike, that is, the strike of 23 missiles, can be assessed as extremely low. At least two CDs landed in the villages of Al-Hamrat and Al-Manzul. The 21 missiles that reached the military base did not cause irreparable damage to the base itself or to personnel.

9 aircraft is, of course, a serious loss for the Syrian aviation, but it is difficult to classify it as irreplaceable - the loss of equipment will most likely be compensated either by transferring similar Soviet-made samples to Syria from Russian stocks, or by building up the Russian VKS group.

As a result of the missile attack, the runway and steering tracks were left without serious damage. The northern group of shelters, where the rest of the Su-22M3 fighter-bombers were located, was not affected either. The absence of blows to the GDP attracts special attention, since in all similar "actions" (Yugoslavia and Libya), the Americans without fail put the strips out of action. It can be assumed that the VVP and the northern group of shelters were the target for some of the "lost" missiles.

As an indicator of the low effectiveness of the strikes on the airfield, the fact that a day later the Syrian aviation resumed flights from Shayrat can serve.

Where did 36 Tomahawks go?

It is still unknown where 36 Tomahawks went missing. The US military was quick to claim that 58 out of 59 missiles had reached their targets just 20 minutes after the strike, but this kind of information is not confirmed by photographs from the airbase.

It was already noted above that only the 2nd division of the 136th air defense brigade remained at the military base. However, it is unlikely that only he was involved in the landing of the Tomahawks. The most convincing version seems to be that Russian crews, who arrived in Syria back in August 2015 and reinforced after the incident with the downed plane, removed the American missiles from the echelon. Surely our electronic warfare specialists also took part in this event.

The number of lost Tomahawks speaks in favor of the theory about the participation of Russian military personnel in the process of destroying American cruise missiles. With all due respect to the Syrian army, it is difficult to believe that the Syrians were able to land almost 2/3 of the American CD without outside help.

It is worth noting that the American attack on the Shayrat base, allegedly initiated by the presence of chemical weapons on it, demonstrated the complete failure of this propaganda campaign. In photographs that appeared on the Web a few hours after the strike, you can see Syrian soldiers and correspondents walking around the airfield without chemical protective equipment. If the chemical weapons were indeed located at the base, they would certainly have been destroyed during missile strikes. Accordingly, everyone present would be at risk of defeat.

The photographs of containers dumped near the shelters, which are distributed in the Ukrainian segment of the Internet, have nothing to do with chemical weapons. The presented photographs depict unified blocks of the BKF series (container front-line blocks) intended for remote mining (1248 mines of PFM "Lepestok" are laid in each block).

It should also be noted that all statements by Western politicians about the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian army on April 4 in the city of Khan Sheikhoun are based on data provided to the world community by local militants and the White Helmets affiliated with them. It is also noteworthy that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons refuses to lay responsibility on one of the parties until the investigation is completed.

Subtotals

To sum up the interim results of the American missile attack on the Shayrat air base, it is worth noting a few points.

From a military point of view, this action turned out to be completely pointless: the air base continues to function normally, the losses in personnel are insignificant, and the state of affairs at the front remains unchanged. For example, for each of the above indicators, the “erroneous” strike of the American coalition on the positions of the Syrian army in Deir ez-Zor last year was an order of magnitude more effective: the Syrians were forced to retreat, and the loss of personnel was 5 times higher.

2. For the first time in a very long period of time, the Americans encountered an enemy that has modern air defense and missile defense systems in its arsenal. It is unlikely that the loss of 2/3 of cruise missiles in the conditions of a breakthrough of a mixed Russian-Syrian missile defense system is acceptable for the Americans.

3. The missile attack on the Syrian base did not arouse enthusiasm among many supporters of Donald Trump - the electorate of the American president split into two camps. The answers of ordinary users to Trump's thematic notes on his Twitter, "top" comments on news sites and rating notes on near-political resources leave no illusions about this.

In the bottom line, it turned out that Donald Trump hit the Syrian Shayrat, but hit his own electorate.