On the night of April 7, an extremely powerful cruise missile attack was launched from two US Navy destroyers on the territory of the Syrian Air Force Shayrat airbase. According to official statements by the Pentagon, 59 Tomahawks were fired at the target, 58 of which were able to successfully hit the intended targets. One of the cruise missiles, for unknown reasons, went off course and fell near the large Syrian port of Tartus.
However, according to reports from a number of media outlets, only 23 Tomahawks reached Shayrat. The crash sites of the remaining 35 missiles (with the exception of Tartus) are unknown. This raises a logical question: whose version should be trusted and where, if the second is plausible, could the Tomahawks that did not reach disappear?After the completion of the attack, various information publications presented many hypotheses regarding the future fate of 35 American cruise missiles, but most of them were based only on unfounded allegations and did not look plausible. Therefore, the data coming from the US Department of Defense seemed somewhat convincing. However, just a couple of days ago, footage of another Tomahawk appeared on the Internet, which also deviated from its intended target.
According to the Syrian news outlet Syria Free News, the site of the American cruise missile landing was discovered by a Syrian farmer on a date plantation he owns, located near the Shayrat airbase. To confirm his words, the Syrian shows parts of the Tomahawk body and electronic equipment that were discovered near the missile.
A Syrian farmer displays the wreckage of a Tomahawk found in his field. Photo source: youtube.com
A nameplate located on the fragment of a found cruise missile, which proves its belonging to the Tomahawk. Photo source: youtube.comYuri Antonov dies quietlyLady or simpleton: what does the haircut sayOwners of coins from the USSR are millionaires
Judging by the size of the crater and the absence of visible damage to the growing trees, the warhead of the found Tomahawk simply did not detonate, which led to the destruction of the rocket upon impact with the ground. Also, the failure of the explosive device is evidenced by the configuration of the crater, which is more similar to a furrow, which is typical for ammunition that did not explode upon impact with an obstacle.
How many missiles reached Shayrat? Second crashed Tomahawk discovered
A crater formed by the fall of a Tomahawk on a Syrian farmer's field. A “furrow-shaped” trace, characteristic of the fall of unexploded ordnance, is clearly visible.
The fact that the Tomahawk only slightly deviated from its trajectory, and this is confirmed by the farmer who discovered it, who from his house observed the fires at the airbase itself, does not play to the benefit of the American military. The cruise missile, touted by the Pentagon as one of the most precision-guided weapons, has once again proven its imperfection.
In turn, the Tomahawk discovered on the field makes it possible to catch the American military department, which claims only one missed missile, in a lie. At least two samples of “high-precision weapons” launched at the Shayrat airbase and not reaching the target have already been found. And therefore, the version about 36 Tomahawks that went astray looks much more plausible than the Pentagon’s version about almost one hundred percent hitting the target with 59 missiles.
We can only wait for new reports from the Syrian media about other fallen Tomahawks discovered in those provinces over which missiles could have flown.
Now to the point. It is impossible to disable Tomahawk guidance devices using electronic warfare systems. Yes, these systems are capable of jamming the missile's radio receivers, for example, the GPS receiver. And they say that in 1999 in Yugoslavia it was possible to use even microwave ovens for these purposes. But the effectiveness of such methods is extremely low. The fact is that on board cruise missiles there are several redundant and complementary systems that provide high-precision access to the target.
Firstly, it is an inertial guidance system based on gyroscopes, which is completely autonomous and unaffected by any interference. But it has low guidance accuracy - an error of about 800 m accumulates in an hour of flight and therefore it must be corrected using more accurate navigation systems. For example, a GPS navigation guidance system, which allows you to correct the data of the inertial guidance system based on signals from satellites. Now she is really susceptible to interference and it can prevent her data from being used to correct the flight.
By the way, a similar system is used in the center of Moscow and drivers using GPS navigators know that in the Kremlin area these navigators give false readings, since issuing exact coordinates can be used to carry out terrorist attacks in this area using quadcopters and other similar devices.
In addition, two more systems are used to guide cruise missiles to the target, allowing for precise access to the target. These are the Tercom correlation system and the DSMAC optical system.
Tercom includes a computer, a radio altimeter, and a set of reference maps of areas along the rocket's flight route. The operating principle of the TERCOM subsystem is based on comparing the terrain of a specific area where the missile is located with reference maps of the terrain along its flight route. Determination of the terrain is carried out by comparing data from radio and barometric altimeters. The first measures the height to the surface of the earth, and the second - relative to sea level. Information about a certain terrain is digitally entered into the on-board computer, where it is compared with data on the terrain of the actual terrain and reference maps of the areas. The computer provides correction signals to the inertial control subsystem. Theoretically, it is possible to interfere with the radio altimeter, but this is a rather difficult task. The radiation pattern of the radio altimeter antenna is quite narrow (about 12-14 degrees) and therefore it is necessary to create a very high interference power along the entire Tomahawk flight route, since the rocket takes special measures to suppress signals arriving through the side lobes of the radio altimeter antenna. Those. To jam the radio altimeter channel, it is necessary to place hundreds or even thousands of ground jammers throughout the entire territory over which the Tomahawks will fly. And this is technically impossible. Or it is necessary to place jammers on airplanes or helicopters and accompany cruise missiles along their entire flight route. And this is also technically very difficult.
And finally, at the final stage of the Tomahawk's flight, when approaching the target, the DSMAC subsystem comes into operation. Using optical sensors, areas adjacent to the target are inspected. The resulting images are digitally entered into the on-board computer. He compares them with reference digital pictures of areas stored in his memory, and develops corrective maneuvers for the missile to accurately hit the target.
You can try to fight this subsystem. The first is reliable camouflage of the target, the use of smoke screens, changing the landscape, etc. The second is “burning out” the optical sensors of the rocket using powerful laser radiation. Which is also very difficult to implement technically.
And the most reliable way to combat the massive use of cruise missiles is to use an electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion, which will simply burn out the “electronic brains” of cruise missiles. But at the same time, a nuclear explosion (explosions) will cause unacceptable damage to its own population and infrastructure.
So there is no need to believe various “sensational” materials. Including a fake story about how a Su-24 with its on-board electronic warfare equipment "Khibiny" disabled all the electronics of an American destroyer in the Black Sea.
UPD Photos have nothing to do with Tomahawks. They are wearing a missile from the Tochka-U divisional tactical complex. This is evidenced by the lattice rudders at the rear of the rocket. Here is another Syrian photograph of this missile.
Today was spent studying a huge amount of information on the topic of shelling of an airfield in Syria. There are a huge number of questions, the facts are also already there, we will discard the conspiracy theory of the beginning of the big mess on April 16 for now, let’s talk about the facts.
What is available at the moment. The main question is why the air defense did not work without covering the airfield, because we were talking about complete control of the skies of Syria. From media reports and comments from officials, we know that 59 cruise missiles were launched from American ships. From the same sources it is known that only 23 missiles reached the base. From the photographs and videos that appeared, from the base itself, we can conclude that 59 missiles definitely did not reach it, and 30 too. Personally, this morning I thought that no more than ten missiles actually flew; it’s too expensive a pleasure to bomb an almost empty base with cruise missiles worth a total of almost $90 million. But America is a rich country, and even for Trump, show-off is sometimes more valuable than money, what can you say? and spent all their money making a fuss... And where were our air defenses looking? Well, as they say - qua... The Tomahawks laughed at our S-400...
Or is it not? Let's count the same officially known figures. 59 took off, 23 flew, 36 got lost somewhere along the way. It is known that our S-400s are located in Syria, covering Khmeimim, the Sharayat airbase is within the coverage area of their radars, and the destruction system has a range of 250 km. Missiles can hit low-flying targets; I didn’t know this important detail this morning. And here’s what’s interesting: the systems produced before 2012, which are on combat duty in Syria, are capable of simultaneously engaging 36 targets. How many missiles were “missing in action”, did we count? It's probably just a coincidence.
For what purpose did Trump decide to bomb an almost empty airfield? This is what I can’t understand, really. I have already said, judging by the visual information from there, the takeoff was not damaged, the destroyed planes were inoperable, everything that could leave, fly away, crawl away from there, left and flew away. And judging by information from open sources, there was quite a bit of equipment there. The 7th MiG-25 squadron, the MiG-23 squadron, the MiG-29 squadron, the 677th Su-22 squadron, the 685th squadron, which included the Su-22 aircraft involved in the chemical attack on the city of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4, were based there . In addition, the Su-25 attack aircraft, eight K-52 helicopters and four Mi-27 helicopters were based there. The headquarters of the 22nd brigade of the Assad regime forces was stationed at the airbase. But we see only empty takeoffs and some scattered debris.
Each non-nuclear tomahawk missile has a 500 kg warhead. explosives. Those. 60 missiles contained 30 tons of explosives! Do you see traces of their explosion at the airfield? :)
It is known that the Pentagon warned Russia about future shelling, Russia, in turn, apparently warned Assad, and everything was removed from the base. Maybe it was really more of a PR move for Trump, who was losing his ratings and showing off as “Kuzka’s mother”? Maybe. But he found himself in an even more delicate situation, which could ultimately turn against him. In fact, the shelling of the base, positioned as a response to the insidious Assad’s use of sarin bombs, was carried out without relying on the real facts of the use of chemical weapons by Assad’s army. The investigation has not been completed (and has it even begun?), there is only a loud statement by Trump in the style - he is a scoundrel, he must be punished and I gave the order to punish him. I couldn’t find a similar statement by Bush, but from memory, these statements are very similar... It was only then that Bush coordinated his actions with Congress, and today many congressmen were surprised to learn from the news about Trump’s decision. And not everyone was happy with such actions...
People living in the countries of the Middle East, who witnessed another act of American aggression against their fellow believers, were even less happy. In Iran, they were especially upset, and their (Muslims) resentment can sometimes lead to the most unexpected events. For some reason I am sure that soon BV will not be the best place for Americans to visit. And there are many Muslims living in the United States itself, and even in the European Union... Iran, by the way, spoke negatively about what happened: such measures strengthen terrorists in Syria and complicate the situation in this country and in the region as a whole; Greece also condemned the American aggression.
In fact, Trump today worsened relations with Iran and with Russia, which suspended the memorandum on avoiding US incidents in Syria. Almost all “civilized countries” supported the American aggression - France (I think the fun will start there again soon), Germany (and it’s possible there were a lot of “tourists” there), Britain, Japan, in general, also spoke positively (Trump’s efforts were not in vain ), South Korea, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Australia, and Israel.
As for Israel, by the way, it’s worth clarifying something. Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, became an adviser to his high-profile father-in-law in January. Kushner also headed a new department and is one of Trump's key confidants. One of his main tasks is to return peace to the Middle East, overseeing the fight against ISIS... Jared Kushner works in the interests of Israel, of course, and it seems that, through the hands of his wife’s father, he began to actively act against Syria, and Iran at the same time.
Let's see what Russia says at the UN today. It is now known that the number of deaths from the American missile attack is 9 people, including four children. Last time, the “partners” placed the main emphasis on children affected by the “chemical bombing” by Assad.
Cruise missile strike on Syrian airfield - “driving nails with a microscope”A massive cruise missile strike was launched against Syria from American destroyers based in the Mediterranean Sea. As a result, the Shayrat airfield of the Syrian Air Force in Homs province was partially destroyed. The official reason for the strikes is to prevent the Syrian leadership from using chemical weapons against civilians. The Pentagon says all planned targets were destroyed. The Russian Ministry of Defense claims that this strike was being prepared long before information about the use of chemical weapons in Syria appeared.
MK asked military experts how effective the US actions were and what goals they primarily wanted to achieve.
According to military expert Viktor Murakhovsky, the American missile strike is simply a PR campaign. “Launching cruise missiles at an airfield can be compared to hammering nails with a microscope. Expensive and ineffective,” says Murakhovsky. In his opinion, the Americans can continue launching missile strikes, but the military effect of these actions cannot be called breakthrough. At the same time, Murakhovsky believes that under the cover of these attacks, terrorist groups that are secretly supported by the United States may go on the offensive.
Ivan Konovalov, head of the military policy and economics sector of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, is also convinced that a cruise missile strike is primarily a demonstration action. “What we see. The airfield's runway is practically untouched. Warehouses where, according to American intelligence, chemical weapons were allegedly located were destroyed, but there was no chemical release into the atmosphere. This means that no prohibited ammunition was stored in warehouses,” Konovalov noted. According to him, of course, the infrastructure of the airfield was destroyed, but it is too early to say that this destruction is critical. This means, apparently, there was no goal of completely destroying the airfield. In addition, the Syrian army was warned in advance about the attack and evacuated its units from the airfield.
According to Konovalov, it is still difficult to say why not all the missiles reached the target.
“Now the Syrians, under the supervision of Russian military experts, are establishing an air defense system, and this is not only anti-aircraft missile systems, this is building systems of decoys and electronic warfare. The missiles could have been knocked off course,” the expert suggested. Also, according to him, “Tomahawk” is an old complex developed back in the 70s of the last century and can no longer be called super-effective. “It is clear that the missiles have an expiration date and may have launched missiles that were soon to be decommissioned, so it cannot be ruled out that they simply did not reach their targets due to their advanced age,” Konovalov did not rule out.
The expert is convinced that the cruise missile strike is primarily a demonstration of US military power in front of its allies and a certain message to those who are wavering, such as Turkish President Erdogan. Turkey is faced with a choice - who it is with. In addition, Konovalov recalled that the launch of the Tomohawks occurred at a time when President Donald Trump was receiving his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping. It is possible that the United States demonstrated its tough position to the Chinese, with whom they have many unresolved problems.
The Russian Ministry of Defense, through its official representative Major General Igor Konashenkov, has already stated that it regards the actions of the American side as a gross violation of the Memorandum on preventing incidents and ensuring security during operations in Syrian airspace, signed in 2015.
“The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation suspends cooperation with the Pentagon within the framework of this Memorandum,” Konashenkov emphasized.
He stated that the attack by American cruise missiles on the Syrian airbase was being prepared long before the events associated with the chemical attack on Khan Jeyhun.
“To prepare for such a strike, it is necessary to carry out a large complex of measures for reconnaissance, planning, preparation of flight missions and bringing the missiles into full readiness for launch,” he noted. The general said that in order to cover the most sensitive objects of the Syrian infrastructure, a set of measures will be implemented in the near future to strengthen and increase the effectiveness of the air defense system of the Syrian armed forces.
HELP "MK"
"Tomahawk" (Tomahawk) is an American multi-purpose high-precision long-range subsonic cruise missile (up to 2500 km) for strategic and tactical purposes. Flies at extremely low altitudes, skirting the terrain. There are 13 modifications. Can be equipped with various types of warheads, including nuclear ones. It has been used in all significant military conflicts involving the United States since its adoption in 1983. Estimated cost: $1.45 million.
1. Where did Trump hit Syria?
From two US destroyers “Porter” and “Ross”, which are drifting off the Greek island of Crete in the Mediterranean Sea. These destroyers are equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles. And he fired 59 of these missiles at Shayrat air base in Homs province in Syria, which belongs to the government forces of Bashar al-Assad.
2. What damage was caused to Shayrat air base?
According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, as a result of the strike, 6 MiG-23 aircraft located in repair hangars were destroyed, as well as a radar station, ammunition and fuel depots, and a canteen... Four Syrian soldiers were killed and two were missing, and six more were burned while extinguishing the fire at the base due to missile hits.
The Syrian authorities have already stated that “America has caused serious damage to the fight against ISIS” (an organization banned in the Russian Federation - ed.).
One of the base employees frankly admitted: “We can say that Shayrat is out of order.” However, the Russian Ministry of Defense has slightly different information: “the runway, taxiways and Syrian Air Force aircraft parked are not damaged.” And, judging by the first photos from Shayrat, this is closer to the truth - we see the surviving “take-off” and several surviving aircraft.
Considering that the cost of 1 Tomahawk missile is at least $1.5 million (and the price of some modernized copies can reach up to $2 million), it turns out that Donald Trump spent 100 million full dollars on such an ineffective attack from a military point of view! In rubles, this amount looks threatening - 6 billion. Apparently, the political result of such an irrational waste of ammunition was more important for Trump.
3. Were there Russian military personnel at this base?
The Pentagon officially reported that they were trying to “minimize the risk to base personnel,” including Russian military personnel who could be at the facility. And before the strike, they allegedly informed the Russian military through established communication channels that are used to prevent conflicts in Syria. Yes, there are such channels. But the Americans’ message was received by the command of our group in Syria at the very last moment, when the Tomahawks were already approaching. For it is absolutely clear that if the warning had been “two hours” before the attack (as the US claims), then the Russians would have warned the Syrians, and they could have removed their planes and helicopters from Shayrat during that time.
Some Russian military experts “initiated” in this emergency claim that “there was no warning at all.”
4. Why didn’t Russian and Syrian air defense work?
The Russian S-300 and S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems, which are located at our bases in Syria in Khmeimim and Tartus, protect precisely these objects. They do not have the task of covering the entire sky of Syria.
But why didn’t the Syrian air defense system work? This is the most difficult question yet, the answer to which has not yet been received. There are only assumptions by our specialists that the crews of the Syrian anti-aircraft missile systems covering the Shayrat base “turned out to be unprepared” to repel such a massive missile attack. In addition, the Americans, on their destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea, came as close as possible to the shore and significantly reduced the flight time of their Tomahawks to their targets. In this case, the response time to an attack by air defense crews should be instantaneous. Apparently, this did not happen.
But there is other information: part of the Tomahawks was shot down after all! The Pentagon cheerfully reported that “all missiles reached their target.” But this, to put it mildly, is not true. According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, out of 59 missiles fired at Shayrat, only 23 reached the target. A little more than a third!
But whether the 36 Tomahawks that did not make it were actually shot down or simply fell into the sea and got lost along the way - this remains to be seen.
5. What is a Tomahawk?
This is an American multi-purpose high-precision long-range subsonic cruise missile for strategic and tactical purposes. It was put into service back in 1983. But it is constantly being modernized.
The rocket received its name in honor of the edged weapon of the Indians - a battle ax, with which they not only chopped, but also often threw it at the enemy.
"Tomahawk" is not easy to detect by air defense radars, since it flies at extremely low altitudes (up to 25-30 m) and skirts the terrain.
Firing range - 2500 km.
Average speed is 800-900 km/h.
Length - 6.25 m. Weight - 1500 kg. The weight of the warhead is 120 kg.
The Tomahawk can also carry a nuclear warhead.
Some have already stated that Russian air defenses simply cannot shoot down such a powerful, fast and cunning missile as the Tomahawk. This is a lie. Even the S-300 (not to mention the more modern S-400 system) shoot down such “targets” flying at speeds of up to 10 thousand km/h! So Tomahawks are quite tough for them.
But is it possible to compare the Tomahawk with the Russian Caliber missile, which has already shown itself in all its glory in Syria? Yes, you can. In fact, these are very similar missiles. They have similar speed. The Caliber has a more modern weapon that hits the target more accurately. We can say that "Caliber" is a super-"Tomahawk".
6. Moscow announced that it was withdrawing from the Memorandum on Flight Safety with the United States. What does it mean?
The US missile strike was a flagrant violation of the Russian-American agreement (2015 Memorandum) that the parties undertake to avoid sudden actions in Syrian airspace (whether aircraft flights or missile launches). The Russian side, in accordance with the agreement, always warned the US military about the time, areas and nature of the actions of its aircraft and ships in the region.
After the violation of the memorandum by the United States, Russia simply “frees its hands” and abandons the established “rules of the game.”
7. Why did the ISIS attack begin immediately after the US attack?
Indeed, ISIS militants launched an attack on the Shayrat base a couple of hours before the US strike. Maybe the Americans “by mistake” warned not the Russians, but the Ililovites about their missile attack? And they did not miss the moment.
This once again suggests that suspicions of Washington’s patronage over ISIS in Syria are not groundless. The same timing coincided with the ISIS attack on the positions of Assad’s army near the city of Dar ez-Zor immediately after US coalition planes struck government troops.
Near Shayrat, Syrian soldiers nevertheless repelled the attack of the bandits. But the aftertaste from its synchronization with the American strike remained...
Also see:
Similar news:
