Why didn't ours shoot down missiles in Syria? Why didn't Russia shoot down American missiles in Syria? How it happened

home After the American destroyers Ross and Porter attacked with Tomahawk cruise missiles on April 7 Syrian airbase

Shayrat in Homs province, and Russian anti-aircraft missile systems did not repel the attack, doubts arose about their effectiveness - as previously stated, they tightly close the sky over Syria from outside interference. Our Version's correspondent found out why Russia didn't even try to prevent the Tomahawk attack. Back in 2013, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that they had deployed modern complexes S-400 "Triumph" that can protect air space countries from any possible attacks. The claims were supported by the fantastic characteristics of these complexes. As stated, within a radius of 400 kilometers, air defense systems are guaranteed to hit almost all aerodynamic targets, including tactical and strategic aviation , warheads ballistic missiles

, as well as all types of cruise missiles. It was especially emphasized that Triumph missiles are capable of hitting low-flying targets - moving at an altitude of 5 meters.

And so the Americans provided an opportunity to test the effectiveness of the Russian S-400 in practice. At the same time, the task turned out to be as easy as possible - the Pentagon warned the Russian military in advance about the proposed attacks. Moreover, American destroyers demonstratively fired through the four-hundred-kilometer range of Russian anti-missile systems located in Khmeimim. But as a result, 59 American Tomahawks flew unharmed past the Russian air defense systems deployed in Tartus and Khmeimim without any damage to themselves. In addition, according to the American side, not a single Tomahawk was intercepted.

Now experts give different reasons why Russia did not shoot down Tomahawk. Military-political arguments are in the foreground - it is obvious that any forceful reaction to American actions would provoke a response, which could cause the level of conflict to rise to an unacceptably high level. If we assume that Russian air defense systems or fighters would have shot down all the American Tomahawks on approach, the Pentagon, according to military logic, should have responded by deploying an arsenal to suppress these air defense systems, and so on in increasing numbers. It is almost impossible to predict where such an escalation might lead, so the silence of the air defense systems in Syria can most easily be explained by Russia’s reluctance to bring the situation to a crisis. nuclear war. Alternative version, that out of 59 only 23 flew, and then in order not to humiliate the United States, we discussed in the last issue in the material “Staged War...”

However, some foreign commentators believe that the destruction of Tomahawk would hardly be a reason for starting a nuclear war, calling these explanations just excuses for helplessness Russian funds Air defense. As a result, the opinion is growing that the power of Russian air defense systems is in fact a myth and Russian air defense systems are simply not able to shoot down complex targets at all. All these statements come against the backdrop of repeated attempts to discredit Russian air defense systems. Suffice it to recall how the story of the interception by the Arrow-2 missile defense system of a Syrian anti-aircraft guided missile fired at an Israeli aircraft of the Russian-made S-200VE air defense system that happened on March 17 was inflated.

In principle, there is a basis for such a version. According to open data, the S-400 system demonstrates about 90 percent of successful interceptions. True, we are talking about training interception, and not about combat, that is, carried out in sterile conditions with predetermined flight parameters of a projectile simulating an enemy object. In a combat situation, these systems were not used, especially against American cruise missiles, so the effectiveness of their fire on Tomahawk cannot be predicted. And since the conditions in Syria were quite difficult, the interception attempt might not have been 100% successful. As a result, a small percentage of downed missiles could significantly reduce the demand for Russian air defense systems in the world and generally affect the reputation Russian weapons, which are planned to be supplied, including for export. However, the Pentagon, as it turns out, took the capabilities of the Russian air defense system very seriously.

Indirect confirmation of this is the fact that the simultaneous launch of 59 cruise missiles at once was an unprecedented case. Experts also determined that the debris found at the attacked airfield makes it possible to identify the missiles as the most modern Tactical Tomahawk (RGM/UGM-109E Block 4) in the US Navy arsenal, which has the greatest capabilities to overcome air defense systems. Thus, the mere presence of the S-400 complex in Syria played a role and even forced the Americans to adjust their plans.

It is also significant that the missile launches were carried out at the maximum distance from the Syrian coast - the distance to the Shayrat airbase from the missile launch zone was about 1,200 kilometers, and almost the entire Tomahawk flight took place over the sea and only 75–80 kilometers over land. Experts suggest that it was not for nothing that the Americans significantly complicated the flight route of cruise missiles. The Pentagon did not officially report information about their trajectory, but, presumably, Tomahawk from the outside Mediterranean Sea first entered Lebanese airspace, and then moved along the Jordan-Syria border, where there are practically no radars capable of detecting the passage of missiles. Then the missiles turned north and entered the combat course. In this case, the Russian S-300V4 and S-400 were located 200–300 kilometers from the Tomahawk. Why was there no interception?

Anatoly Tsyganok, director of the Center for Military Forecasting:

– Judging by the photographs, 59 missiles definitely did not reach the Shayrat airbase; the destruction in the photo clearly does not correspond to the power of the strike. But what happened to the 36 Tomahawks that didn’t make it remains to be seen. According to some information, 5 rockets fell in the vicinity of Shayrat, killing several civilians and injuring about 20 people. The remaining Tomahawks crashed into the sea, never reaching the shore. The inaccuracy of the hit may be due to the fact that the missiles were aimed using satellite means without additional reconnaissance of the targets. According to another version, many American missiles had expired and were faulty. There is also an assumption that the guidance devices of most Tomahawks were disabled by external influences and Russian electronic warfare systems may be behind this.

It should also be noted that the US Navy actually conducted a kind of exercise for the Russian air defense to repel a massive attack of American cruise missiles by Russian air defense systems. Moreover, the cost of this training for the US Navy was about $90 million, approximately the same amount that the American media estimate 59 launched cruise missiles to be. At the same time, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation did not spend a penny on this unique experience. Never before at any exercises or training grounds Russian troops Air defense did not have the opportunity to observe a real massive attack of American Tomahawk cruise missiles, while it was possible to capture them for escort, determine flight parameters, and receive radar signatures of these air attack weapons. If we take into account the fact that this moment All Russian components of the surveillance system have been deployed in Syria, I have no doubt that the maximum will be extracted from this missile attack vital information. In particular, very useful experience was gained in tracking groups of cruise missiles in a real combat situation, which may prove invaluable in further combat training of troops, as well as in the modernization of radar detection, electronic warfare and anti-aircraft guided missiles.

The military is waiting for Prometheus

As experts explain, the S-300V4 and S-400 cover only the installations of the Russian Armed Forces, and Bashar al-Assad’s troops are responsible for the air defense of Syrian installations. Thus, the Khmeimim air defense systems located in the region, in principle, would not be able to withstand a massive strike, since the distance to the Syrian Shayrat air base is about 100 kilometers. It should be noted that although formally maximum range destruction of S-300V4 and S-400 is 400 kilometers, this rule only works if the air target operates at medium and high altitudes, since the S-400 is primarily designed to destroy high-altitude targets - airplanes and helicopters. Another thing is cruise missiles that fly at altitudes of 30-50 meters, which makes them difficult to detect because the terrain gets in the way. SAM radars at a great distance do not see missiles, which are very maneuverable and fly below the visibility zone under the cover of the so-called radio horizon. To increase radio visibility, various measures are used - in particular, in air defense systems, the radar is raised on towers. There is such a tower in Khmeimim, but it does not allow increasing the detection range to the required values, so the S-300 and S-400 divisions in Khmeimim and Tartus could simply not notice the distant target. However, experts emphasize, this does not mean at all that Russian air defense systems are not suitable for modern warfare. The fact is that a cruise missile is a very difficult target, and when the launches are sudden and massive, the air defense is powerless. In addition, Russia has deployed too few forces in Syria air defense, and systems such as the S-400 cover a certain and very limited area.

In addition, there is a possibility that some of the systems deployed in Syria are armed with old missiles, which significantly worsens the characteristics of this advanced air defense system. Let us recall that for several years they could not create a new extended-range missile for this system, which would allow achieving the declared tactical and technical characteristics of the S-400. Recently, official sources made statements that tests of a new long-range missile have been completed. It is currently reported that new rocket is completely ready, but the production speed of missiles for the S-400 and these air defense systems themselves is quite low, and accordingly, the re-equipment of air defense is proceeding at a slow pace.

Against this background, it is worth noting that almost immediately after the American Tomahawk attack, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced the imminent adoption of a new anti-aircraft missile system S-500 "Prometheus". The military hopes that the new air defense system will be significantly superior to the S-300V4 and S-400 and will reliably prevent massive cruise missile attacks. This complex, according to the developer represented by JSC Concern VKO Almaz-Antey, is a new generation of surface-to-air anti-aircraft missile systems and is designed to intercept ballistic missiles with a range of up to 3,500 kilometers at medium and close ranges. According to the design documentation, Prometheus is capable of destroying missiles medium range, operational-tactical missiles, as well as missiles in near space and, thus, will be an element of strategic missile defense. However, as experts note, the timing of its adoption into service is constantly being postponed. It is possible that problems have arisen again with the S-500 missiles, since they have only recently begun to undergo flight tests. However, it should be noted that the American company Lockheed Martin Missiles, commissioned by the Pentagon, has been developing the THAAD (Theater High Altitude Area Defense) mobile long-range interception missile defense system for almost 25 years, but it is still not possible to create a workable system.

Alexander Gorkov, former head of the anti-aircraft missile forces of the Russian Air Force:

– The Tomahawk flight route was carefully planned and lined up to keep the missiles as far as possible from air defense systems and radars, and therefore the route passed outside the zones combat use Russian air defense systems, carefully avoided the fire zones. And this is not surprising - similar tactics, completely eliminating risks, were used in Yugoslavia and earlier in the Middle East. This was, perhaps, a double reinsurance, since the S-400 is capable of detecting cruise missiles only at a line-of-sight range. It is also difficult to say why this was simultaneously applied a large number of rockets. Since there is no objective control data, it is impossible to say that such a quantity was released to guarantee a breakthrough Russian system Air defense, no reason.

If the Ministry of Defense has information that 36 missiles did not reach the target, I see no reason not to trust it. In any case, such failures are theoretically quite possible and explainable. For example, a equipment failure occurred or data for the guidance program was entered with errors. Before launch, a terrain map is entered into the on-board devices, the flight route is determined, and devices such as a parametric altimeter, which reads the distance relative to the sea surface, and a radio altimeter are on board - the difference between these values ​​indicates the terrain. The Tomahawks flew at extremely low altitudes from 50 to 100 meters, skirting the terrain, which is why any error in data entry or failure in the radio altimeter could lead to the loss of the missile.

In addition, the Americans use an inertial guidance system, when in the final section, to increase the accuracy of hitting a certain target, either a radar or optical guidance head can be triggered - errors are also possible at this stage. Most likely, exclusively technical methods of missile guidance were used, data from satellites were used, which could also lead to incorrect aiming. Therefore, preparing such operations requires a long time; it is necessary to determine objects and terrain in advance, enter this data and “sew up” them into the program. Moreover, it is not so easy to launch missiles from a destroyer - the coordinates of the destroyer must be verified with surgical precision. If the ship's coordinates are determined incorrectly, this means that the entire route and correction areas will be calculated incorrectly. I think the whole point is that the operation was prepared in a hurry. The order for a massive launch probably came as a surprise even to the command of the 6th Fleet of the US Navy, and American sailors did not have time for thorough preparation.

It was to this unexpected conclusion that General Konashenkov’s phrase about the Tomahawks reaching the target led the experts. I will not bore readers with details of why this act is impossible - there are both political and purely technical reasons. The latter, however, are of a secondary nature - having missed the first launches, ours could well have worked on the launched missiles. But this is already a direct military clash, for which Russia and Syria did not sign an agreement, helping only in the fight against terrorists. The USA, de jure, is not such. But de facto, it’s clear where those who disagree can put themselves - after Yugoslavia, even the most slow-witted understood. And after Libya...

Konaenkov’s speech is interesting and self-sufficient in itself:

But the conspiracy theory is also beautiful. According to Russian objective monitoring data, only 23 missiles reached the Syrian airbase. The crash site of the remaining 36 cruise missiles is unknown,” Konashenkov said. Plus the video of the destruction in his own speech is clearly insufficient for 59 missiles. Based on this, let's start:

"... I trust the RF Ministry of Defense, writes chervonec:

a) it is possible to determine on the spot the number of missiles that reached the airfield
b) the shooting shows completely uncritical destruction

It is doubly surprising that there are no reports that Russia used the S-300 and S-400 complexes (only target illumination?) and its aircraft as air defense.

Another moment --- attack it came from the sea, from which the missile can’t fly very far --- 100 km and only 30 km over Syrian territory (from the Lebanese border). Accordingly, to counter the Syrian air defense - nothing at all, time and distance.

So where did 61% of the missiles disappear? The rest... are missing?
23 flew, and 4 hit the target.

As a result, 59 cruise missiles costing almost 100 megabucks were spent on 6 old MiG-23s under REPAIR. And I feel sorry for the dining room."

The dining room is really a shame. As well as the dead. But the version is just developing. We start from the number 36. By the way, there was another missile that crashed there, the 37th. Remember: “At the number 37, the hops immediately fly off my face...”?:

The missiles clearly caused too little damage for their smart 59 brains, in fact, barely enough for two dozen:

Here's how Tomahawks hit targets:

Some of the open-air aircraft and some of the caponiers also survived here.

But let's develop topic 36:

"So, given: - how many missiles were fired from American destroyers: 59; - how many missiles reached the ill-fated Syrian airfield: 23. The remainder: 36 missiles. Where did they go? Did they just scatter across the desert or fall into the sea? I have little faith in this, the Americans are too prudent and pragmatic to simply lose more than half of the missiles somewhere, especially since Tomahawks have long been used in punitive operations, starting with the Gulf War in 1991, then there was Yugoslavia, again Iraq, Libya.

It’s rare that Americans lost dozens of Tomahawks at once. Follow the numbers: 59 - 23 = 36... Intriguing biggrin Remember the number 36. Let's now look at performance characteristics The S-400 Triumph air defense system can be found on any military website, no one hides this data. Small screenshot:


American Tomahawks in Syria could have been shot down by our S-400 Triumph 59 - 36 = 23

Number of simultaneously fired targets ( full staff ZRS) 36. What does this mean? This means that 1 S-400 division is capable of simultaneously shooting down 36 targets. One S-400 division includes many different equipment: command post, radars, launchers themselves, technical assistance, etc. Launchers, those that we always see at parades (see photo below, for those who haven’t seen them), there are 12 pieces in the division, i.e. 12 x 4 = 48 missiles. This means that the number of missiles for 1 accurate salvo is quite enough. The height of destruction of targets is from 5 meters; cruise missiles are included in this category of targets.

American Tomahawks in Syria could have been shot down by our S-400 Triumph

Why am I so sure that the 1st S-400 division is based in Syria? Because this is open information that is in the public domain:

Based on all the data, we can conclude that there is 1 S-400 Triumph division in Syria, capable of destroying up to 48 targets, but 36 of them in one salvo. 36.

Here's another helpful information, for those who say that the Tomahawks were out of reach of our air defense.

Why am I so sure that the Tomahawks were destroyed by the S-400? And let's ask a counter question, why did the Americans suddenly want to launch 59 (!!!) cruise missiles at the Syrian army airfield? This huge swarm of metal, fire and explosives was released at one military airfield.

To completely paralyze such an airfield, it would take a couple of missiles to hit the runway, and that’s all. By the way, why exactly 59 and not 60, for example? Probably 1 rocket did not take off or fell somewhere on the deck. Such a swarm of missiles was needed to somehow get through our air defense. The maximum we can do in such a situation is to shoot down 48 missiles from an obvious enemy. It was decided to shoot down 36 out of 59 in one salvo.

The rest were most likely blinded and deafened by our electronic warfare, because... It is not entirely clear why the missiles did not hit the target exactly. Well, this is an assumption, I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the information. Or maybe the Americans didn’t set exact goals, but simply wanted to demonstratively pass through our air defense. And they passed, with losses, but they passed. As planned. By the way, this was a reason for all liberal media to shout that our air defense is leaky like a sieve and to start holding a funeral for the S-400.

But none of them counted our specific resources and downed enemy missiles. If we proceed from the fact that 59 missiles were launched not at the airfield, but to break through our air defense, then this can be considered a direct strike on us. The breakthrough in this case was successful; 23 missiles passed through our defenses. USA in Once again They openly show aggression towards Russia, but we do not see an adequate response. Or is it too early to expect any reaction, although... wait for the replenishment of S-400 divisions in Syria, there are clearly not enough resources there."

This is the version. For me, it’s incredible - it’s impossible to hide the launch of dozens of missiles - the network would already be bursting from the footage recorded on phones, fortunately there are plenty of people around our base, and especially no one was hiding this phenomenal success. But like a beautiful fairy tale, it has the right to life.

United States would have led to a nuclear conflict, which did not happen only thanks to the composure of the Russian Supreme Commander, Corresponding Member told Izvestia Russian Academy military sciences Sergei Sudakov. At the same time, Russian air defense systems are subordinate only to Russia and protect its military facilities, military expert Vladislav Shurygin noted in a conversation with Izvestia.

Hot war

Most main question, which everyone asks - why Russian air defense All these missiles were not shot down. The inhabitants believe that this should be done and thereby repel aggression. But, by and large, if we started shooting them down now, we might not wake up this morning. Because what could happen today is what is called " nuclear conflict"because it would be a collision of two nuclear powers on a third territory, says Sudakov.

Russian air defense systems are subordinate only to Russia and cover Russian military facilities; everything else is PR, which has no relation to reality, Shurygin notes.

Therefore, Israel and Türkiye periodically bomb Syria - we cover our airfield and our facilities. I think that a political decision was also made not to shoot down these missiles, because ultimately this would be a conflict between the United States and Russia at the level of repelling air defense, the expert believes.

According to Sudakov, Donald Trump has approached a state called a “hot war.”

If not for the composure of the Russian Supreme Commander-in-Chief, the order to “shoot down the Tomahawks” would have been given. And this means the beginning of a war,” the expert notes.

The United States warned through diplomatic channels that they were going to strike, Russia also warned the Syrians, and they withdrew the train from the base and transferred equipment from there, Shurygin continues.

This does not indicate the strength of our position, but even with all these goodies, the aftertaste remains very bitter,” the expert concluded.

Attacks and parallels

About a week ago, one of the Syrian bases, on the territory of which the Russian Air Force was present, was struck by the Israeli Air Force, and there are parallels between these attacks, they have not yet been paid attention to, but they are significant, notes leading expert of the Center for Contemporary Politics Viktor Olevich.

Israel, a key US ally in the Middle East, takes a position on Syria that is close to the US, and these strikes that it carried out are partly reminiscent of today's history. They can be considered, if not as a kind of training, then as a test for reaction, and Russia in this case chose to leave the response for the future. Russia will definitely respond adequately, the expert explains.

If the American bombing of Syrian troops in the province of Deir ez-Zor in September 2016 put an end to the agreements that were reached in Switzerland to resolve the Syrian crisis, then today’s missile attack put an end to Moscow’s hopes for a quick normalization of relations with Washington, Olevich continues.

According to the political scientist, a number personnel changes, preceding today's military aggression against Syria (for example, the removal of Michael Flynn, who took a moderate position on Syria), "show that Trump is unable to stand up to the American establishment": replacing key figures in his administration who did not suit the leadership of the Democratic and Republican Party, the president is now taking steps that the establishment, as well as the intelligence agencies, are happy with.

Wrong move

Trump needs to take some steps to foreign policy, which would make him respected internally. I believe that the step he took was absolutely in vain. It was not his decision, but the decision of his advisers, and it was a big mistake. The number of times the United States has violated UN articles, invaded and destroyed the sovereignty of others cannot be counted. But what we see now is another aggression, which was carried out against an ally of two quite serious opponents - Russia and Iran, explains Sudakov from the Russian Academy of Military Sciences.

With such an act of aggression, the United States throws away the possibility of full-fledged negotiations even within the framework of “ G20", at which Vladimir Putin was supposed to meet with Donald Trump, the expert continues: instead of building normal relations with Russia, Trump overnight crossed out these relations; now the countries cannot even become “sworn friends.”

This is a big blow to Russian-American relations, to what was beginning to take shape, and it is clear that there were hopes for the new president that relations with him would be better than with the previous one. In addition, this is a blow to the peace process in Syria, which is already proceeding with great difficulty. Now this is also under threat,” the political scientist agrees with Sudakov and Chief Editor edition of Iran Today Nikita Smagin.

According to the expert, now we need to look at the further reaction of the United States: if this is an isolated action, then this is a big problem, but nevertheless the negotiation process can continue. If the United States intends to continue to carry out some strikes, this is a different story and the consequences could be even more serious, Smagin does not rule out.

Switch attention

Trump played out another scenario with this attack, Sergei Sudakov is sure.

The fact is that the situation in Mosul is now catastrophic - heavy losses, great amount casualties among the civilian population, and Trump was advised to distract the situation, including from Mosul, with this bombing,” the expert notes.

The hypothesis that the strike was an attempt to divert attention from the situation in Mosul is quite workable, supported by Smagin.

I think that this factor almost certainly influenced the decision-making, but I do not think that it was the only one, it was one of the factors. When you need to divert attention, this is an additional incentive to carry out some kind of demonstrative action,” the expert clarifies.

In any case, what happened threw away all relations from the point of view of world standards of law at the beginning of the twentieth century, Sudakov continues.

We see the return of the “world gendarme”, who imposes his will with the help of force, the political scientist concludes.

It is alleged that no more than half of the missiles fired from the Ross and Porter destroyers reached the Al-Shayrat air base of the Syrian government forces in Homs province. naval forces US Tomahawk cruise missiles. Despite the fact that sources deny this information, insisting on one missile that did not reach the target, according to the Russian military, the combat effectiveness of the American missile strike on the Syrian airbase is extremely low.

At the same time, Moscow did not comment on the effectiveness of the latest domestic S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile system in Latakia, which is deployed to protect the Russian Khmeimim airbase.

Moreover, the American command warned the leadership two hours in advance Russian group in Syria about the upcoming strike.

The question of why not a single American Tomahawk was shot down by the Russian S-400 air defense system is asked, for example, in the specialized blog The Aviationist. According to the publication, cruise missiles flew through the “capture zone” of Russian air defense systems.

"By at least on paper, the missiles are unlikely to be able to evade the S-400,” the publication writes. “Perhaps, given that they [the Russian military] were notified in advance, they simply decided to let them pass.”

The distance from Khmeimim, where only one division of the S-400 air defense system is deployed, to the Shayrat airbase is about 200 km. This is practically the far limit of the destruction zone of the S-400 anti-aircraft missile system. To hit a target at such a range, its height must be at least 8-9 km. If the target height is lower, the S-400 radar complex and the multifunctional radar of the anti-aircraft missile division simply will not see the target. This is due to the curvature earth's surface.

Approximately the same situation arises with the S-300V air defense system deployed in Tartus. From Tartus to Shayrat air base is about 100 km. At such a distance and due to the terrain, anti-aircraft missile system The S-300V will see targets at an altitude of only 6-7 km or more. And this is also explained by the same curvature of the earth’s surface and the heterogeneity of the terrain.

“Tomahawk cruise missiles fly at an altitude of 50-60 meters,” explained the former chief of the General Staff of the Air Defense Forces, Colonel General of Aviation, to Gazeta.Ru.

The far limit of the detection zone for targets of this type is 24-26 km in moderately rough terrain.

Immediately after detection of a cruise missile, it is necessary to open fire with a burst of at least two anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAM). Otherwise, it will simply leave the relatively small affected area in a matter of seconds. The meeting of the missile defense system with the Tomahawk in this case will occur at a distance of 12-14 km.

“That is, by and large, the capabilities of firing cruise missiles are extremely limited in range,” emphasizes Igor Maltsev.

According to the military leader, the anti-aircraft missile divisions and batteries stationed in Khmeimim and Tartus could not, even theoretically, “reach” American cruise missiles.

According to Igor Maltsev, in order to effectively protect the Shayrat air base from missile attacks, at least 4-5 S-400 anti-aircraft missile divisions must be deployed in the area of ​​the air base. In addition to this grouping, it is necessary to create a radar reconnaissance system to ensure required depth detection of cruise missiles. At a minimum, this will require a radio technical regiment consisting of several battalions and radar companies. This grouping must be tested in exercises and the effectiveness of the created fire system must be clarified.

In addition, the military leader emphasizes, the object must be protected by forces of no less than a fighter aviation regiment on aircraft such as Su-30SM or Su-35.

And only then can we say that reliable air defense of the protected facility has been created. Nothing like this was created at the Al-Shayrat airbase. Therefore, doubt the effectiveness domestic weapons There are no reasons yet. Anti-aircraft rocket troops have not yet entered into battle, nor have Russian fighter aircraft participated in it.

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, the Russian Ministry of Defense emphasizes.

Illustration copyright Reuters Image caption Footage taken at the base shows burnt out hangars with planes in them.

The United States used 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles to strike the Syrian Shayrat airbase. These precision-guided munitions can penetrate missile defense enemy is an expensive weapon: each missile costs the American budget about a million dollars.

Thus, the Americans decided to punish the regime of Bashar al-Assad, which they accuse of using chemical weapons against residents of the small village of Khan Sheikhoun, resulting in the death of more than 70 people, many of them children.

It is difficult to judge what damage was caused to the airbase - conflicting information is coming from Syrian sources on the ground, from official Damascus and from the Russian military.

However, it can be assumed that the missiles destroyed several aircraft, warehouses and other buildings at the airfield.

How did this happen?

On the night of April 7, the US Navy destroyers Ross and Porter fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Mediterranean Sea at the Syrian airbase of Shayrat in Homs province.

The airbase belonged to Syrian government forces, but the planes Russian Air Force They used it as a “jump airfield” during combat missions.

Information about casualties of Russian military personnel or damage to Russian military property was not officially reported.

The United States warned Russia about the impending attack, and perhaps, if there were Russian specialists at the base, they had time to evacuate them. A Pentagon spokesman said that during the planning of the operation, the US military did everything to avoid the deaths of Russian and Syrian troops.

The US airstrike killed 10 soldiers, the Syrian army said. The Syrian state news agency SANA reports the deaths of nine civilians, including four children. According to the agency, the deceased lived in a village near the airbase. Many houses in the base area were seriously damaged.

On Friday morning, after the attack on the airfield, it became known that Russia was suspending the memorandum with the United States on preventing incidents and ensuring the safety of aviation flights during the operation in Syria.

It was this mechanism that the Americans used to warn about shelling of a base where Russians could be located. Communication channels remain between the two countries, but this one, closed after the shelling, was created specifically for the rapid exchange of operational information.

Is there a missile defense system in Syria?

Russian missile defense systems S-200, S-300, S-400 and Buk-M2 are deployed at the Khmeimim airbase in Syrian Latakia. The main task of these complexes is air cover of Russian military installations.

In addition, they are periodically located near the coast guided missile cruisers"Moscow" and "Varyag", which are also equipped sea ​​version S-300 - Fort air defense system, although these ships are not there now, judging by open sources.

Finally, the air base also houses short-range systems that protect, among other things, long-range air defense systems, including from cruise missiles.

The Syrian air defense forces are equipped with long-range S-200VE complexes, medium-sized Buk-M2E, as well as various short-range systems.

The S-200VE systems were deployed in mid-March to intercept Israeli fighters that were carrying out strikes in Syria, but not a single missile hit the target. One interceptor missile.

Why weren't the Tomahawks shot down?

Russian complexes located in Latakia are capable of fighting cruise missiles, including the Tomahawk class, but only those that are heading towards an object in their immediate vicinity.

The Shayrat airfield is located at a great distance from Latakia (about 100 kilometers), and cruise missiles flying at low altitude are simply impossible to track with radar.

The interception was also complicated by the short approach time of the missiles, as well as their large number - a total of 59 Tomahawks were fired.

The air base itself, apparently, was not covered from the air by systems capable of shooting down cruise missiles.

On Friday afternoon, a representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense, Igor Konashenkov, said that “in the near future, a set of measures will be implemented to strengthen and increase the effectiveness of the air defense system of the Syrian armed forces in order to cover the most sensitive objects of the Syrian infrastructure.”

He did not say which complexes would be deployed. It is also unknown which facilities Russia will strengthen the defense of.

What is the damage?

Information about the damage to the air base is very contradictory.

The Russian Ministry of Defense said the strike destroyed a logistics warehouse, a training building, a canteen, six Mig-23 aircraft in repair hangars, and a radar station.

Previously, Russian state media reported that nine aircraft were destroyed in the airstrike. Syrian journalist Thabet Salem told the BBC, citing activists in northern Syria, that 14 aircraft were destroyed, as well as runways and warehouses.

Finally, a short time after the strike, the Syrian military reported that the base had suffered "severe damage."

Correspondent of the Russian state TV channel Vesti 24 Evgeny Poddubny, who is in Syria, visited the base on the morning of April 7.

The footage he shot showed damaged hangars, some of which were empty of aircraft, as well as several burnt-out fighter jets.

In one of the frames, the silhouette of a dilapidated aircraft is clearly visible, and it does not look like the MiG-23 reported Russian ministry defense The aircraft is more similar to the Su-22 heavy strike fighter.

Such aircraft are in service with the Syrian Air Force, and footage taken by Poddubny shows the same undamaged fighters at the same airfield.

What remains of Syrian aviation?

It is very difficult to judge how serious this blow is for the Syrian Air Force. Firstly, it is not known exactly how many and which fighters were destroyed, and secondly, exact data on how many aircraft are in the Air Force as of April 2017 is also not publicly available. Finally, there is even less information about how many aircraft are in airworthy condition.

The website globalsecurity.org writes that in 2017 the Syrian Air Force had strike fighters of the following modifications: 53-70 MiG-21 units; 30-41 - MiG-23; 20 - MiG-29; 36-42 - Su-22; 11-20 - Su-24 (the latter are front-line bombers). In addition, according to the same source, Bashar al-Assad’s troops also have fighters for air combat: 20-30 - MiG-29; 2 - MiG-25; 39-50 - MiG-23.

Thus, even if we take the most big number losses of 14 aircraft, then even in this case, the combat effectiveness of the Air Force after the attack by cruise missiles did not decrease critically.

In addition, the Russian aviation group, which was reduced in the spring of 2016, continues to operate in Syria. According to last year's data, it included at least a Su-24 squadron, as well as Su-30SM and Su-35S fighters and helicopters.

How much did the airstrike cost the US?

The cost of Tomahawk cruise missiles varies depending on how advanced the ammunition is.

It is unknown what kind of missiles the destroyers fired on Friday morning, and therefore, according to data from open sources, the cost of a salvo of 59 missiles can range from $30 million to $100 million.

The most approximate cost of the MiG-23 and Su-22 fighters ranges from one to three million dollars.