NATO defines air defence as "all measures designed to nullify or reduce the effectiveness of hostile air action." They include ground and air based weapon systems, associated sensor systems, command and control arrangements and passive measures. It may be to protect naval, ground and air forces wherever they are. However, for most countries the main effort has tended to be 'homeland defence'. NATO refers to airborne air defence as counter-air and naval air defence as anti-aircraft warfare. Missile defence is an extension of air defence as are initiatives to adapt air defence to the task of intercepting potentially any projectile in flight.

However, in some countries, such as Britain and Germany in World War II, the Soviet Union and NATO's European Command, ground based air defence and air defence aircraft have been under integrated command and control. Nevertheless, while overall air defence may be for homeland defence including military facilities, forces in the field, wherever they are, invariably deploy their own air defence capability if there is an air threat. A surface based air defence capability can also be deployed offensively to deny the use of airspace to an opponent.

Terminology

The term ''air defence'' was probably first used by Britain when Air Defence of Great Britain (ADGB) was created as a Royal Air Force command in 1925. However, arrangements in UK were also called 'anti-aircraft', abbreviated as AA, a term that remained in general use into the 1950s. After World War I it was sometimes prefixed by 'Light' or 'Heavy' (LAA or HAA) to classify a type of gun or unit.

NATO defines anti-aircraft warfare (AAW) as "measures taken to defend a maritime force against attacks by airborne weapons launched from aircraft, ships, submarines and land-based sites." In some armies the term All-Arms Air Defence (AAAD) is used for air defence by non-specialist troops. Other terms from the late 20th century include GBAD (Ground Based AD) with related terms SHORAD (Short Range AD) and MANPADS ("Man Portable AD Systems": typically shoulder launched missiles). Anti-aircraft missiles are variously called surface-to-air missile, abbreviated and pronounced "SAM" and Surface to Air Guide Weapon (SAGW).

Important non-English terms for air defence include German flak (from the German ''Fliegerabwehrkanone'', aircraft defence cannon; also cited as ''Flugzeugabwehrkanone'' or ''Flugabwehrkanone'') and the Russian term Protivovozdushnaya oborona (Cyrillic: Противовоздушная оборона), a literal translation of "anti-air defence", abbreviated as PVO. Nicknames for anti-aircraft guns include AA, AAA or triple-A, an abbreviation of ''anti-aircraft artillery'', "ack-ack" (from the World War I phonetic alphabet for AA), archie (a World War I British term probably coined by Amyas Borton and believed to derive via the Royal Flying Corps from the music-hall comedian George Robey's line "Archibald, certainly not!").

The maximum distance at which a gun or missile can engage an aircraft is an important figure. However, many different definitions are used but unless the same definition is used, performance of different guns or missiles cannot be compared. For AA guns only the ascending part of the trajectory can be usefully used. One term is 'ceiling', maximum ceiling being the height a projectile would reach if fired vertically, not practically usefully in itself as few AA guns are able to fire vertically, and maximum fuze duration may be too short, but potentially useful as a standard to compare different weapons. The British adopted "effective ceiling", meaning the altitude at which a gun could deliver a series or shells against a moving target; this could be constrained by maximum fuze running time as well as the gun's capability. By the late 1930s the British definition was "that height at which a directly approaching target at 400 mph can be engaged for 20 seconds before the gun reaches 70 degrees elevation". However, effective ceiling for heavy AA guns was affected by non-ballistic factors:

The maximum running time of the fuze, this set the maximum usable time of flight.

The capability of fire control instruments to determine target height at long range.

The precision of the cyclic rate of fire, the fuze length had to be calculated and set for where the target would be at the time of flight after firing, to do this meant knowing exactly when the round would fire.

General description

The essence of air defence is to detect hostile aircraft and destroy them. The critical issue is to hit a target moving in three-dimensional space; an attack must not only match these three coordinates, but must do so at the time the target is at that position. This means that projectiles either have to be guided to hit the target, or aimed at the predicted position of the target at the time the projectile reaches it, taking into account speed and direction of both the target and the projectile.

Throughout the 20th century air defence was one of the fastest-evolving areas of military technology, responding to the evolution of aircraft and exploiting various enabling technologies, particularly radar, guided missiles and computing (initially electromechanical analog computing from the 1930s on, as with equipment described below). Air defence evolution covered the areas of sensors and technical fire control, weapons, and command and control. At the start of the 20th century these were either very primitive or non-existent.

Initially sensors were optical and acoustic devices developed in World War I and continued into the 1930s, but were quickly superseded by radar, which in turn was supplemented by optronics in the 1980s.

Command and control remained primitive until the late 1930s, when Britain created an integrated system for ADGB that linked the ground-based air defence of the army's AA Command, although field-deployed air defence relied on less sophisticated arrangements. NATO later called these arrangements an "air defence ground environment", defined as "the network of ground radar sites and command and control centres within a specific theatre of operations which are used for the tactical control of air defence operations".

Rules of Engagement are critical to prevent air defences engaging friendly or neutral aircraft. Their use is assisted but not governed by IFF (identification friend or foe) electronic devices originally introduced in World War II. While these rules originate at the highest authority, different rules can apply to different types of air defence covering the same area at the same time. AAAD usually operates under the tightest rules.

NATO calls these rules Weapon Control Orders (WCO), they are:

weapons free: a weapon control order imposing a status whereby weapons systems may be fired at any target not positively recognized as friendly.

weapons hold: a weapon control order imposing a status whereby weapons systems may only be fired in self-defence or in response to a formal order.

weapons tight: a weapon control order imposing a status whereby weapons systems may be fired only at targets recognized as hostile.

Until the 1950s guns firing ballistic munitions were the standard weapon; guided missiles then became dominant, except at the very shortest ranges. However, the type of shell or warhead and its fuzing and, with missiles the guidance arrangement, were and are varied. Targets are not always easy to destroy totally, although damaged aircraft may be forced to abort their mission and, even if they manage to return and land in friendly territory, may be out of action for days or permanently. Ignoring small arms and smaller machine-guns, ground-based air defence guns have varied in calibre from 20 mm to at least 149 mm.

Ground-based air defence is deployed in several ways:

Self-defence by ground forces using their organic weapons, AAAD.

Accompanying defence, specialist aid defence elements accompanying armoured or infantry units.

Point defence around a key target, such as a bridge, critical government building or ship.

Area air defence, typically 'belts' of air defence to provide a barrier, but sometimes an umbrella covering an area. Areas can vary widely in size, belts along a nation's border, e.g. the Cold War MIM-23 Hawk and Nike belts that ran north–south across Germany, a military formation's manoeuvre area, or the area of a city or port. In ground operations air defence areas may be used offensively by rapid redeployment across current aircraft transit routes.

Air defence has included other elements, although after World War II most fell into disuse:

Tethered barrage balloons to deter and threaten aircraft flying below the height of the balloons, where they are susceptible to damaging collisions with steel tethers..

Searchlights to illuminate aircraft at night for both gun-layers and optical instrument operators. During World War II searchlights became radar controlled.

Large smoke screens created by large smoke canisters on the ground to screen targets and prevent accurate weapon aiming by aircraft.

Passive air defence is defined by NATO as "Passive measures taken for the physical defence and protection of personnel, essential installations and equipment in order to minimize the effectiveness of air and/or missile attack". It remains a vital activity by ground forces and includes camouflage and concealment to avoid detection by reconnaissance and attacking aircraft. Measures such as camouflaging important buildings was common in World War II. During the Cold War some airfields painted their runways and taxiways green.

Organization

While navies are invariably responsible for their own air defence, at least for ships at sea, organisational arrangements for land-based air defence vary between nations and over time.

The most extreme case was the Soviet Union, and this model may still be followed in some countries: it was a separate service, on a par with the navy or ground force. In the Soviet Union this was called Voyska PVO, and had both fighter aircraft and ground-based systems. This was divided into two arms, PVO Strany, the Strategic Air defence Service responsible for Air Defence of the Homeland, created in 1941 and becoming an independent service in 1954, and PVO SV, Air Defence of the Ground Forces. Subsequently these became part of the air force and ground forces respectively

The divided responsibility echoed Germany's arrangements in World War II, where the Luftwaffe was responsible for air defence of Germany while the army protected itself. At the other extreme the United States Army has an Air Defense Artillery branch that provided ground-based air defence for both homeland and the army in the field. Many other nations also deploy an air-defence branch in the army.

In Britain and some other armies, the single artillery branch has been responsible for both homeland and overseas ground-based air defence, although there was divided responsibility with the Royal Navy for homeland air defence in World War I. However, in World War II the RAF Regiment was formed to protect airfields everywhere, and this included light air defences. In the later decades of the Cold War this included the United States Air Force's operating bases in UK. However, all ground-based air defence was removed from Royal Air Force (RAF) jurisdiction in 2004. The army's homeland air defence role ended in 1955, but during the 1960s and 1970s the RAF's Fighter Command operated long-range air -defence missiles to protect key areas in the UK. During World War II the Royal Marines also provided air defence units; formally part of the mobile naval base defence organisation, they were handled as an integral part of the army-commanded ground based air defences.

The basic air defence unit is typically a battery with 2 to 12 guns or missile launchers and fire control elements. These batteries, particularly with guns, usually deploy in a small area, although batteries may be split; this is usual for some missile systems. SHORAD missile batteries often deploy across an area with individual launchers several kilometres apart. When MANPADS is operated by specialists, batteries may have several dozen teams deploying separately in small sections; self-propelled air defence guns may deploy in pairs.

Batteries are usually grouped into battalions or equivalent. In the field army a light gun or SHORAD battalion is often assigned to a manoeuvre division. Heavier guns and long-range missiles may be in air-defense brigades and come under corps or higher command. Homeland air defence may have a full military structure. For example the UK's AA Command, commanded by a full artillery general was part of ADGB. At its peak in 1941–42 it comprised three AA corps with 12 AA divisions between them.

History

Earliest use

The use of balloons by the Union Army during the American Civil War compelled the Confederates to develop methods of combating them. These included the use of artillery, small arms, and saboteurs. They were unsuccessful, but internal politics led the Union's Balloon Corps to be disbanded mid-war. The Confederates experimented with balloons as well.

The earliest known use of weapons specifically made for the anti-aircraft role occurred during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. After the disaster at Sedan, Paris was besieged and French troops outside the city started an attempt at resupply via balloon. Gustav Krupp mounted a modified 1-pounder (37mm) gun — the ''ballonkanone'' — on top of a horse-drawn carriage for the purpose of shooting down these balloons. By the early 20th century balloon, or airship, guns, for land and naval use were attracting attention. Various types of ammunition were proposed, high explosive, incendiary, bullet-chains, rod bullets and shrapnel. The need for some form of tracer or smoke trail was articulated. Fuzing options were also examined, both impact and time types. Mountings were generally pedestal type, but could be on field platforms. Trials were underway in most countries in Europe but only Krupp, Erhardt, Vickers Maxim, and Schneider had published any information by 1910. Krupp's designs included adaptations of their 65 mm 9-pounder, a 75 mm 12-pounder, and even a 105 mm gun. Erhardt also had a 12-pounder, while Vickers Maxim offered a 3-pounder and Schneider a 47 mm. The French balloon gun appeared in 1910, it was an 11-pounder but mounted on a vehicle, with a total uncrewed weight of 2 tons. However, since balloons were slow moving, sights were simple. But the challenges of faster moving airplanes were recognized.

By 1913 only France and Germany had developed field guns suitable for engaging balloons and aircraft and addressed issues of military organization. Britain's Royal Navy would soon introduce the QF 3-inch and QF 4-inch AA guns and also had Vickers 1-pounder quick firing "pom-pom"s that could be used in various mountings.

World War I

By the start of World War I, the 75 mm had become the standard German weapon, and came mounted on a large traverse that could be easily picked up on a wagon for movement. The British immediately recognised the issue, and as their first priority was defence of the British Isles, guns were quickly deployed to defend key targets in the London area. By December 1914 the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) was manning AA guns and searchlights assembled from various sources at some nine ports. The Royal Garrison Artillery (RGA) was given responsibility for AA defence in the field, using motorised two-gun sections. The first were formally formed in November 1914. Initially they used QF 1 pounder "pom-pom" (a 37 mm version of the Maxim Gun).

All armies soon deployed AA guns often based on their smaller field pieces, notably the French 75 mm and Russian 76.2 mm, typically simply propped up on some sort of embankment to get the muzzle pointed skyward. The British Army adopted the 13-pounder quickly producing new mountings suitable for AA use, the 13-pdr QF 6 cwt Mk III was issued in 1915. It remained in service throughout the war but 18-pdr guns were lined down to take the 13-pdr shell with a larger cartridge producing the 13-pr QF 9 cwt and these proved much more satisfactory. However, In general, these ad-hoc solutions proved largely useless. With little experience in the role, no means of measuring target, range, height or speed the difficulty of observing their shell bursts relative to the target gunners proved unable to get their fuze setting correct and most rounds burst well below their targets (discovering this, British fliers gave German anti-aircraft fire the mocking nickname, "Archie"). The exception to this rule were the guns protecting spotting balloons, in which case the altitude could be accurately measured from the length of the cable holding the balloon.

The first issue was ammunition. Before the war it was recognised that ammunition needed to explode in the air. Both high explosive (HE) and shrapnel were used, mostly the former. Airburst fuzes were either igniferious (based on a burning fuse) or mechanical (clockwork). Igniferious fuzes were not well suited for anti-aircraft use. The fuze length was determined by time of flight, but the burning rate of the gunpowder is affected by altitude. The British pom-poms had only contact-fused ammunition. Zeppelins, being hydrogen filled balloons, were targets for incendiary shells and the British introduced these with airburst fuzes, both shrapnel type-forward projection of incendiary 'pot' and base ejection of an incendiary stream. The British also fitted tracers to their shells for use at night. Smoke shells were also available for some AA guns, these bursts were used as targets during training.

German air attacks on the British Isles increased in 1915 and the AA efforts were deemed somewhat ineffective, so a Royal Navy gunnery expert, Admiral Sir Percy Scott, was appointed to make improvements, particularly an integrated AA defence for London. The air defences were expanded with more RNVR AA guns, 75 mm and 3-inch, the pom-poms being ineffective. The naval 3-inch was also adopted by the army, the QF 3 inch 20 cwt (76 mm), a new field mounting was introduced in 1916. Since most attacks were at night, searchlights were soon used, and acoustic methods of detection and locating were developed. By December 1916 there were 183 AA Sections defending Britain (most with the 3-inch), 74 with the BEF in France and 10 in the Middle East.

AA gunnery was a difficult business. The problem was of successfully aiming a shell to burst close to its target's future position, with various factors affecting the shells' predicted trajectory. This was called deflection gun-laying, 'off-set' angles for range and elevation were set on the gunsight and updated as their target moved. In this method when the sights were on the target, the barrel was pointed at the target's future position. Range and height of the target determined fuze length. The difficulties increased as aircraft performance improved.

The British dealt with range measurement first, when it was realised that range was the key to producing a better fuze setting. This led to the Height/Range Finder (HRF), the first model being the Barr & Stroud UB2, a 2-metre optical coincident rangefinder mounted on a tripod. It measured the distance to the target and the elevation angle, which together gave the height of the aircraft. These were complex instruments and various other methods were also used. The HRF was soon joined by the Height/Fuze Indicator (HFI), this was marked with elevation angles and height lines overlaid with fuze length curves, using the height reported by the HRF operator, the necessary fuze length could be read off.

However, the problem of deflection settings — 'aim-off' — required knowing the rate of change in the target's position. Both France and UK introduced tachymetric devices to track targets and produce vertical and horizontal deflection angles. The French Brocq system was electrical, the operator entered the target range and had displays at guns; it was used with their 75 mm. The British Wilson-Dalby gun director used a pair of trackers and mechanical tachymetry; the operator entered the fuze length, and deflection angles were read from the instruments.

The German Krupp 75 mm guns were supplied with an optical sighting system that improved their capabilities. The German Army also adapted a revolving cannon that came to be known to Allied fliers as the "flaming onion" from the shells in flight. This gun had five barrels that quickly launched a series of 37 mm artillery shells.

As aircraft started to be used against ground targets on the battlefield, the AA guns could not be traversed quickly enough at close targets and, being relatively few, were not always in the right place (and were often unpopular with other troops), so changed positions frequently. Soon the forces were adding various machine-gun based weapons mounted on poles. These short-range weapons proved more deadly, and the "Red Baron" is believed to have been shot down by an anti-aircraft Vickers machine gun. When the war ended, it was clear that the increasing capabilities of aircraft would require better means of acquiring targets and aiming at them. Nevertheless a pattern had been set: anti-aircraft weapons would be based around heavy weapons attacking high-altitude targets and lighter weapons for use when they came to lower altitudes.

Inter-war years

World War I demonstrated that aircraft could be an important part of the battlefield, but in some nations it was the prospect of strategic air attack that was the main issue, presenting both a threat and an opportunity. The experience of four years of air attacks on London by Zeppelins and Gotha bombers had particularly influenced the British and was one of if not the main driver for forming an independent air force. As the capabilities of aircraft and their engines improved it was clear that their role in future war would be even more critical as their range and weapon load grew. However, in the years immediately after World War I the prospect of another major war seemed remote, particularly in Europe where the most militarily capable nations were, and little financing was available.

Four years of war had seen the creation of a new and technically demanding branch of military activity. Air defence had made huge advances, albeit from a very low starting point. However, it was new and often lacked influential 'friends' in the competition for a share of limited defence budgets. Demobilisation meant that most AA guns were taken out of service, leaving only the most modern.

However, there were lessons to be learned. In particular the British, who had had AA guns in most theatres in action in daylight and used them against night attacks at home. Furthermore they had also formed an AA Experimental Section during the war and accumulated a lot of data that was subjected to extensive analysis. As a result they published, in 1924–5, the two volume Textbook of Anti-Aircraft Gunnery. It included five key recommendations for HAA equipment:

Shells of improved ballistic shape with HE fillings and mechanical time fuzes.

Higher rates of fire assisted by automation.

Height finding by long-base optical instruments.

Centralised control of fire on each gun position, directed by tachymetric instruments incorporating the facility to apply corrections of the moment for meteorological and wear factors.

More accurate sound-location for the direction of searchlights and to provide plots for barrage fire.

Two assumptions underpinned the British approach to HAA fire; first, aimed fire was the primary method and this was enabled by predicting gun data from visually tracking the target and having its height. Second, that the target would maintain a steady course, speed and height. This HAA was to engage targets up to 24,000 feet. Mechanical, as opposed to igniferous, time fuzes were required because the speed of powder burning varied with height so fuze length was not a simple function of time of flight. Automated fire ensured a constant rate of fire that made it easier to predict where each shell should be individually aimed.

In 1925 the British adopted a new instrument developed by Vickers. It was a mechanical analogue computer Predictor AA No 1. Given the target height its operators tracked the target and the predictor produced bearing, quadrant elevation and fuze setting. These were passed electrically to the guns where they were displayed on repeater dials to the layers who 'matched pointers' (target data and the gun's actual data) to lay the guns. This system of repeater electrical dials built on the arrangements introduced by British coast artillery in the 1880s, and coast artillery was the background of many AA officers. Similar systems were adopted in other countries and for example the later Sperry device, designated M3A3 in the US was also used by Britain as the Predictor AA No 2. Height finders were also increasing in size, in Britain, the World War I Barr & Stroud UB 2 (7 feet optical base) was replaced by the UB 7 (9 feet optical base) and the UB 10 (18 feet optical base, only used on static AA sites). Goertz in Germany and Levallois in France produced 5 metre instruments. However, in most countries the main effort in HAA guns until the mid-1930s was improving existing ones, although various new designs were on drawing boards.

From the early 1930s eight countries developed radar, these developments were sufficiently advanced by the late 1930s for development work on sound locating acoustic devices to be generally halted, although equipment was retained. Furthermore in Britain the volunteer Observer Corps formed in 1925 provided a network of observation posts to report hostile aircraft flying over Britain. Initially radar was used for airspace surveillance to detect approaching hostile aircraft. However, the German Würzburg radar was capable of providing data suitable for controlling AA guns and the British AA No 1 Mk 1 GL radar was designed to be used on AA gun positions.

The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK.

The USSR introduced a new 76 mm M1931 in the early 1930s and an 85 mm M1938 towards the end of the decade.

Britain had successful tested a new HAA gun, 3.6-inch, in 1918. In 1928 3.7-inch became the preferred solution, but it took 6 years to gain funding. Production of the QF 3.7-inch (94 mm) began in 1937; this gun was used both on mobile carriages with the field army and transportable guns on fixed mountings for static positions. At the same time the Royal Navy adopted a new 4.5-inch (114 mm) gun in a twin turret, which the army adopted in simplified single-gun mountings for static positions, mostly around ports where naval ammunition was available. However, the performance of both 3.7 and 4.5-in guns was limited by their standard fuze No 199, with a 30 second running time, although a new mechanical time fuze giving 43 seconds was nearing readiness. In 1939 a Machine Fuze Setter was introduced to eliminate manual fuze setting.

The US ended World War I with two 3-inch AA guns and improvements were developed throughout the inter-war period. However, in 1924 work started on a new 105 mm static mounting AA gun, but only a few were produced by the mid-1930s because by this time work had started on the 90 mm AA gun, with mobile carriages and static mountings able to engage air, sea and ground targets. The M1 version was approved in 1940. During the 1920s there was some work on a 4.7-inch which lapsed, but revived in 1937, leading to a new gun in 1944.

While HAA and is associated target acquisition and fire control was the primary focus of AA efforts, low-level close-range targets remained and by the mid-1930s were becoming an issue.

Until this time the British, at RAF insistence, continued their World War I use of machine guns, and introduced twin MG mountings for AAAD. The army was forbidden from considering anything larger than .50-inch. However, in 1935 their trials showed that the minimum effective round was an impact fuzed 2 lb HE shell. The following year they decided to adopt the Bofors 40 mm and a twin barrel Vickers 2-pdr (40 mm) on a modified naval mount. The air-cooled Bofors was vastly superior for land use, being much lighter than the water-cooled pom-pom, and UK production of the Bofors 40 mm was licensed. The Predictor AA No 3, as the Kerrison Predictor was officially known, was introduced with it.

The 40 mm Bofors had become available in 1931. In the late 1920s the Swedish Navy had ordered the development of a 40 mm naval anti-aircraft gun from the Bofors company. It was light, rapid-firing and reliable, and a mobile version on a four-wheel carriage was soon developed. Known simply as the 40 mm, it was adopted by some 17 different nations just before World War II and is still in use today in some applications such as on coastguard frigates.

Rheinmetall in Germany developed an automatic 20 mm in the 1920s and Oerlikon in Switzerland had acquired the patent to an automatic 20 mm gun designed in Germany during World War I. Germany introduced the rapid-fire 2 cm FlaK 30 and later in the decade it was redesigned by Mauser-Werke and became the 2 cm FlaK 38. Nevertheless, while 20 mm was better than a machine gun and mounted on a very small trailer made it easy to move, its effectiveness was limited. Germany therefore added a 3.7 cm. The first, the 3.7 cm FlaK 18 developed by Rheinmetall in the early 1930s, was basically an enlarged 2 cm FlaK 30. It was introduced in 1935 and production stopped the following year. A redesigned gun 3.7 cm FlaK 36 entered service in 1938, it too had a two wheel carriage. However, by the mid 1930s the Luftwaffe realised that there was still a coverage gap between 3.7 cm and 8.8 cm guns. They started development of a 5 cm gun on a four-wheel carriage.

After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, bu trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile antiaircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.

The Soviet Union also used a 37 mm, the 37 mm M1939, which appears to have been copied from the Bofors 40 mm. A Bofors 25 mm, essentially a scaled down 40 mm, was also copied as the 25 mm M1939.

During the 1930s solid fuel rockets were under development in the Soviet Union and Britain. In Britain the interest was for anti-aircraft fire, it quickly became clear that guidance would be required for precision. However, rockets, or 'unrotated projectiles' as they were called could the used for anti-aircraft barrages. A 2-inch rocket using HE or wire obstacle warheads was introduced first to deal with low-level or dive bombing attacks on smaller targets such as airfields. The 3-inch was in development at the end of the inter-war period.

World War II

Germany's high-altitude needs were originally going to be filled by a 75 mm gun from Krupp, designed in collaboration with their Swedish counterpart Bofors, but the specifications were later amended to require much higher performance. In response Krupp's engineers presented a new 88 mm design, the FlaK 36. The eighty-eight would go on to become one of the most famous artillery pieces in history. First used in Spain during the Spanish Civil War, the gun proved to be one of the best anti-aircraft guns in the world, as well as particularly deadly against light and medium tanks.

After the Dambusters raid in 1943 an entirely new system was developed that was required to knock down any low-flying aircraft with a single hit. The first attempt to produce such a system used a 50 mm gun, but this proved inaccurate and a new 55 mm gun replaced it. The system used a centralised control system including both search and targeting radar, which calculated the aim point for the guns after considering windage and ballistics, and then sent electrical commands to the guns, which used hydraulics to point themselves at high speeds. Operators simply fed the guns and selected the targets. This system, modern even by today's standards, was in late development when the war ended.

The British had already arranged license building of the 40 mm Bofors gun, and introduced these into service. These had the power to knock down aircraft of any size, yet were light enough to be mobile and easily swung. The gun became so important to the British war effort that they even produced a movie, ''The Gun'', that encouraged workers on the assembly line to work harder. The Imperial measurement production drawings the British had developed were supplied to the Americans who produced their own (unlicensed) copy of the 40 mm at the start of the war, moving to licensed production in mid-1941.

Service trials demonstrated another problem however: that ranging and tracking the new high-speed targets was almost impossible. At short range, the apparent target area is relatively large, the trajectory is flat and the time of flight is short, allowing to correct lead by watching the tracers. At long range, the aircraft remains in firing range for a long time, so the necessary calculations can in theory be done by slide rules - though, because small errors in distance cause large errors in shell fall height and detonation time, exact ranging is crucial. For the ranges and speeds that the Bofors worked at, neither solution was good enough. The solution was automation, in the form of a mechanical computer, the Kerrison Predictor. Operators kept it pointed at the target, and the Predictor then calculated the proper aim point automatically and displayed it as a pointer mounted on the gun. The gun operators simply followed the pointer and loaded the shells. The Kerrison was fairly simple, but it pointed the way to future generations that incorporated radar, first for ranging and later for tracking. Similar predictor systems were introduced by Germany during the war, also adding radar ranging as the war progressed.

Although they receive little attention, US Army anti-aircraft systems were actually quite competent. Their smaller tactical needs were filled with four M2 .50 caliber machine guns linked together (known as the "Quad Fifty"), which were often mounted on the back of a half-track to form the Half Track, M16 GMC, Anti-Aircraft. Although of less power than Germany's 20 mm systems, the typical 4 or 5 combat batteries of a typical Army AAA battalion were often spread many kilometers apart from each other, rapidly attaching and detaching to larger ground combat units to provide welcome defense from enemy aircraft.

AAA battalions were also used to help suppress ground targets. Their larger 90 mm M3 gun would prove, as did the eighty-eight, to make an excellent anti-tank gun as well, and was widely used late in the war in this role. For smaller targets, the U.S. Army made use of its Quad-4 halftracks, which were truck-mounted turrets equipped with 4 parallel-mounted 50 mm machine guns. These weapons, though few in number, played a significant role in beating back the Germans in the Battle of the Bulge. Attached or nearby General Patton's Third Army when he began his unprecedented race to Bastogne, about a dozen Quad-50 units were used to, among other tasks, literally open up "holes" in the dense forest with their 4 parallel machine guns through which some minimal visibility was made possible. Also available to the Americans at the start of the war was the 120 mm M1 gun ''stratosphere gun'', which was the most powerful AA gun with an impressive altitude capability. No 120 M1 was ever fired at an enemy aircraft. The 90 mm and 120 mm guns would continue to be used into the 1950s.

The US Navy had also put some thought into the problem, and came up with the 1.1"/75 (28mm) gun to replace the inadequate .50 caliber. This weapon had the teething troubles that most new weapons have, but the issues with the gun were never sorted out. It was replaced by the Bofors 40 mm wherever possible. The 5"/38 caliber gun turned out to be an excellent anti-aircraft weapon, once the Proximity fuze had been perfected. The Germans developed massive reinforced concrete blockhouses, some more than six stories high, which were known as ''Hochbunker'' "High Bunkers" or "''Flaktürme''" flak towers, on which they placed anti-aircraft artillery. Those in cities attacked by the Allied land forces became fortresses. Several in Berlin were some of the last buildings to fall to the Soviets during the Battle of Berlin in 1945. The British built structures in the Thames Estuary and other tidal areas upon which they based guns. After the war most were left to rot. Some were outside territorial waters, and had a second life in the 1960s as platforms for pirate radio stations. During World War II, the use of rocket-powered missiles for shooting down aircraft began. Research was conducted mostly by the US, Britain and Germany. The first step was unguided missile systems like the British 2 inch RP, which was fired in large numbers from ''Z batteries''. The firing of one of these devices during an air raid is suspected to have caused the Bethnal Green disaster in 1943. Facing the threat of Japanese Kamikaze attacks the British and US developed surface-to-air rockets like British Stooge or the American Lark as counter measures, but none of them were ready at the end of the war. The Germans missile research was the most advanced of the war as the Germans put considerable effort in the research and development of rocket systems for all purposes. Among them were several guided and unguided systems. Unguided systems involved the Fliegerfaust as the first MANPADS. Guided systems were several sophisticated radio, wire, or radar guided missiles like the Wasserfall rocket. Due to the severe war situation for Germany all of those systems were only produced in small numbers and most of them were only used by training or trial units.

Another aspect of anti-aircraft defense was the use of barrage balloons to act as physical obstacle initially to bomber aircraft over cities and later for ground attack aircraft over the Normandy invasion fleets. The balloon, a simple blimp tethered to the ground, worked in two ways. Firstly, it and the steel cable were a danger to any aircraft that tried to fly among them. Secondly, to avoid the balloons, bombers had to fly at a higher altitude, which was more favorable for the guns. Barrage balloons were limited in application, and had minimal success at bringing down aircraft, being largely immobile and passive defenses.

Post-war

Post-war analysis demonstrated that even with newest anti-aircraft systems employed by both sides, the vast majority of bombers reached their targets successfully, on the order of 90%. This was bad enough during the war, but the introduction of the nuclear bomb upset things considerably. Now even a single bomber reaching the target would be unacceptable.

The developments during World War II continued for a short time into the post-war period as well. In particular the US Army set up a huge air defence network around its larger cities based on radar-guided 90 mm and 120 mm guns. But, given the general lack of success of guns against even propeller bombers, it was clear that any defence was going to have to rely almost entirely on interceptor aircraft. Despite this, US efforts continued into the 1950s with the 75 mm Skysweeper system, an almost fully automated system including the radar, computers, power, and auto-loading gun on a single powered platform. The Skysweeper replaced all smaller guns then in use in the Army, notably the 40 mm Bofors.

Things changed with the introduction of the guided missile. Although Germany had been desperate to introduce them during the war, none were ready for service, and British countermeasures were likely to defeat them even if they were. With a few years of development, however, these systems started to mature into practical weapons. The US started an upgrade of their defenses using the Nike Ajax missile, and soon the larger anti-aircraft guns disappeared. The same thing occurred in the USSR after the introduction of their SA-2 Guideline systems.

As this process continued, the missile found itself being used for more and more of the roles formerly filled by guns. First to go were the large weapons, replaced by equally large missile systems of much higher performance. Smaller missiles soon followed, eventually becoming small enough to be mounted on armored cars and tank chassis. These started replacing, or at least supplanting, similar gun-based SPAAG systems in the 1960s, and by the 1990s had replaced almost all such systems in modern armies. Man-portable missiles, MANPADs as they are known today, were introduced in the 1960s and have supplanted or even replaced even the smallest guns in most advanced armies.

In the 1982 Falklands War, the Argentine armed forces deployed the newest west European weapons including the Oerlikon GDF-002 35 mm twin cannon and SAM Roland, while the British forces used the brand-new FIM-92 Stinger. Both sides also used the Blowpipe missile.

During the 2008 South Ossetia war air power faced off against powerful SAM systems, like the 1980s Buk-M1.

AA warfare systems

Although the firearms used by the infantry can be used to engage air targets, on occasion with notable success, their effectiveness is generally limited to long-term attrition rather than preventing individual aircraft from completing weapon delivery. Speed and altitude of modern jet aircraft limit target opportunities, and critical systems may be armored in aircraft designed for the ground attack role. Adaptations of the standard autocannon, originally intended for air-to-ground use, and heavier artillery systems were commonly used for most anti-aircraft gunnery, starting with standard pieces on new mountings, and evolving to specially designed guns with much higher performance prior to World War II. The ammunition and shells fired by these weapons are usually fitted with different types of fuses (barometric, time-delay, or proximity) to send exploding metal fragments into the area of the airborne target. For shorter-range work, a lighter weapon with a higher rate of fire is required, to increase a hit probability on a fast airborne target. Weapons between 20 mm and 40 mm caliber have been widely used in this role. Smaller weapons, typically .50 caliber or even 8 mm rifle caliber guns have been used in the smallest mounts. Unlike the heavier guns, these smaller weapons are in widespread use due to their low cost and ability to quickly follow the target. Classic examples of autocannons and large caliber guns are the 40 mm autocannon and the 8.8 cm FlaK 18, 36 gun, both designed by Bofors of Sweden. Artillery weapons of this sort have for the most part been superseded by the effective surface-to-air missile systems that were introduced in the 1950s, although they were still retained by many nations. The development of surface-to-air missiles began in Nazi Germany during the late World War II with missiles such as the Wasserfall, though no working system was deployed before the war's end, and represented new attempts to increase effectiveness of the anti-aircraft systems faced with growing threat from bombers. Land-based SAMs can be deployed from fixed installations or mobile launchers, either wheeled or tracked. The tracked vehicles are usually armoured vehicles specifically designed to carry SAMs.

Larger SAMs may be deployed in fixed launchers, but can be towed/re-deployed at will. The SAMs launched by individuals are known in the United States as the Man-Portable Air Defence Systems (MANPADS). MANPADS of the former Soviet Union have been exported around the World, and can be found in use by many armed forces. Targets for non-ManPAD SAMs will usually be acquired by air-search radar, then tracked before/while a SAM is "locked-on" and then fired. Potential targets, if they are military aircraft, will be identified as friend or foe before being engaged. The developments in the latest and relatively cheap short-range missiles have begun to replace autocannons in this role.

The interceptor aircraft (or simply interceptor) is a type of fighter aircraft designed specifically to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft, particularly bombers, usually relying on high speed and altitude capabilities. A number of jet interceptors such as the F-102 Delta Dagger, the F-106 Delta Dart, and the MiG-25 were built in the period starting after the end of World War II and ending in the late 1960s, when they became less important due to the shifting of the strategic bombing role to ICBMs. Invariably the type is differentiated from other fighter aircraft designs by higher speeds and shorter operating ranges, as well as much reduced ordnance payloads.

The radar systems use electromagnetic waves to identify the range, altitude, direction, or speed of aircraft and weather formations to provide tactical and operational warning and direction, primarily during defensive operations. In their functional roles they provide target search, threat, guidance, reconnaissance, navigation, instrumentation, and weather reporting support to combat operations.

Future developments

If current trends continue, missiles will replace gun systems completely in "first line" service. Guns are being increasingly pushed into specialist roles, such as the Dutch Goalkeeper CIWS, which uses the GAU-8/A Avenger 30 mm seven-barrel Gatling Gun for last ditch anti-missile and anti-aircraft defense. Even this formerly front-line weapon is currently being replaced by new missile systems, such as the Rolling Airframe Missile, which is smaller, faster, and allows for mid-flight course correction (guidance) to ensure a hit. To bridge the gap between Guns and Missiles, Russia in particular produces the Kashtan CIWS, which uses both guns and missiles for final defense. Two six-barreled 30 mm Gsh-6-30 gatling guns and 9M311 surface to air missiles provide for its defensive capabilities.

Upsetting this development to all-missile systems is the current move to stealth aircraft. Long range missiles depend on long-range detection to provide significant lead. Stealth designs cut detection ranges so much that the aircraft is often never even seen, and when it is, often too late for an intercept. Systems for detection and tracking of stealthy aircraft are a major problem for anti-aircraft development.

However, as Stealth technology grows, so does anti-stealth technologies. Multiple transmitter radars such as those from Bistatic radars and Low-frequency radars are said to have the capabilities to detect stealth aircraft. Advanced forms of Thermographic cameras such as those that incorporate QWIPs would be able to optically see a Stealth aircraft regardless of the aircraft's RCS. In addition, Side looking radars, High-powered Optical Satellites, and sky-scanning, high-Aperature, high sensitivity Radars such as Radio telescopes, would all be able to narrow down the location of a Stealth aircraft under certain parameters. The newest SAM's have a claimed ability to be able to detect and engage stealth targets, with the most notable being the S-400, which is claimed to be able to detect a target with a 0.05 meter squared RCS from 90 km away.

Another potential weapon system for anti-aircraft use is the laser. Although air planners imagined lasers in combat since the late 1960s, only the most modern laser systems are currently reaching what could be considered "experimental usefulness". In particular the Tactical High Energy Laser can be used in the anti-aircraft and anti-missile role. If current developments continue, some believe it is reasonable to suggest that lasers will play a major role in air defense starting in the next ten years.

The future of projectile based weapons may be found in the railgun, currently tests are underway on developing systems that could create as much damage as a BGM-109 Tomahawk, but at a fraction of the cost. In February 2008 the US Navy tested a magnetic railgun; it fired a shell at per hour using 10 megajoules of energy. Its expected performance is over per hour muzzle velocity, accurate enough to hit a 5 meter target from away while shooting at 10 shots per minute. It is expected to be ready in 2020 to 2025. These systems while currently designed for static targets would only need the ability to be retargeted to become the next generation of AA system.

Force structures

Most Western and Commonwealth militaries integrate air defence purely with the traditional services, of the military (i.e. army, navy and air force), as a separate arm or as part of artillery. In the United States Army for instance, air defence is part of the artillery arm, while in the Pakistan Army, it was split off from Artillery to form a separate arm of its own in 1990. This is in contrast to some (largely communist or ex-communist) countries where not only are there provisions for air defence in the army, navy and air force but there are specific branches that deal only with the air defence of territory, for example, the Soviet PVO Strany. The USSR also had a separate strategic rocket force in charge of nuclear ICBMs.

Navy

thumb|right|Model of the multirole [[IDAS (missile)|IDAS missile of the German Navy, which can be fired from submerged anti-aircraft weapon systems.]] Smaller boats and ships typically have machine-guns or fast cannons, which can often be deadly to low-flying aircraft if linked to a radar-directed fire-control system radar-controlled cannon for point defence. Some vessels like Aegis cruisers are as much a threat to aircraft as any land-based air defence system. In general, naval vessels should be treated with respect by aircraft, however the reverse is equally true. Carrier battle groups are especially well defended, as not only do they typically consist of many vessels with heavy air defence armament but they are also able to launch fighter jets for combat air patrol overhead to intercept incoming airborne threats.

Some modern submarines, such as the Type 212 submarines of the German Navy, are equipped with surface-to-air missile systems, since helicopters and anti-submarine warfare aircraft are significant threats.

Army

Armies typically have air defence in depth, from integral MANPADS like RBS 70, Stinger and Igla at smaller force levels up to army-level missile defence systems such as Angara and Patriot. Often, the high-altitude long-range missile systems force aircraft to fly at low level, where anti-aircraft guns can bring them down. As well as the small and large systems, for effective air defence there must be intermediate systems. These may be deployed at regiment-level and consist of platoons of self-propelled anti-aircraft platforms, whether they are self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (SPAAGs), integrated air-defence systems like Tunguska or all-in-one surface-to-air missile platforms like Roland or SA-8 Gecko.

Air force

Air defense by air forces is typically taken care of by fighter jets carrying air-to-air missiles. However, most air forces choose to augment airbase defense with surface-to-air missile systems as they are such valuable targets and subject to attack by enemy aircraft. In addition, countries without dedicated air defense forces often relegate these duties to the air force. For example, the United States' strategic air defense is the domain of the Air Force, even when it is performed by missiles launched from fixed installations. For example, see Project Nike.

Area air defense

Area air defence, the air defense of an specific area or location, (as opposed to point defense), have historically been operated by both armies (Anti-Aircraft Command in the British Army, for instance) and Air Forces (the USAF's Nike Hercules and its sibling programmes). Area defence systems have medium to long range and can be made up of various other systems and networked into an area defence system (in which case it may be made up of several short range systems combined to effectively cover an area). An example of area defence is the defence of Saudi Arabia and Israel by MIM-104 Patriot missile batteries during the first Gulf War, where the objective was to cover populated areas.

Tactics

Mobility

Most modern air defence systems are fairly mobile. Even the larger systems tend to be mounted on trailers and are designed to be fairly quickly broken down or set up. In the past, this was not always the case. Early missile systems were cumbersome and required much infrastructure; many could not be moved at all. With the diversification of air defence there has been much more emphasis on mobility. Most modern systems are usually either self-propelled (i.e. guns or missiles are mounted on a truck or tracked chassis) or easily towed. Even systems that consist of many components (transporter/erector/launchers, radars, command posts etc.) benefit from being mounted on a fleet of vehicles. In general, a fixed system can be identified, attacked and destroyed whereas a mobile system can show up in places where it is not expected. Soviet systems especially concentrate on mobility, after the lessons learnt in the Vietnam war between the USA and Vietnam. For more information on this part of the conflict, see SA-2 Guideline.

North Korea (officially the DPRK) has inherited a lot of older Soviet equipment. One major reason for the success of the U.N. forces during the Korean War (1950–1953) against the Korea was the air superiority they were able to attain. As tensions still exist on the Korean Peninsula and Korea is so heavily militarised, their air-defence network is amongst the strongest of a non-superpower. A large part of it consists of a number of older, fixed systems like SA-2, SA-3, and SA-5, but DPRK is also in possession of many mobile systems that have proven deadly in the past.

Air defence versus air defence suppression

The U.S. Air Force, in conjunction with the members of NATO, has developed significant tactics for air defence suppression. Dedicated weapons such as anti-radiation missiles and advanced electronics intelligence and electronic countermeasures platforms seek to suppress or negate the effectiveness of an opposing air-defence system. It is an arms race; as better jamming, countermeasures and anti-radiation weapons are developed, so are better SAM systems with ECCM capabilities and the ability to shoot down anti-radiation missiles and other munitions aimed at them or the targets they are defending.

See also

Integrated air defense system (IADS)

Artillery

Gun laying

List of anti-aircraft weapons

Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon

Notes

References

AAP-6 NATO Glossary of Terms. 2009.

Bellamy, Chris. 1986. "The Red God of War – Soviet Artillery and Rocket Forces". London: Brassey's

Bethel, Colonel HA. 1911. "Modern Artillery in the Field". London: Macmillan and Co Ltd

Checkland, Peter and Holwell, Sue. 1998. "Information, Systems and Information Systems – making sense of the field". Chichester: Wiley

Hogg, Ian V. 1998. "Allied Artillery of World War Two". Malborough: The Crowood Press ISBN 1-86126-165-9

Hogg, Ian V. 1998. "Allied Artillery of World War One" Malborough: The Crowood Press ISBN 1-86126-104-7

Hogg, Ian V. 1997. "German Artillery of World War Two" London: Greenhill Books ISBN 1-85367-261-0

Routledge, Brigadier NW. 1994. "History of the Royal regiment of Artillery – Anti-Aircraft Artillery 1914–55". London: Brassey's ISBN 1-85753-099-3

Handbook for the Ordnance, Q.F. 3.7-inch Mark II on Mounting, 3.7-inch A.A. Mark II – Land Service. 1940. London: War Office 26|Manuals|2494

History of the Ministry of Munitions. 1922. Volume X The Supply of Munitions, Part VI Anti-Aircraft Supplies. Reprinted by Naval & Military Press Ltd and Imperial War Museum.

Flavia Foradini: ''I bunker di Vienna", Abitare 2/2006, Milano

Flavia Foradini, Edoardo Conte: ''I templi incompiuti di Hitler", catalogo della mostra omonima, Milano, Spazio Guicciardini, 17.2-13.3.2009

External links

''1914 1918 war in Alsace - The Battle of Linge 1915 - The 63rd Anti Aircraft Regiment in 14 18 - The 96th poste semi-fixed in the Vosges''

''Archie to SAM: A Short Operational History of Ground-Based Air Defense'' by Kenneth P. Werrell (book available for download)

Japanese Antiaircraft land/vessel doctrines in 1943–44

Category:Warfare by type Category:Military aviation

ar:دفاع جوي bg:Зенитно оръдие da:Antiluftskyts de:Flugabwehrkanone es:Defensa antiaérea fa:پدافند هوایی fr:Lutte antiaérienne hr:Protuzračna obrana id:Pertahanan udara it:Armi contraerei he:נ"מ lv:Pretgaisa aizsardzība lb:Flak lt:Priešlėktuvinė gynyba nl:Luchtafweergeschut ja:対空兵器 no:Luftvern pl:Obrona przeciwlotnicza pt:defesa antiaérea ru:Противовоздушная оборона sr:Против-ваздушна одбрана fi:Ilmatorjunta sv:Luftvärn tr:Uçaksavar uk:Протиповітряна оборона zh:高射炮

Coordinates	°′″N°′″N
Name	S-300 FamilyNATO reporting name:SA-10 Grumble, SA-12 Giant/Gladiator, SA-20 Gargoyle
Origin
Type	long-range SAM system
Is vehicle	yes
Is uk	yes
Service	1978-present
Used by	See list of operators
Wars
Designer	Almaz-Antey: : NPO Almaz (lead designer) : NIIP (radars) : MKB Fakel (missile designer) : MNIIRE Altair (naval version designer)
Design date	1967-2005
Manufacturer	MZiK
Production date	1978-2011
Variants	see variants }}

The S-300 is a series of Russian long range surface-to-air missile systems produced by NPO Almaz, all based on the initial S-300P version. The S-300 system was developed to defend against aircraft and cruise missiles for the Soviet Air Defence Forces. Subsequent variations were developed to intercept ballistic missiles. The S-300 was jointly produced by Almaz with Samsung Group of South Korea since 1993.

The S-300 system was first deployed by the Soviet Union in 1979, designed for the air defense of large industrial and administrative facilities, military bases, and control of airspace against enemy strike aircraft.

The project-managing developer of the S-300 is Russian Almaz corporation (government owned, aka "KB-1") which is currently a part of "Almaz-Antei" Air Defense Concern. S-300 uses missiles developed by MKB "Fakel" design bureau (a separate government corporation, aka "OKB-2").

The S-300 is regarded as one of the most potent anti-aircraft missile systems currently fielded. Its radars have the ability to simultaneously track up to 100 targets while engaging up to 12. S-300 deployment time is five minutes. The S-300 missiles are sealed rounds and require no maintenance over their lifetime. An evolved version of the S-300 system is the S-400 (NATO reporting name SA-21), entering limited service in 2004.

Variations and upgrades

Numerous versions have since emerged with different missiles, improved radars, better resistance to countermeasures, longer range and better capability against short-range ballistic missiles or targets flying at very low altitude. There are currently three main variations.

S-300 system family tree

S-300P

Land-based S-300P (SA-10)

The S-300P (transliterated from Russian С-300П, NATO reporting name SA-10 ''Grumble'') is the original version of the S-300 system which became operational in 1978. In 1987 over 80 of these sites were active, mainly in the area around Moscow. The ''P'' suffix stand for ''PVO-Strany'' (country air defence system). An S-300PT unit consists of a 36D6 (NATO reporting name ''TIN SHIELD'') surveillance radar, a 30N6 (''FLAP LID'') fire control system and 5P85-1 launch vehicles. The 5P85-1 vehicle is a semi-trailer truck. Usually a 76N6 (''CLAM SHELL'') low altitude detection radar is also a part of the unit.

This system broke substantial new ground, including the use of a phased array radar and multiple engagements on the same Fire-control system (FCS). Nevertheless, it had some limitations. It took over one hour to set up this semi-mobile system for firing and the hot vertical launch method employed scorched the TEL.

It was originally intended to fit the Track Via Missile (TVM) guidance system onto this model. However, the TVM system had problems tracking targets below 500 m. Rather than accept the limitation, the Soviets decided that the tracking of low altitude targets was a must and decided to use a pure command-guidance system until the TVM head was ready. This allowed the minimum engagement altitude to be set at 25 m.

Improvements to the S-300P have resulted in several major subversions for both the internal and the export market. The S-300PT-1 and S-300PT-1A (SA-10b/c) are incremental upgrades of the original S300PT system. They introduce the 5V55KD missile and the cold launch method thereafter employed. Time to readiness was reduced to 30 minutes (broadly comparable to Patriot) and trajectory optimizations allowed the 5V55KD to reach a range of 75 km.

The S-300PS/S-300PM (Russian С-300ПC/С-300ПМ, NATO reporting name SA-10d/e) was introduced in 1985 and is the only version thought to have been fitted with a nuclear warhead. This model saw the introduction of the modern TEL and mobile radar and command-post vehicles that were all based on the MAZ-7910 8x8 truck. This model also featured the new 5V55R missiles which increased maximum engagement range to 90 km (56 mi) and introduced a terminal semi-active radar homing (SARH) guidance mode. The surveillance radar of these systems was designated 30N6. Also introduced with this version was the distinction between self propelled and towed TELs. The towed TEL is designated 5P85T. Mobile TELs were the 5P85S and 5P85D. The 5P85D was a "slave" TEL, being controlled by a 5P85S "master" TEL. The "master" TEL is identifiable thanks to the large equipment container behind the cabin; in the "slave" TEL this area is not enclosed and is used for cable or spare tyre storage.

The next modernisation, called the S-300PMU (Russian С-300ПМУ, US DoD designation SA-10f) was introduced in 1992 for the export market and featured the upgraded 5V55U missile which still utilised the intermediate SARH terminal guidance method and smaller warhead of the 5V55R but increased the engagement envelope to give this missile roughly the same range and altitude capabilities as the newer 48N6 missile (max. range 150 km/93 mi). The radars were also upgraded, with the surveillance radar for the S-300PMU being designated 64N6 (BIG BIRD) and the illumination and guidance radar being designated 30N6-1 in the GRAU index.

S-300F

Sea-based S-300F (SA-N-6)

The S-300F ''Fort'' (Russian С-300Ф ''Форт'', DoD designation SA-N-6, ''F'' suffix for ''Flot'', Russian for ''fleet'') was introduced in 1984 as the original ship-based (naval) version of the S-300P system developed by ''Altair'' with the new 5V55RM missile with range extended to 7–90 km (4-56 mi, equal to 3.8-50 nautical miles) and maximum target speed up to Mach 4 while engagement altitude was reduced to 25-25,000 m (100-82,000 ft). The naval version utilises the TOP SAIL or TOP STEER, TOP PAIR and 3R41 Volna (TOP DOME) radar and utilises command guidance with a terminal semi-active radar homing (SARH) mode. Its first installation and sea trials were on a Kara class cruiser and it is also installed on Slava class cruisers and Kirov class battlecruisers. It is stored in eight (Slava) or twelve (Kirov) 8-missile rotary launchers below decks. The export version of this system is known as ''Rif'' (Russian ''Риф'' — ''reef''). The NATO name, found also in colloquial use, is "Grumble".

Sea-based S-300FM (SA-N-20)

The S-300FM ''Fort-M (Russian С-300ФМ, DoD designation SA-N-20'') is another naval version of the system, installed only on the Kirov class cruiser RFS Pyotr Velikiy, and introduced the new 48N6 missile. It was introduced in 1990 and increased missile speed to approximately Mach 6 for a maximum target engagement speed of up to Mach 8.5, increased the warhead size to 150 kg (330 lb) and increased the maximum engagement range yet again to 5–150 km (3-93 mi) as well as opening the altitude envelope to 10m-27 km (33–88500 ft). The new missiles also introduced the ultimate track-via-missile guidance method and brought with it the ability to intercept short-range ballistic missiles. This system makes use of the TOMB STONE MOD rather than TOP DOME radar. The export version is called the ''Rif-M''. Two Rif-M systems were purchased by China in 2002 and installed on the Type 051C air-defence guided missile destroyers.

Both naval versions are believed to include a secondary infrared terminal seeker, similar to the newer US Standard missile system, probably to reduce the system's vulnerability to saturation. This also allows the missile to engage contacts over the radar horizon, such as warships or sea-skimming anti-ship missiles.

S-300V (SA-12)

The 9K81 S-300V ''Antey-300'' (Russian 9К81 С-300В ''Антей-300'' - named after ''Antaeus'', NATO reporting name SA-12 ''Gladiator/Giant'') is a bit different from the other versions. It was built by Antey as opposed to Almaz. The ''V'' suffix stands for ''Voyska'' (ground forces). It was designed to act as the top tier army air defence system, providing a defence against ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and aircraft, replacing the SA-4 'Ganef'. The "GLADIATOR" missiles have a maximum engagement range of around 75 km (47 miles) while the "GIANT" missiles can engage targets out to 100 km (62 miles) and up to altitudes of around 32 km (100,000 ft). In both cases the warhead is around 150 kg (331 lb).

While it was created from the same project (hence the common S-300 designation) different priorities resulted in a design quite different from the other versions. The S-300V system is carried on tracked MT-T transporters, which gives it better cross-country mobility than even the S-300Ps on 8x8 wheeled transporters. It is also somewhat more distributed than the S-300P's. For example, while both have mechanically-scanned radar for target acquisition (9S15 ''BILL BOARD A''), the battery level 9S32 ''GRILL PAN'' has autonomous search ability and SARH delegated to illumination radar on TELARs. The early 30N6 ''FLAP LID'' on the S-300P handles tracking and illumination, but is not equipped with autonomous search (later upgraded).

The S-300V places a greater emphasis on ABM, with the dedicated 9M83 (SA-12B ''Giant''). This missile is larger and only two can be held on each TELAR. It also has a dedicated ABM radar - the 9S19 ''HIGH SCREEN'' phased array radar at battalion level. A typical S-300V battalion is made up out of a target detection and designation unit, a guidance radar and up to 6 TELARs. The detection and designation unit consists of the 9S457-1 command post, a 9S15MV or 9S15MT ''BILL BOARD'' all-round surveillance radar and 9S19M2 ''HIGH SCREEN'' sector surveillance radar. The S-300V uses the 9S32-1 ''GRILL PAN'' multi-channel guidance radar. Four types of TELARs can be used with the system. The 9A83-1 which holds 4 9M83 ''GLADIATOR'' missiles and the 9A82 which holds 2 9M82 ''GIANT'' missiles are pure launchers, while the 9A84 (4× 9M83 GLADIATOR missile) and 9A85 (2× 9M82 GIANT missile) are loaders/launchers.

S-300V system may be controlled by a upper level command post system 9S52 Polyana-D4 integrating it with Buk missile system into a brigade.

S-300PMU-1/2 (SA-20)

The S-300PMU-1 (Russian С-300ПМУ-1,US DoD designation SA-20A, NATO reporting name SA-20 ''Gargoyle'') was also introduced in 1992 with the new and larger 48N6 missiles for the first time in a land-based system and introduced all the same performance improvements from the S300FM version including the increased speed, range, TVM guidance and ABM capability. The warhead is slightly smaller than the naval version at 143 kg (315 lb). This version also saw the introduction of the new and more capable 30N6E TOMB STONE radar.

The S-300PMU-1 was introduced in 1999 and for the first time introduces several different kinds of missiles in a single system. In addition to the 5V55R, 48N6E and 48N6E2 missiles the S-300PMU-1 can utilise two new missiles, the 9M96E1 and 9M96E2. Both are significantly smaller than the previous missiles at 330 and 420 kg (728 and 926 lb respectively) and carry smaller 24 kg (53 lb) warhead. The 9M96E1 has an engagement range of 1–40 km (1-25 mi) and the 9M96E2 of 1–120 km (1-75 mi). They are still carried 4 per TEL. Rather than just relying on aerodynamic fins for manoeuvring, they use a gas-dynamic system which allows them to have an excellent probability of kill (P_k) despite the much smaller warhead. The P_k is estimated at 0.7 against a tactical ballistic missile for either missile. The S-300PMU-1 typically uses the 83M6E command and control system, although it is also compatible with the older Baikal-1E and Senezh-M1E CCS command and control systems. The 83M6E system incorporates the 64N6E (BIG BIRD) surveillance/detection radar. The fire control/illumination and guidance radar used is the 30N6E(1), optionally matched with a 76N6 low altitude detection radar and a 96L6E all altitude detection radar. The 83M6E command and control system can control up to 12 TELs, both the self propelled 5P85SE vehicle and the 5P85TE towed launchers. Generally support vehicles are also included, such as the 40V6M tow vehicle, intended for lifting of the antenna post.

The S-300PMU-2 ''Favorite'' (Russian С-300ПМУ-2 ''Фаворит'' – ''Favourite'', DoD designation SA-20B), introduced in 1997, is an upgrade to the S-300PMU-1 with range extended once again to 195 km (121 mi) with the introduction of the 48N6E2 missile. This system is apparently capable against not just short range ballistic missiles, but now also medium range tactical ballistic missiles. It uses the 83M6E2 command and control system, consisting of the 54K6E2 command post vehicle and the 64N6E2 surveillance/detection radar. It employs the 30N6E2 fire control/illumination and guidance radar. Like the S-300PMU-1, 12 TELs can be controlled, with any mix of 5P85SE2 self propelled and 5P85TE2 trailer launchers. Optionally it can make use of the 96L6E all altitude detection radar and 76N6 low altitude detection radar, just like the S-300PMU-1.

S-400 (SA-21)

The S-400 ''Triumf'' (Russian С-400 ''«Триумф»'', formerly known as the S-300PMU-3/С-300ПМУ-3, NATO reporting name SA-21 ''Growler'') was introduced in 1999 and features a new, much larger missile with 2 per TEL. The project has been encountering delays since its original announcement and deployment has only begun on a small scale in 2006. With an engagement range of up to 400 km (250 mi), depending on the missile variant used, and specifically designed to counter stealth it is by far the most advanced version. Little else is known about this version.

S-300VM (SA-X-23)

The S-300VM (Antey 2500) is an upgrade to the S-300V. It consists of a new command post vehicle, the 9S457ME and a selection of new radars. As all-round surveillance radar the 9S15M2, 9S15MT2E or 9S15MV2E are possible, and the sector surveillance radar was upgraded to 9S19ME. The upgraded guidance radar has Grau index 9S32ME. The system can still employ up to 6 TELARs, the 9A84ME launchers (up to 4 × 9M83ME missile) and up to 6 launcher/loader vehicles assigned to each launcher (2 × 9M83ME missile each). An upgraded version, dubbed S-300V4 will be delivered to Russian army in 2011.

Operators and other versions

The S-300 is mainly used in Eastern Europe and Asia although sources are inconsistent about the exact countries possessing the system. bought 2 battalions of S-300PMU2 in 2009 worth at least $300 million. - S-300PS systems delivered from Russia in 2007 to replace older S-300 model in Belarussian inventory. Older S-300V sold to Turkey for testing and using on Anatolian Eagle exercises. has ten S-300 launchers, divided into two units with five launchers each. : China has bought the S-300PMU-1 and are licensed to manufacture it under the name Hongqi-10 (HQ-10). China is also the first customer of S-300PMU-2 and may be using the S-300V under the name Hongqi HQ-18. China also built an upgraded version of the HQ-10 labelled the HQ-15 with the maximum range upgraded from 150 km (93 mi) to 200 km (124 mi). There are unconfirmed reports that claim this version is the Chinese manufactured S-300PMU-2. The total number of the S-300PMU/1/2 and HQ-15/18 batteries in PLA are approximately 40 and 60 respectively, in the year 2008. The total number of the missiles is well above 1,600, with about 300 launcher platforms. Five such SAM battalions are deployed and in active duty around Beijing region, six battalions in Taiwan strait region and rest battalions in other major cities like Shanghai, Chengdu and Dalian. Two Rif (SA-N-6) systems were purchased in 2002 for the Chinese Navy for the Type 051C Destroyers. & : Cyprus signed an agreement to buy S-300 systems in 1996. Eventually bought the S-300PMU-1 version, but due to political tension between Cyprus and Turkey and intense Turkish pressure (see Cyprus Missile Crisis), the system was transferred to the Greek Island of Crete. Later, Cyprus acquired the Tor-M1 system and the Buk-M1 system. Finally, on 19/12/07 the missiles passed officially to Greek government in return for more Tor-M1 systems and Buk-M1 systems. - Inherited from Czechoslovakia. Slovakian proposal to equip another battalion in mid '90 was canceled. announced an intention to buy the S-300P in 1991 and now seems to possess the system. : Has used all of the S-300 variations. The Russian Air Defense Forces, which are part of the Air Force, currently operates 768 S-300PMUs and 185 S-300Vs, meaning they operate 953 in total. In addition Russian armed forces also operates 32 S-400 systems by 2011 with more on order. - S-300PS, S-300PMU, S-300V and others. Venezuela has ordered S-300VM "Antey-2500" to equip 12 Regiments. Deliveries are expected to be completed by 2010-2011. has bought two S-300PMU-1 batteries (12 launchers) for nearly $300 million. In early year 2010, addendum to the order of the jet fighter, the Department of Air Defense (binh chung phong khong) has present a purchase order to Rosoboronexport for 6 additional S-300 PMU-2 batteries; 4 systems were delivered in Q1 2011, with 2 systems deliver in Q4 2011. On the 10 October 2010 military parade a new SAM system, complete with Flap Lid radars, was displayed. North Korea announced it to be "an anti-ballistic defense system", capable of shooting down aircraft at distances of 90 kilometers and at altitudes of up to 30 kilometers. Japanese media reported the system to be a locally designed S-300 derivative, a fact that is corraberated by the presence of Flap Lid radars. However this and the origin of the Missles (Locally Produced?) has yet to be confirmed.

Former operators

: Croatia no longer maintains an S-300 system. It was acquired from Ukraine in 1995 and was never complete and in operational state, but served the role of a psychological weapon. After much controversy, as of 2004 the system is no longer in Croatia and was presumably sold. According to some sources, including the court testimony of arms dealer Zvonko Zubak, the system was indeed shipped to the United States in 2004. - One battalion created in 1990. Passed on to Slovakia in 1993.

Possible future operators

- 4 S-300PMU2 were ordered in 2006. 's status regarding the S-300 system remains controversial. Iran claimed to have signed a contract with Russia on 25 December 2007 on the sales of the S-300PMU-1 missile system. Russian officials have denied this. It has also been claimed that Croatia sold their S-300s to Iran. Later, another claim was made saying Libya transferred S-300s to Iran. On December 21, according to a senior Iranian lawmaker, Russia has started the supply of components for S-300 air defense systems to Iran. Esmaeil Kosari, deputy chairman of the parliamentary commission on national security and foreign policy, told the Iranian news agency IRNA that Iran and Russia had held negotiations for several years on the purchase of S-300 air defense systems and had finalized a deal. Kosari said the Islamic Republic would deploy S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to strengthen national defense on border areas. On 28 October 2009, if asked when Russia would deliver the systems to Iran, Ivanov said: "There have been no such deliveries to date." Yet on 23 December 2009, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Borodavkin said Russia sees no reason to cancel a deal to provide S-300s to Iran. He said ""Exports of such weapons is subject to no UN treaty or other bilateral agreements, This is why we see no essential reason to make any change in the deal," indicating that there is a deal. On 8 February 2010, Iran announced that it had a "domestically-made" system with the same capabilities as the S-300. Alexander Fumin has said that the delay in the delivery is due to a technical problem with the radiowave system. In 19 April 2010, Asr Iran (Iran's Era) website said that Iran could develop a similar air missiles system On 11 June 2010 Russia has stopped sale of the S-300 air defense system to Iran in lieu of U.N. sanctions against Iran stating that the "S-300s fall under these sanctions". On 4 August 2010 Iran claimed it has obtained two S-300PT (SA-10) from Belarus and two others from another unspecified source despite Russian refusal to deliver them. The Belarusian government has denied rumors that Minsk had allegedly sold S-300 air defense systems to Iran. "The State Military-Industrial Committee can officially state that Belarus has never held talks with Iran on the deliveries of the S-300 air defense systems", said committee's spokesman Vladimir Lavrenyuk. "Belarus has never supplied S-300 systems or their components to Iran," he said, adding that Minsk strictly complied with international arms control regulations. On 22 September 2010 Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree banning the sale of the S-300 and other military equipment to Iran. The sale was canceled because of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929 sanctions on Iran. On 10 November 2010 Iran announced that it had developed a version of the S-300 missile. However Pieter Wezeman of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute has questioned Iran's ability to duplicate the Russian missile system. Russia has offered the S-300VM to Turkey. Venezuela Venezuelan government has recently confirmed a contract with the Russian government to buy one S-300 missile system.

Combat history

Although none of the S-300 versions have ever fired a missile in a real conflict, it is considered a very capable SAM system. In April 2005, NATO had a combat exercise in France and Germany called ''Trial Hammer 05'' to practice Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses missions. Participating countries were pleased that the Slovak Air Force brought a S-300PMU along, providing a unique opportunity for NATO to become familiar with the system.

Israel's purchase of F-35 Lightning II fighters was allegedly motivated in part to nullify the threat of S-300 missiles that were, at the time the fighters were initially sought, subject to a potential arms sale to Iran.

Specifications

Missiles are guided by the 30N6 FLAP LID or naval 3R41 Volna (TOP DOME) radar using command guidance with terminal semi-active radar homing. Later versions use the 30N6 FLAP LID B or TOMB STONE radar to guide the missiles via command guidance/seeker-aided ground guidance (SAGG). SAGG is similar to the Patriot's TVM guidance scheme. The earlier 30N6 FLAP LID A can guide up to four missiles at a time to up to four targets, and can track up to 24 targets at once. The 30N6E FLAP LID B can guide up to two missiles per target to up to six targets simultaneously. Targets flying at up to Mach 2.5 can be successfully engaged or around Mach 8.5 for later models. One missile can be launched every three seconds. The mobile control centre is able to manage up to 12 TELs simultaneously.

The original warhead weighed 100 kg (220 lb), intermediate warheads weighed 133 kg (293 lb) and the latest warhead weighs 143 kg (315 lb). All are equipped with a proximity fuze and contact fuze. The missiles themselves weigh between 1,450 kg (3,200 lb) and 1,800 kg (3,970 lb). Missiles are catapulted clear of the launching tubes before their rocket motor fires, which can accelerate at up to 100 ''g'' (1 km/s²). They launch straight upwards and then tip over towards their target, removing the need to aim the missiles before launch. The missiles are steered with a combination of control fins and through thrust vectoring vanes. The sections below give exact specifications of the radar and missiles in the different S-300 versions. It should be noted that since the S-300PM most vehicles are interchangeable across variations.

Radar

The 30N6 FLAP LID A is mounted on a small trailer. The 64N6 BIG BIRD is mounted on a large trailer along with a generator and typically towed with the now familiar 8-wheeled truck. The 76N6 CLAM SHELL is mounted on a large trailer with a mast which is between 24 and 39 m (79 and 128 ft) tall.

The original S-300P utilises a combination of the 76N6 CLAM SHELL continuous-wave Doppler radar for target acquisition and the 30N6 FLAP LID A I/J-band phased array digitally steered tracking and engagement radar. Both are mounted on trailers. In addition there is a trailer-mounted command centre and up to twelve trailer-mounted erector/launchers with four missiles each. The S-300PS/PM is similar but uses an upgraded 30N6 tracking and engagement radar with the command post integrated and has truck-mounted TELs.

If employed in an anti-ballistic missile or anti-cruise missile role, the 64N6 BIG BIRD E/F-band radar would also be included with the battery. It is capable of detecting ballistic missile class targets up to 1000 km (620 mi) away travelling at up to 10000 km/h (6200 mph) and cruise missile class targets up to 300 km (185 mi) away. It also employs electronic beam steering and performs a scan once every twelve seconds.

The 36D6 TIN SHIELD radar can also be used to augment the S-300 system to provide earlier target detection than the FLAP LID radar allows. It can detect a missile-sized target flying at an altitude of 60 meters (200 ft) at least 20 km (12.5 mi) away, at an altitude of 100 meters (330 ft) at least 30 km (19 mi) away, and at high altitude up to 175 km (108 mi) away. In addition a 64N6 BIG BIRD E/F band target acquisition radar can be used which has a maximum detection range of 300 km (186 mi).

The S-300 FC Radar Flap Lid can be mounted on a standard pylon.

- CLAM SHELL CLAM SHELL BIG BIRD CHEESE BOARD BILL BOARD HIGH SCREEN TOP STEER TOP PAIR

+ Surveillance radar	Main Agency of Missiles and Artillery of the Ministry of Defence of the Soviet Union	GRAU index !! NATO reporting name !! Specialisation !! Target detection range !! Simultaneously detected targets !! NATO frequency band !! First used with !! Notes
36D6	TIN SHIELD	|	180–360 km (112-224mile)	120	E/F	S-300P	Industrial designation: ST-68UM350 kW to 1.23 MW signal strength
76N6	|	Low altitude detection			I	S-300P
76N6	|	Low altitude detection	120 km (75mile)	300	I	S-300PMU	1.4 kW FM continuous wave
64N6	|	-	300 km (186mile)		C	S-300PMU-1
96L6E	|	All altitude detection	300 km (186mile)	300		S-300PMU-1
9S15	|	-	250 km (155mile)	200		S-300V
9S19	|	Sector tracking		16		S-300V
MR-75	|	Naval	300 km (186mile)		D/E	S-300F
MR-800 Voskhod	|	Naval	200 km (124mile)		C/D/E/F	S-300F

Simultaneously engaged targets ! I/J FLAP LID B FLAP LID B GRILL PAN TOP DOME

+ Target tracking/missile guidance	GRAU index !! NATO reporting name !! NATO frequency band !! Target detection range !! Simultaneously tracked targets	First used with !! Notes
30N6	FLAP LID A	|		4	4	S-300P
30N6E(1)	|	H-J	200 km (124mile)	12	6	S-300PMU	Phased array
30N6E2	|	I/J	200 km (124mile)	72	36	S-300PMU-2
9S32-1	|	Multi-band	140–150 km (90mile)	12	6	S-300V
3R41 Volna	|	I/J	100 km (62mile)			S-300F

Missiles

47 km (29mile) 1984 1992 1992 1992 1984 1984 1990 1999 1999 2000

+ Missile specifications	GRAU index !! Year !! Range !! Maximum velocity !!Maximum target Speed!! Length !! Diameter !! Weight !! Warhead !! Guidance !! First used with
5V55K/KD	1978	|	1,700 m/s (3,800 mph)	1,150 m/s (2572 mph)	7 m (23 ft)	450mm	1,450 kg (3,200 lb)	100 kg (220 lb)	Command
5V55R/RM	|	90 km (56mile)	1,700 m/s (3,800 mph)	1,150 m/s (2572 mph)	7 m (23 ft)	450mm	1,450 kg (3,200 lb)	133 kg (293 lb)	SARH
5V55U	|	150 km (93mile)	2,000 m/s (4,470 mph)		7 m (23 ft)	450mm	1,470 kg (3,240 lb)	133 kg (293 lb)	SARH
48N6/E	|	150 km (93mile)	2,000 m/s (4,470 mph)	2,800 m/s (6,415 mph)	7.5 m (25 ft)	500mm	1,780 kg (3,920 lb)	~150 kg (~330 lb)	TVM
48N6E2	|	195 km (121mile)	2,000 m/s (4,470 mph)	2,800 m/s (6,415 mph)	7.5 m (25 ft)	500mm	1,800 kg (3,970 lb)	150 kg (330 lb)	TVM
9M82	|	40 km (25mile)	2,500 m/s (5,600 mph)					150 kg (330 lb)	SARH by TELAR	S-300V
9M83	|	100 km (60mile)	1,800 m/s (4,030 mph)				420 kg (926 lb)	150 kg (330 lb)	SARH by TELAR	S-300V
9M83ME	|	200 km (120mile)							SARH by TELAR	S-300VM
9M96E1	|	40 km (25mile)	900 m/s (2,010 mph)	4,800-5,000 m/s (10,737-11,185 mph)			330 kg (728 lb)	24 kg (53 lb)	Active Radar Homing	S-400
9M96E2	|	120 km (75mile)	1,000 m/s (2,240 mph)	4,800-5,000 m/s (10,737-11,185 mph)			420 kg (926 lb)	24 kg (53 lb)	Active Radar Homing	S-400
40N6	|	400 km (250mile)							Active Radar Homing	S-400

Comparable SAMs

MIM-104 Patriot

Type 3 Chū-SAM

Akash missile

KS-1

HQ-9

NASAMS

References

External links

http://www.almaz-antey.ru/ in Russian

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Asia-Sams-Pt1.pdf and http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Asia-Sams-Pt2.pdf , a two-part piece from Australian Air Power.

www.dtig.org detailed overview of the S-300P & S-300V family.

Almaz S-300 – China's "Offensive" Air Defense

Soviet/Russian Missile Designations

S-300PMU2 Favorit EnemyForces.com

Almaz S-300P/PT/PS/PMU/PMU-1/PMU-2

76N6 Clam Shell Acquisition Radar

Antey 9K81 S-300V - SA-12A/B Gladiator/Giant

Category:Article Feedback Pilot Category:Cold War surface-to-air missiles of the Soviet Union Category:Surface-to-air missiles of Russia Category:Surface-to-air missiles of the People's Republic of China Category:Missile defense Category:Anti-ballistic missiles Category:Naval surface-to-air missiles

ar:أس - 300 az:S-300 bg:С-300 cs:S-300 de:S-300 (Flugabwehrrakete) et:S-300 es:S-300 fa:اس-۳۰۰ fr:S-300 ko:S-300 hr:S-300 it:S-300 he:S-300 hu:SZ–300 ja:S-300 (ミサイル) ps:اس ـ ۳۰۰ pl:S-300W ro:S-300 ru:С-300 fi:S-300 sv:S-300 tr:S-300 vi:Tổ hợp tên lửa S-300 zh:S-300导弹