Exclusive: U.S. considers HAWK air defense equipment for Ukraine

[1srelluc]

Link

WASHINGTON, Oct 25 (Reuters) - The United States is considering sending older HAWK air defense equipment from storage to Ukraine to help it defend against Russian drone and cruise missile attacks, two U.S. officials told Reuters.

The HAWK interceptor missiles would be an upgrade to the Stinger missile systems - a smaller, shorter range air defense system - that the United States has already sent to blunt Russia's invasion.

The Biden administration would use the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to transfer the HAWK equipment which is based on Vietnam-era technology, but has been upgraded several times. The PDA allows the United States to transfer defense articles and services from stocks quickly without congressional approval in response to an emergency.

Reuters was unable to determine how many HAWK systems and missiles the United States has available to transfer. The White House declined to comment.

The HAWK system is the predecessor to PATRIOT missile defense system made by Raytheon Technologies (RTX.N) which remains off the table for Ukraine, U.S. officials have told Reuters.

U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Spain intends to send four HAWK launchers.

The United States would likely initially send interceptor missiles for the HAWK system to Ukraine because it was unclear if enough U.S. launchers were in good repair, one U.S. official told Reuters. The U.S. systems have been in storage for decades.

A PDA is being considered for later this week, U.S. officials have said. One U.S. official said it would likely be about half the size of the recent security assistance packages which have been around $700 million.

It was not immediately clear if HAWK interceptor missiles would be included, but U.S. officials have previously cautioned that size and composition of military aid packages can change rapidly.

Since the Feb. 24 Russian invasion of neighboring Ukraine, which Moscow calls a "special military operation", the United States has sent around $17.6 billion worth of security assistance to Kyiv.

Fucking Christ, they aren't even trying to broker a peace deal just further escalation.....The Ukes better stock up on oil lanterns and kero is all I got to say.

 

[toobfreak]

U.S. considers HAWK air defense equipment for Ukraine​

Let me correct one typo for you there, you mean:

U.S. MILITARY considers HAWK air defense equipment for Ukraine. Someone WANTS this war and wants it probably as a cover to blame Putin for all the actions they are trying to pull on the world stage for controlling food, oil, energy and other things.

My father never would have believed the day would come where Putin might be the actual "good" guy here and our own government the bad actor.

 

[odanny]

My father never would have believed the day would come where Putin might be the actual "good" guy here and our own government the bad actor.

Your own government IS the bad actor, one led by the dictator Vladimir Putin, and I hope these HAWK missiles blow the shit out of your country's military.

 

[toobfreak]

Your own government IS the bad actor, one led by the dictator Vladimir Putin, and I hope these HAWK missiles blow the shit out of your country's military.

Sick asshole, eat shit and die, but not until being dog sick for a few days.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Hawk missile system entered U.S. military service way back in 1959 and was phased out in 2001 when the Stinger replaced it.
Even though the Hawk missile system went through several upgrades during its years of service.
Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

 

[odanny]

The Hawk missile system entered U.S. military service way back in 1959 and was phased out in 2001 when the Stinger replaced it.
Even though the Hawk missile system went through several upgrades during its years of service.
Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

You can only hope you Russian cock sucker.

 

[1srelluc]

The Hawk missile system entered U.S. military service way back in 1959 and was phased out in 2001 when the Stinger replaced it.
Even though the Hawk missile system went through several upgrades during its years of service.
Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

I would think but if they are in inventory and sent there they will have to be replaced by something at twice (or better) the price.....Something something about the 1st rule of .mil procurement.

And the neocon's PACs get fatter.

 

[toobfreak]

You can only hope you Russian cock sucker.

Sure beats your being a chinese ass-sucker! Say He to Xi for me!

 

[Sunni Man]

Basically, the U.S. is down to clearing out its warehouse's of antique military hardware like the Hawk missile and sending it to Ukraine.
Then bozo Biden can brag to the media about how his administration is stepping up and supplying the Ukrainian forces with weapons to defeat the Russian army. ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Link

WASHINGTON, Oct 25 (Reuters) - The United States is considering sending older HAWK air defense equipment from storage to Ukraine to help it defend against Russian drone and cruise missile attacks, two U.S. officials told Reuters.

The HAWK interceptor missiles would be an upgrade to the Stinger missile systems - a smaller, shorter range air defense system - that the United States has already sent to blunt Russia's invasion.

The Biden administration would use the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to transfer the HAWK equipment which is based on Vietnam-era technology, but has been upgraded several times. The PDA allows the United States to transfer defense articles and services from stocks quickly without congressional approval in response to an emergency.

Reuters was unable to determine how many HAWK systems and missiles the United States has available to transfer. The White House declined to comment.

The HAWK system is the predecessor to PATRIOT missile defense system made by Raytheon Technologies (RTX.N) which remains off the table for Ukraine, U.S. officials have told Reuters.

U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Spain intends to send four HAWK launchers.

The United States would likely initially send interceptor missiles for the HAWK system to Ukraine because it was unclear if enough U.S. launchers were in good repair, one U.S. official told Reuters. The U.S. systems have been in storage for decades.

A PDA is being considered for later this week, U.S. officials have said. One U.S. official said it would likely be about half the size of the recent security assistance packages which have been around $700 million.

It was not immediately clear if HAWK interceptor missiles would be included, but U.S. officials have previously cautioned that size and composition of military aid packages can change rapidly.

Since the Feb. 24 Russian invasion of neighboring Ukraine, which Moscow calls a "special military operation", the United States has sent around $17.6 billion worth of security assistance to Kyiv.

Fucking Christ, they aren't even trying to broker a peace deal just further escalation.....The Ukes better stock up on oil lanterns and kero is all I got to say.

Proxy war with Russia over the Ukrainian Money Laundering Center, what's the worst that could happen?

 

[odanny]

Then bozo Biden can brag to the media about how his administration is stepping up and supplying the Ukrainian forces with weapons to defeat the Russian army.

As long as it works, and it sure seems to be.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The Hawk missile system entered U.S. military service way back in 1959 and was phased out in 2001 when the Stinger replaced it.
Even though the Hawk missile system went through several upgrades during its years of service.
Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

If you bother to read the article, the HAWKs are being sent as anti-DRONE missiles. Since most drones don't carry ECM and aren't smart enough to maneuver to avoid a SAM, they will do that job well. They're obsolete, so they are cheap and even the launchers are expendable.

 

[Sunni Man]

If you bother to read the article, the HAWKs are being sent as anti-DRONE missiles. Since most drones don't carry ECM and aren't smart enough to maneuver to avoid a SAM, they will do that job well. They're obsolete, so they are cheap and even the launchers are expendable.

Actually, the article said the Hawk's have been sent to defend against both cruise missiles and drones.
It would be easy to add electronic counter-measures and flares to the drones in order to defeat the Hawk missiles, and I seriously doubt a decades old Hawk missile could intercept and destroy a modern cruise missile.

Also from the article, "U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month."

Sorry bozo Biden, while the Hawk missile was an advanced air defense system when first introduced in 1959, today it's basically an antique.

 

[Mac-7]

Link

WASHINGTON, Oct 25 (Reuters) - The United States is considering sending older HAWK air defense equipment from storage to Ukraine to help it defend against Russian drone and cruise missile attacks, two U.S. officials told Reuters.

The HAWK interceptor missiles would be an upgrade to the Stinger missile systems - a smaller, shorter range air defense system - that the United States has already sent to blunt Russia's invasion.

The Biden administration would use the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to transfer the HAWK equipment which is based on Vietnam-era technology, but has been upgraded several times. The PDA allows the United States to transfer defense articles and services from stocks quickly without congressional approval in response to an emergency.

Reuters was unable to determine how many HAWK systems and missiles the United States has available to transfer. The White House declined to comment.

The HAWK system is the predecessor to PATRIOT missile defense system made by Raytheon Technologies (RTX.N) which remains off the table for Ukraine, U.S. officials have told Reuters.

U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Spain intends to send four HAWK launchers.

The United States would likely initially send interceptor missiles for the HAWK system to Ukraine because it was unclear if enough U.S. launchers were in good repair, one U.S. official told Reuters. The U.S. systems have been in storage for decades.

A PDA is being considered for later this week, U.S. officials have said. One U.S. official said it would likely be about half the size of the recent security assistance packages which have been around $700 million.

It was not immediately clear if HAWK interceptor missiles would be included, but U.S. officials have previously cautioned that size and composition of military aid packages can change rapidly.

Since the Feb. 24 Russian invasion of neighboring Ukraine, which Moscow calls a "special military operation", the United States has sent around $17.6 billion worth of security assistance to Kyiv.

Fucking Christ, they aren't even trying to broker a peace deal just further escalation.....The Ukes better stock up on oil lanterns and kero is all I got to say.

At the very least biden must be made to replenish the stock he is giving away

 

[Manonthestreet]

Since the air war is mostly drones this is a waste

 

[1srelluc]

Actually, the article said the Hawk's have been sent to defend against both cruise missiles and drones.
It would be easy to add electronic counter-measures and flares to the drones in order to defeat the Hawk missiles, and I seriously doubt a decades old Hawk missile could intercept and destroy a modern cruise missile.

Also from the article, "U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month."

Sorry bozo Biden, while the Hawk missile was an advanced air defense system when first introduced in 1959, today it's basically an antique.

LOL....I was looking at the M501 carrier and they are rebuilding them as vintage sure enough.



.mil procurement boondoggle to fatten Neocon PACs much?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Actually, the article said the Hawk's have been sent to defend against both cruise missiles and drones.
It would be easy to add electronic counter-measures and flares to the drones in order to defeat the Hawk missiles, and I seriously doubt a decades old Hawk missile could intercept and destroy a modern cruise missile.

Also from the article, "U.S. President Joe Biden pledged to Ukraine President Zelenskiy that Washington would provide Ukraine with advanced air systems after a devastating missile barrage from Russia earlier this month."

Sorry bozo Biden, while the Hawk missile was an advanced air defense system when first introduced in 1959, today it's basically an antique.

Neither drones or cruise missiles carry ECM or flares. Both are disposable and ECM would increase cost and reduce payload. Plus ECM costs money and needs electronic components that Russia can’t produce for itself and is banned from importing. Plus HAWK is a radar homer, HAWK is an acronym for Homing All the Way Killer. It uses on-board active radar homing, like a AMRAAM missile.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Hawk missile system entered U.S. military service way back in 1959 and was phased out in 2001 when the Stinger replaced it.
Even though the Hawk missile system went through several upgrades during its years of service.
Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

It's probably aimed for at drones than at high tech fighter planes.

 

[Mushroom]

The HAWK interceptor missiles would be an upgrade to the Stinger missile systems - a smaller, shorter range air defense system - that the United States has already sent to blunt Russia's invasion.

The Biden administration would use the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to transfer the HAWK equipment which is based on Vietnam-era technology, but has been upgraded several times. The PDA allows the United States to transfer defense articles and services from stocks quickly without congressional approval in response to an emergency.

Sorry, I just don't see it happening. For a great many reasons.

Now HAWK is a good system, and it was not replaced by STINGER. What it was replaced by was PATRIOT. However, PATRIOT has a higher "minimum ceiling" than HAWK did, so Stinger takes the area of 0 to 100 meters or so that the PATRIOT simply can't cover. If anything, the closest to replacing HAWK was the AVENGER, which is essentially 8 STINGER missiles mounted on a truck.

And it has been constantly upgraded, I doubt there is anything of the original system left, other than the trailers they are mounted on. The newest generation of RADAR is a flat plane phased array unit, similar to that of the PATRIOT but smaller. And many nations still use it, and for a low altitude or close in attacker they are still highly effective.

But I simply do not see it happening because where are they going to get the HAWK units? The Army retired theirs in 1993, almost 30 years ago. The Marines retired their last one a few years later.

When I was at Fort Bliss, those things were all over the place. There was a junkyard out in town that had at least a dozen of the launchers. I do not even think there is enough functioning equipment to put together even a single Battery of 6 launchers in the entire United States. Now Raytheon might indeed have a handful of launchers, but those do not belong to us. They are maintained only for testing upgrades because they still do upgrades and maintain the 14 or so countries that still use it (obviously not counting Iran).

Now I have heard that Spain is considering sending some to Ukraine. However, those are not what apparently the President is talking about. He is talking about sending US owned equipment over there. And I want to know what in the hell is he thinking? That after decades of budget cuts, that the Army has sitting around dozens of maintained and functioning equipment just sitting in some warehouse?

Fort Bliss · Texas

Texas

www.google.com

That is the last place I saw a lot of HAWK equipment in one place. It was actually a civilian company that bought up a ton of them when they were sold off as surplus. Raytheon has a facility nearby, and they have been striping them to send to Raytheon for over 2 decades now. I remember when all of that storage area was full of launchers and RADAR systems. And now, there are only a couple left.

And while I generally never talk about the current President, he must have rocks in his head if he thinks that we have any of these to even send to Ukraine! Sending them some functioning HAWK systems from the US, is about as likely as sending them functioning M60 tanks. Or functioning F4 Skyhawks. Or sending them almost any of our other retired equipment. They are not kept in operating condition at all, at most simply in a state so they do not fall apart as they are canibalized for parts to sell to countries that do still use it.

That is why I am laughing, as there literally is nothing to send them.

 

[Mushroom]

Today's generation of jet fighters with modern electronic counter-measures should be able to easily defeat a Hawk missile shot at it.

Actually, that is not true.

The HAWK was always intended as a short range air defense system. Intended to fill the gap between the super-short range VADS system, based on the 20mm VULCAN and the intended mobile version of the NIKE-HERCULES. However, the mobile NIKE was scrapped, and the replacement took another 20 years to enter operation, by then known as PATRIOT.

But even by Cold War standards it was an impressive system. MACH 2.4, fired at low to medium altitude targets as ranges of no more than 20 kilometers. And over the decades they have amassed around 40 combat kills, primarily in the "War of Attrition" against Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. And the newest generation of HAWK really shares nothing with the original other than the profile of the missile, and maybe the trailer it sits on.

In fact, nobody but maybe IRAN still uses the old RADAR from decades ago. The AN/MPQ-64 SENTINEL RADAR is what is used now.

The same system the US uses on it's SHORAD equipment. And it is basically a cut down shorter range version of the same RADAR that PATRIOT and THAAD uses. The old days of 2 or 3 trailers with spinning dishes is long gone.

And being RADAR homing, they suffer much less problems when it comes to spoofing than air to air missiles do. In fact, the defenses used to defeat air to air missiles are nowhere near as effective when used against ground based systems. That is because A2A missiles are "fire and forget", and the tracking from start to finish is all done by the missile itself. Fool the missile, and it chases shadows. And the RADAR inside of a missile is not very large, powerful, or sophisticated.

However, ground based systems use RADAR that is much more powerful, and they have not only much more advanced processor capabilities, they have an actual person that can direct the missile to the target. Because the missile itself really does not have a RADAR system, it homes in on the signal sent from the ground based system. And if the operator sees they use chaff, then he simply ignores it. Of the 44 coalition aircraft lost in 1990-1991, only a single one was due to air to air combat. The other 43 were all shot down by ground based systems, of the same general era as the HAWK.

Sorry, but ECM is really not that effective at short ranges. Especially when the missile is coming at you at MACH 2.4. That is over 1,800 MPH (just under 3,000 kph). And as most engagements happen at 5 miles (8 kilometers) or less, the pilot does not even have enough time to say "What the hell is that?" before impact.

And if a pilot want to be stupid enough to fly around with their ECM active all the time, then you simply fire off a HARM missile at them. That not only laughs at ECM, it actively tracks and homes in on it. And yes, I know that officially, HARM is only used on air to ground missiles. But the US and Soviets were looking into this capability for years, and the most modern aircraft have little to no ECM capability at all. Only to be used when they know they have had a missile fired at them, as emitting that much radiation voids any stealth they might have.

You know, it might actually help if you actually knew something about air defense systems, and not simply dismissing something because it is "old". It was a system roughly comparable to the HAWK (S-125 - SA-3 GOA) that shot down one F-117 and damaged another in Serbia in 1999.