Interception of Russian Kh-101 cruise missile by American MIM-23 Hawk SAM system caught on video

25 May 2025 273 715 12

The competition (rivalry) between Soviet/Russian and Western weapons continues. An interesting video has appeared on the Internet, which shows footage of the interception of a modernized Russian strategic cruise missile Kh-101 class "air-to-ground" using of technologies reducing the radar signature of the American MIM-23 I-Hawk medium-range anti-aircraft missile (SAM) surface-to-air missile system (SAM).

It should be noted that it is not yet known when this video was filmed. Definitely not today. At the same time, it clearly demonstrates an improved version of the Kh-101 with an improved optical-electronic guidance system, which began to be used in November 2023 and is called "Product 504AP".

The short frames themselves serve as proof of this. In them, one can see how, a second before interception, decoys are automatically fired from the L-504 passive interference unit, releasing small clouds of dipole reflectors to hinder the operation of the enemy's radar.

Therefore, the Russian munition is definitely recent. It is difficult to determine what age category the American interceptor missile belongs to. But it is probably not from 1959, when the MIM-23 I-Hawk entered service, but a more modern version. Ukraine has at least 6 Hawk PIP Phase III launchers.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Petr_Yakovlev

-10

25 May 2025 19: 53

Fake... And a complete fake, not proven by anything...
AC130 Gunship

+19

25 May 2025 19: 59

Quote: Petr_Yakovlev
Fake... And a complete fake, not proven by anything...

If you think that "stupid Americans" have been producing junk for air defense needs for decades, you are deeply mistaken. Underestimating the enemy's military potential is a very dangerous and short-sighted step.
Caliber Kinzhalovich

-8

25 May 2025 20: 32

And licking the heels of the khokhlobidors and their vassals is just plain disgraceful.

The only way to burn this filth here is with napalm
Valery Bor

+6

26 May 2025 07: 37

Fierce rivalry and competition are evident. This is the motivation for further developments and improvements. Where else, if not on the battlefield? Our designers are the best in the world, they will take this fact into account. The main thing is not to listen to the cries - "all is lost!"
KLNM

+3

26 May 2025 09: 27

It turns out that the traps didn't help... then who were they made for?
prior

+8

26 May 2025 09: 49

The USSR defeated the fascists in the Great Patriotic War not so much with the quality of its military equipment, but with its technological advancement, low price and quantity.
There should be so many geraniums, cruise missiles and decoys that even the most advanced American anti-aircraft missiles would not be enough.
Working

+5

26 May 2025 11: 19

From the point of view of the average person, it is not clear from the video which missile shoots down the X-101. The ground-based SAM flies from the bottom up and approaches the target from below or parallel, on a chase or head-on course. The X-101 missile flies at an altitude of about 50 meters above the ground, hiding behind folds of the terrain, a very difficult target for a ground radar. In the video, the SAM flies from above the target, that is, the launch platform was above the X-101 missile. Hence the conclusion that the SAM was launched from an airplane. It is easier to detect an X-101 from an airplane. You can’t hide from it behind a mountain or high-rise buildings. And apparently the interceptor was close to the target, hovering above the missile, accompanying it, so the SAM falls from above. Well, you can fight the interceptor if you raise a MiG 31 or Su-35 with a long-range missile into the air. Then the interceptor aircraft risks becoming a target itself.
1. Dingo
  
  +4
  
  26 May 2025 13: 45
  
  From the point of view of the average person
  
  ...your train of thought is approximately correct. But guidance "in pursuit" or on a "head-on course" is called guidance to the rear hemisphere or to the front, respectively.
  But guidance from an interceptor does take place, however, if it has a so-called "parabolic" sight, i.e. one that can take a target against the background of the earth, reflecting off it and illuminating the target against the background of the sky like a mirror.
  From this we can conclude that our missile was "waited" by an interceptor with exactly this sight. And this already leads to other conclusions...
  I say this because I myself was involved in such guidance (air defense missiles and aircraft), at the Sary-Shagan training ground in the late 70s, as a sergeant, a first-class automated control system operator with his own crew of operators.
  
  The missile flies at an altitude of about 50 meters above the ground, hiding behind folds of terrain, making it a very difficult target for ground radar.
  
  To be more precise - from 50 to 100 m in height. It is very difficult to get such a cruise missile with a ZRV complex, it gets lost in the "locals" (light on the screen from local objects - hills, buildings, etc.), because it goes with the relief of the terrain. Guidance in them is only by extrapolation (specialists know).
  As for the interceptors (IA) - the pilots descended to a height of less than 400 meters, aiming at the rear hemisphere, so that at such speeds it was a piece of cake to "smear" it across the steppe with the slightest error in aiming... There were cases - they simply left the aiming, cursing on the air like crazy... Then these sights appeared on the planes - and things went well.
  Returning to "other conclusions" - why does everyone think that the enemy has not acquired our old Soviet aircraft with such sights, the same MiG-21?
  But this is a question for another service - we have completed our task...
Working

-3

26 May 2025 11: 47
Land-based MIM-23 air defense missile system.
Mongolor

+1

26 May 2025 12: 18

Hawk is a serious, albeit outdated system.
like the early BUKs in the Ukrainian army
75 Sergey

+2

26 May 2025 19: 01

Well, that was to be expected, sooner or later an antidote will be found, now we need to upgrade the missile so that when an interceptor approaches it will perform an evasive maneuver, since the traps seem to be ineffective.
mykola kovacs

0

27 May 2025 15: 34

The X101 is slow but inexpensive. Therefore, in dollars it is approximately equal to the American anti-aircraft Hawk. Nothing terrible. You just need to raise the route higher.