[Goose]

say this just now.   Feels like a continuation of many points in this thread.  Should be free, and I am curious for comments about both potential efficacy and the possibility that developing this might free up more older munitions for the Ukraine (doubt it given pace, but always looking for hope)

https://www.wsj.com/world/new-missile-fo..._permalink

One old munition that seems to be getting freed up is the Hawk Anti Aircraft missile.  Apparently there is something like 40,000  of the lying around NATO and work is afoot to get to Ukraine. Hopefully it is true, While it is OLD technology, it still works and apparently should work well against what Russia is sending against Ukraine.  i would think it is generally a better weapon than the Patriot and much cheaper for most purposes in Ukraine.

https://armyrecognition.com/military-pro...-states-uk
https://www.twz.com/air/first-inside-loo...se-systems
https://www.twz.com/ukraine-to-receive-h...from-spain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-23_Hawk
https://armyrecognition.com/focus-analys...e-missiles

Indeed 40,000 HAWK missiles were delivered over the years. How many are still in existence is another question. The performance of various MIM-23 variants is also quite different. For use against drones such as the Shahed 136 MIM23-E or F will be required. While I am relatively sure lots of those were built I have no idea how many are "out there" today.

Ukraine has confirmed it has received I-HAWK Phase III batteries from Spain. Spain also has HAWK XXI systems that perhaps are what was actually donated. These systems have the AN/MPQ-64 acquisition radar, which is actually "modern" since it is the radar used in the NASAMS. I can see this variant being quite useful. The literal "Phase III" systems using an AN/MPQ-62 for low altitude acquisition are indeed a significant step down. They "work", but the smaller targets low radar cross sections are problematic.
 
The fact that must be remembered is that ALL HAWK MIM-23 missiles are SARH. That means the illuminator must stay on the target the entire time. The reflection from the target must also be large enough that the missile can detect and process it. Unlike an AMRAAM the HAWK system has NO uplink. You can't launch the missile stupid and guide it toward the target until it goes active and acquires the target. The HAWK missile HAS to acquire almost immediately or it goes stupid permanently. The battery may be tracking the target just fine but if the missile doesn't acquire, game over. Of course, if the the battery loses track, the illuminator will too and that is equally game over.
 
It must also be noted that the HAWK systems will suffer the same serious limitations against low altitude targets that all point defense systems share. There will never be enough of them. The HAWK has the additional limitation that it can only engage two targets at a time because it only has two illuminators. For a few years there were attempts to "time share" a single illuminator but apparently that didn't work.

[Goose]

say this just now.   Feels like a continuation of many points in this thread.  Should be free, and I am curious for comments about both potential efficacy and the possibility that developing this might free up more older munitions for the Ukraine (doubt it given pace, but always looking for hope)

https://www.wsj.com/world/new-missile-fo..._permalink

One old munition that seems to be getting freed up is the Hawk Anti Aircraft missile.  Apparently there is something like 40,000  of the lying around NATO and work is afoot to get to Ukraine. Hopefully it is true, While it is OLD technology, it still works and apparently should work well against what Russia is sending against Ukraine.  i would think it is generally a better weapon than the Patriot and much cheaper for most purposes in Ukraine.

https://armyrecognition.com/military-pro...-states-uk
https://www.twz.com/air/first-inside-loo...se-systems
https://www.twz.com/ukraine-to-receive-h...from-spain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-23_Hawk
https://armyrecognition.com/focus-analys...e-missiles

Indeed 40,000 HAWK missiles were delivered over the years. How many are still in existence is another question. The performance of various MIM-23 variants is also quite different. For use against drones such as the Shahed 136 MIM23-E or F will be required. While I am relatively sure lots of those were built I have no idea how many are "out there" today.

Ukraine has confirmed it has received I-HAWK Phase III batteries from Spain. Spain also has HAWK XXI systems that perhaps are what was actually donated. These systems have the AN/MPQ-64 acquisition radar, which is actually "modern" since it is the radar used in the NASAMS. I can see this variant being quite useful. The literal "Phase III" systems using an AN/MPQ-62 for low altitude acquisition are indeed a significant step down. They "work", but the smaller targets low radar cross sections are problematic.
 
The fact that must be remembered is that ALL HAWK MIM-23 missiles are SARH. That means the illuminator must stay on the target the entire time. The reflection from the target must also be large enough that the missile can detect and process it. Unlike an AMRAAM the HAWK system has NO uplink. You can't launch the missile stupid and guide it toward the target until it goes active and acquires the target. The HAWK missile HAS to acquire almost immediately or it goes stupid permanently. The battery may be tracking the target just fine but if the missile doesn't acquire, game over. Of course, if the the battery loses track, the illuminator will too and that is equally game over.
 
It must also be noted that the HAWK systems will suffer the same serious limitations against low altitude targets that all point defense systems share. There will never be enough of them. The HAWK has the additional limitation that it can only engage two targets at a time because it only has two illuminators. For a few years there were attempts to "time share" a single illuminator but apparently that didn't work.