The answer is no - the Russian early-warning radars could not see the missiles that North Korea launched on July 4th - their trajectories were too low for that. The only possible exception would have been the allegedly long-range Taepodong II had it survived a bit longer - the radar in Mishelevka would have probably seen it after about 90 seconds into the flight. But since its flight was terminated at about 40 seconds, the radar did not have a chance.
The answer is even easier with satellites - Russia does not have any that would be able to see a launch from North Korea. The United States, in contrast, has four (!) DSP satellites, looking at North Korea - DSP F-21 at 70E, DSP F-22 at 130E, DSP F-18 at 145E, and DSP F-17 at 165W (here is the larger version of the picture). With this kind of coverage, it is certain that the United States was able to get a fairly good look at the launches.
The book
Comments
Would Russia need to have satellites observing N.Korea rather than observing U.S. and N. Europe instead? Also, did could S-300 radars have detected the launches?
Not that Russia would specifically look at North Korea. But the US-KMO system was supposed to have (almost) global coverage, so it would cover it as well.
As for S-300 (or other air-defense radars), according to Kommersant, the 23rd Air Defense Corps at Vladivostok did detect the missiles, but only at the reentry.
And, why should Russia track missiles lauched to the Pacific Ocean rather than launched to Siberia? It's strange that an analyst that claim that is better to "don't fix" the Russian early warning netwok now is "complining" because the network didn't tracked the Korean missiles.
I'm not complaining about anything - I'm just stating the facts. North Korea was the last thing in the minds of the Russian early-warning system designers, so nobody expects it to look that way.
I think Russian satellites/ground radars should track North Korean missile launches at early stage. Missiles launches may harm to Russia's national security. If any North Korean missiles accidently fall in Russian territory then it may cause minor casualties as well. It is not clear why the US did not take any practical steps to intercept North Korean long range missilies! Are they really capable to intercept any ballistic missile with their missile defense system?
"...It is not clear why the US did not take any practical steps to intercept North Korean long range missilies!..."
Yes it is.The US doesn't have operational anti-missile system.
Because the Teopodong-2 exploded shortly after the take-off.
It was a missed opportunity to test the "shield" against a real thing.
I apologize Pavel. Respect to the number of launches, Baluyevsky told to the press that 10 were detected. This differs of western claims of just 7 but agree with south-Korean reports.
In the fifty-seven or so years of nuclear deterrence, it seems the focus has always been on the polar missile threat to both Russia (Soviet Union) and the United States. The satellite systems and communication & control have always been orientated in that direction. There was a brief time in the 1970s that Soviet ballistic missile submarines operating in coastal US waters (mid Atlantic, for example) created a panic in the Pentagon and a series of East-West coast radar systems (PAW Systems) were deployed to detect such a missile launch. But, as the Delta III-IV and Typhoon class were deployed, the Soviet Union pulled these subs back to home waters where they could be better protected and still hold American targets at risk with their longer ranged missiles. This PAW lateral radar system fell into disuse and was dismantled. If a SCUD missile was fired today from Cuba, I wonder if American radars and defense systems would detect?
Frank Shuler
USA
That's he problem of an all-azimuth LPAR- network. Even if USA is hardly able to construct the net, for Russia will be much more difficult. May be the deployment of semi-mobile radars like the Voronezh DM could palliate the problem by first constructing several radars and later by the relocation of a few ones according the evolving scenario.
Kolokol, any chance such a mobile radar system as you've described could be airborne or would such a system just be too cumbersome? The air platform would only have to detect such a launch and send the information to a ground station for processing. The United States is looking at using dirigibles for such a mission. What is unclear to me is how close such an air platform would need to be to the launch to detect.
Frank Shuler
USA
Frank, honestly, I don't know but even USA, that have more advanced electronics, is deploying an X-band radar in a platform in the Pacific Ocean, so I assume that any radar specialized in tracking warheads should be surface-based, probably because the requirements of radiated energy are extreme.
Unlike USA, Russia is not interested in "global coverage" but probably want to have an "around the clock" coverage for its mainland.
Kolokol, I did read recently that a mobile (I guess that's up to interpretation) X-Based radar system was moved in Japan from the US Air Base at Misawa, Japan to a Japanese SDAF Base to be using in tracking the North Korea launch. I not sure exactly how portable such a system is but this would fit your theory as what would be needed to track regional missile threats.
Frank Shuler
USA
Frank, we are talking about tons of metal, wires, chips and so on. This can only fit in the semi-mobile category. Impossible to move once a week.
Agreed. I'm not sure this could even be classified as a "semi-mobile system".
Frank Shuler
USA