Seeing as to the different types of burden the air defense and the dangers that come from the air, there came the need for movement and in fact the success of the mission relies on the speed of movement.
It is the most recent techniques of modern air defense so it is important when choosing the air defense systems that it be able to move in an appropriate form. Even when it comes to large systems they are carried on giant trucks and are design to be easily and very quickly put together and dismantled. For in the past they were not this easily movable and transferable and where stationary (shape-4) and in this manner it was an easy target for missiles to hit such as the tomahawks via finding its position using manmade satellites.(shape-1)in contrast to moveable platforms (shape-2)(shape-3)(shape-5)that are able to appear in unexpected positions that cannot be accounted for in an attack therefore the hostile forces cannot be safe of its danger and with its constant and quick movement it presents itself as a constant threat. Also among the main challenges facing the aerial defense are the modern airplanes the likes of the raptor f22 and the ghost that depend on the mechanism of disguise/stealth and therefore do not show up on radars and this is where is main threat and danger lies. The advancement of scientific and military development are not going in one direction only and the arms race will shed its fruits in the area of developing new technologies to face up to the stealth/disguise techniques of these advanced fighter planes. But the ghost fighter planes can be caught on the normal radars but at an extremely close range having then taken its opposition by surprise, there are some advanced Russian radars that can catch the ghost fighter plane on radar like the camara radar which was produced in the checz republic during the late eighties and the recent edition in the early nineties add to the that the s400 modern system (shape-2) that can detect and destroy the ghost fighter plane at a range of 400 km.the sokhoi model su35 can also detect the ghost fighter plane within the range starting from 90km and 50 km using the optical system and there also some ordinary ways of intercepting and defending against it like installing air defense patrols at the hour also using ground visual observatories and planes without pilots but in large numbers which then detect it and shoot it down. The price of one ghost fighter plane can reach to 130 million dollars. Of course there are specialized systems which can defend against short range ammunitions in an full automatic manner and it is the favorite when dealing with helicopter planes. medium range system can also be used in a shape of a wall or circle to ensure the safety of a long range target but this process is costly as it involves a big number of these systems.
It is also possible to for example to reinforce the defense using a circular defensive loop of Pechora 2 and book(shape-3) as the range of protection increase with the increase of the circular loop and a large number of batteries .but does this defense technique suit defending on a large scale of all targets? The answer is No
For this reason I see that there should be a lesser amount of depending on medium range systems and acquiring batteries of long range that have the ability to deal with medium range targets and that for that is why it has may advantages such as:
-decreasing the cost
-increases the proportion of coverage
-Increases the intensity of coverage
-mutual protection
-freedom of maneuvering and not having to stay in a certain range.
-canceling the feasibility of a lot of the air arms out there today.
This does not cancel "much" the importance of short range batteries and short range systems in protecting the means of long range air defense and the industrial ,strategic and vital targets from a intensive attack with cruise missiles and the rest of the ammunitions and light planes without pilots that have small ammunitions that are yet able to hit and cause damage to these organizations.
Therefore the modern systems with long range abilities are able to deal with targets on a medium range not like the kall s200 or the folga sam2 missiles(shape-4) that launches a shell which is even larger than the enemies planes and can be most easily maneuvered on medium ranges, taking about s300 and s400 systems(shape-5)(shape-2) have the ability to deal with a large number of targets at one time and in any wave of attacks it will have acquired substancal damage before being able to fire its shells with the presence of the Greyhound and Tor(shape-3) on standby to defend and deal with it and the continuation of the s300/400 of hitting its targets while they attack and while they retreat.
Perhaps what I put forward is an future outlook that precedes prematurely its time.as the long-range air weapons systems still constitute only a small part of the arsenal of the Air Force across the world, which is still in the coming years are forced to move closer to its goals thus now and in the foreseeable future there is still a role for the mid-range systems in the air defense for the region, so that the plans to build, develop and strengthen the air defense networks must take into account what has been mentioned above.
Costs
In particular point cost cuff tend to favor long-term systems because it is seen in a cost-effectiveness, and not to the price and cost-effective means / price if you want inexpensive system at all you should acquire 14.5 mm guns which are in fact useless!
bok battery (shape - 3) the price of $ 60 million maximum range of 50 km
S-300 battery (shape - 5) price of $ 200 million a range of 150 km, for example,
How much is the coverage of Bok? 9498.5 km ² and how much is coverage of Wallace -300? 70,650 km ²
The price of Wallace -300 exceeds the price of Bok 3 times
But the coverage of Wallace -300 is better than the coverage of Bok by 7 times.
So the Authorized superiority in yield is 2.33 times
That modern ground - air long-term ballistics have the ability to maneuver well even in the medium range for it is not a huge and heavy shell like the past, such as the sam-5 Alfika or sam-2 Volga (shape- 4), which must burn a large portion of its fuel in order to become as light as needed to maneuver and thus can not engage with the targets over the medium range.
So The solution is in the long term systems to be stationed at the back where the planes over the medium range of the targets be too far for such systems and The effectiveness of this strategy relies on the conditions of the topography here we then must prepare several ambushes of shoulder-fired missiles on trends approaching concealed areas to prevent airplanes from flying low and using the ground in the event of such airplane fires missiles or bombs on the target before the long-range defense system can destroy it.for the short-range systems scattered around the target will be ready to destroy pending destruction of platforms that bombard the targets.
A Las 300 BM U 2 (shape - 5) Follow-up on a 100 targets and hit 10 targets at the same time at a distance of 5 km up to 150 km and an altitude of up to 27 km. The year 1997 saw another development of the system, where it was called the "S - 300 BMW or Favorite" which totaled a range of dealing with targets of 195 km. And this system can not fight only deal with ballistic missiles, but operational and tactical missile mid-range missiles of speeds Mach 8 at a level of destruction of 0.8 to 0.93 against aircraft and 0.8 to 0.98 against Tomahawks. So - the first circle of protection against all air threats as well as cruise missiles and long-range missiles.
- Second circle of defense against medium-range bok - M (shape - 3) and Sam 6 Sam 3 pechura M 2 M and the Hawk which is the strongest in any air defense , where it can effectively intercept very high bomber airplanes and conventional airplanes and multi-tasking airplanes without pilots and cruise missiles and long-range missiles.
- the smallest Circle is the greyhound and tor - Um, either the greyhound 12 km from the height of 5 m to 5 km and tor from over 12 km and rising up to 10 kilometers a it is a strong circle to some extent due to the cheapness of the missiles the airplanes hold and could sink that circle with missiles from outside the its range , this circle against cruise missiles, shells and intense raids by airplanes.
Long-term defense came to complement the medium-range defense and short range and not to as a replacements and as we have seen far-range defense is able to defend against cruise missiles and long-range missiles it can replace the circle of medium and short range.
But the problem is provide cheap air ammunition to attack from outside the scope and use of such systems medium-range intercept ammunition resulted in economic loss because the missile is more precious than the bomb that will bring it down .in origin the attacker is stronger than defender so most often the stronger nation is the one attacking so must be solutions defensive take into account the economic teams of military force and economic development, which tends to favor the attacker instinctively, the continuing attacks of the superior nation economically, industrially and militarily to fire missiles, which you continue to defend using Bok and Pechora missiles will lead to you running out of your missiles and not your enemy will not run out of bombs.
But when the solution to defend against those bombs using an economical system such as greyhound Here it's a whole different situation where you can defend using computer-guided artillery shells which are most definitely much cheaper than the what you will be destroying.
The second solution is obvious and most effective economically is to destroy the air plane before it could launch its missiles and this requires long-range systems.
Does this mean that medium-range systems are of no particular need? .. No
But there is a need for it and that is to respond and defend against cruise missiles.
cruise missiles are costly weapons thus economic efficiency exists as a reasonable surplus for the defender.
Why not just do with greyhound and short-range systems in dealing with the cruise missiles?
Because the cruise is a weapon which has a number of launch techniques even from outside long range systems. Which threats an intensive and simultaneous attack from all sides not being able to be defended by short-term systems. All of this because of the short time available and here comes the role of Bok mid-range in the sequential clash with those missiles and destroying them and relieving the pressure on the short range protection to destroy the rest, and the same thing for the destruction of reconnaissance planes, but the mid-range weapon must be of a very high capability in tracking low targets, here the conditions force the airplanes to enter the range of the medium range systems and if the cruise missiles maneuver and escape the mid range systems the long range systems will be waiting to take them out, therefore defending efficiently where multiple systems and multiple coverage of vital targets, increases the proportion of destruction and the rate of success is very large.
English 
العربية 
