Military Review

Business Insider on Russian rocket armament

27
The combat use of the latest Russian cruise missiles of the Caliber family, as well as the development of other complexes, attracted the attention of the whole world, and still remains the topic of the most active discussions. Military specialists and amateurs are trying to determine the real effectiveness of such weapons, to understand the threat it poses, and also to determine ways to protect against it or to find symmetrical answers. Such questions still lead to the appearance of interesting publications in the foreign press.


Over the past few weeks, the American edition of Business Insider has repeatedly raised the issue of the latest Russian missile systems. 23 March, an article entitled “The US Navy has a severe missile gap with China and Russia - was published” (“China and Russia went to the“ missile gap ”from the US Navy. How to defeat them?”) by Alex Loki. As is clear from the title, the subject of the publication was the current situation in the field of rocket weapons, as well as the consequences of the latest Russian and Chinese successes in creating new weapons.

A. Locky begins his article with a brief description of the current situation. US Navy still remains the most powerful fleet in the world, but the latest developments in China and the renewal of Russian missile arsenals have corresponding consequences. A new threat appears at sea, characterized by high range and speed characteristics. However, the US Navy and Lockheed Martin have ideas that will tip the scales in the direction of the United States in real combat.



The author recalls that over the years, the United States Navy has used the concept of distributed lethality (“distributed lethality”). The essence of this idea was to arm all ships and boats, even small and light ones, with the most powerful weapons, allowing you to strike at enemy targets at long range.

At the same time, the Russian and Chinese armed forces have already received new complexes with long-range missiles. The characteristics of such weapons make it possible to attack American ships long before approaching a small distance. In addition, both Chinese and Russian industry are now working on advanced hypersonic weapons that can fly five times faster than the speed of sound. Due to its speed, such a weapon will not leave even the hope of salvation for American ships.

A. Locki notes that the tension in relations between the USA, Russia and China has reached its peak in recent years. In particular, this is expressed in the fact that the Russian fleet, the marine aviation and coastal forces regularly threaten NATO ships, and the naval forces of the People’s Liberation Army of China, having received new weapons, prevent American forces from working normally in the South China Sea.

His vision of the current situation in the rocket industry was recently announced by the management of Lockheed Martin. Vice President of Tactical Missiles Chris Mang during a recent press conference held at the company's office in Arlington, made some interesting statements. First of all, he noted that defense is good, but the attack is even better. In addition, he recalled that leaving on their own will not shoot in the back.

C. Mang said that promising anti-ship missiles, such as the LRASM currently being developed (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile - “Anti-ship long-range missile”), can be put into service by the 2020 year. Such a weapon would allow the United States Navy to continue using the “See first, understand first, shoot first” strategy (“first saw, first figured, first shot”). The new LRASM rocket has a range of more than 200 nautical miles, carries an 1000 combat unit of pounds and hits targets, showing transonic speed of flight.

The new missile will also benefit the United States in another area that has not yet been adequately mastered by Russia and China - in naval aviation. According to the management of Lockheed Martin, over the next few years, work will be completed on integrating the LRASM rocket into the weapon system of various types of aircraft. Such weapons will be able to carry both F-18 fighter-bombers and B-1B long-range bombers. The first such results are planned to be received next year.

The author of the publication Business Insider notes that in the field of missile weapons, the United States is to some extent lagging behind competing countries. At the same time, the US Navy still has advantages in the field of radar systems, means of detection, monitoring and control. With the help of such equipment, ships will be able to notice the enemy earlier and react to it earlier, which will give a noticeable advantage in the event of hostilities.

Also Vice-President of Lockheed Martin touched upon the subject of hypersonic rocket armament and its use in the naval sphere. According to K. Mang, similar systems of American development are still far from practical application. However, the United States Air Force and the Advanced Development Agency DARPA are currently working on their own projects of such systems.

K. Mang also spoke about the possible characteristics of a new weapon. The hypersonic weapon differs in huge fuel consumption, and also is exposed to extremely high thermal loads. As a result, a truly fast flight may not last too long, and this limits the distance. The tactics of using such weapons should be as follows: the operator must be able to launch his hypersonic rocket before entering the zone of action of enemy weapons.

The naval forces continue to improve the combat information and control system of Aegis, as well as to increase the number of its carriers. Such equipment is proposed for use in the global missile defense system. In addition, with the help of such a CICS, it is proposed to “knock out” Russian and Chinese long-range missiles. In the future, the American information management system and related weapons should be able to combat hypersonic weapons.

A. Lokki completes his article with a curious thought. "On paper" the US Navy in some respects lose to the Russian and Chinese fleets. However, letters and numbers alone can never defeat the US Navy. Instead, the United States and its industry, represented by Lockheed Martin, continue to develop and improve their technologies in order to increase the capabilities of the armed forces in protecting the country.

***

The 6 of April edition of Business Insider published A. Loki’s new material titled “The US can't defend your new cruise missiles - try“ offense instead ”(“ The US cannot defend itself against the latest Russian cruise missile — perhaps instead protection should be attacked "), also devoted to the current situation in the field of missile weapons.

Business Insider on Russian rocket armament


On the eve of the publication of the article, April 4, a meeting of the US Senate Armed Forces Committee was held, in which the head of the strategic command, General John Heithen, took part. During this event, the commander bluntly stated that the United States does not have good defense systems to counter the latest Russian-developed cruise missiles.

The general said that the United States could not defend itself against such a threat and, moreover, protect its European allies from it. New Russian missile weapons can threaten most of the European continent, depending on the area of ​​deployment. All this causes serious concern, and therefore it is necessary to find a way to combat such threats.

A. Loki writes that the United States got into the existing situation not simply because of the technical superiority of Russia. He believes that the Russian complexes, which have become a cause for concern, violate the treaty on medium and short-range missiles - one of the most successful agreements in the field of disarmament. In fact, the INF Treaty prevented an increase in the number of nuclear weapons in Europe in the late eighties of the last century. Now the situation has changed. A number of experts in a conversation with the author of the publication Business Insider said that now Russia has the opportunity to attack any point in Europe from its territory.

At the same time, as the author notes, protection against cruise missiles is an extremely difficult task. Such weapons fly at high speeds and low altitudes. Because of this, the detection of missiles turns out to be an extremely difficult task for radar facilities, which are far from always able to find a flying object against the background of various objects, uneven ground, etc. Protection against cruise missiles throughout the European continent requires an advanced detection and tracking system - which in itself is far from a cheap solution.

An alternative to this may be a return to the previously used strategy. The United States may choose a different path, implying a warning to the Russian side against the use of medium-range missiles. The founder of the publishing house Arms Control Wonk, Jeffrey Lewis, told A. Loki about possible ways to solve the existing problem. To contain Russia can be used two basic methods of various kinds.

The first method of influencing the Russian side is the continuation of pressure on Russia. The United States must force Moscow to abide by the terms of the existing agreement on medium and short-range missiles. The second important method could be the beginning of a large number of advanced weapons development programs. Due to this, you can literally scare Russia and force it to act as necessary. To this end, J. Lewis, in particular, proposes to begin preparations for the deployment of land-based cruise missiles in Europe. Such weapons should be used if Moscow launches a banned rocket.

J. Lewis believes that the Russian side should be reminded why and under what circumstances the existing treaty on medium and short-range missiles appeared. He recalled that the Soviet Union quickly got rid of their arsenals, when it became clear that the United States would respond with similar measures. Also, the founder of the publishing house recalled that the United States wanted the INF Treaty because they did not want to deal with Soviet medium- and short-range missiles. At the same time, he calls for consideration of how dangerous US systems can be deployed, for example, in Poland, for example.

***

The reviewed publications of the American edition of Business Insider clearly demonstrate several basic ideas and opinions concerning the situation in the field of rocket weapons and have become widespread in the foreign press. As a result, these articles can be a good indicator.

The first material, “The US Navy has a more severe missile gap”, shows some features of the current reaction of foreign experts to Russian successes in the rocket industry. Experts are trying to predict what impact the latest Russian missiles can have on the course of a hypothetical conflict and the balance of forces in the oceans. In addition, the active quoting of a high-ranking executive at Lockheed Martin demonstrates a desire to show that the United States also has some success in the missile sphere.

The article “The US can't defend against the new cruise missiles - try it off, instead,” in turn, draws attention to the consequences of a strategic nature. At the same time, A. Lokki focuses on the incompatibility of Russian missiles with the existing international agreement. He claims that Russia's weapons violate the existing treaty on medium and short range missiles, and then tries to find possible answers to such threats.

It should be noted that the theme of a certain violation of the INF Treaty by Russia is not new. Over the past few years, foreign publications, primarily American ones, have been regularly writing about the testing of new Russian missiles, which allegedly fall under the limitations of the existing agreement. In addition, similar statements are heard from official representatives of various US government agencies. Until recently, such allegations concerned only promising ballistic missiles. For some time now, newer complexes with cruise missiles have appeared in such statements. Recent publications from Business Insider are a great example of this.



The presence of such accusations and the search for methods to counter the “Russian aggression” make it possible to suspect foreign authors and analysts of bias and bias. Nevertheless, it should be remembered that such views on current Russian work in the field of rocket weapons were widely spread and almost became the official point of view of the United States authorities.

The reference to the LRASM project in the context of the development of Russian and Chinese missile weapons is also of particular interest. Considering foreign successes, the American press does not forget to recall the existence of its own projects of a similar purpose. At the same time, along with a simple mention, there are indications of certain advantages of the American missile system. So, the author recalled the imminent emergence of the possibility of equipping the most diverse aircraft carriers with promising missiles.

In general, recent articles in the publication Business Insider and other foreign media allow us to draw a number of conclusions. Abroad, we really noticed the effect of the newest Russian attack missile systems, studied the use of such systems and made certain conclusions. In this regard, there are various assumptions regarding the protection against such weapons during a hypothetical conflict. At the same time, attempts are being made to expose Russian developments that do not meet the requirements of relevant international agreements. This may be an attempt to find a reason for this or that pressure on Russia, including with a view to reducing its advantages in the missile sphere.

It is obvious that the Russian armed forces and the defense industry will continue to develop missile systems of various classes, and in the future they will show new successes in this field. Existing and future progress is unlikely to please the foreign military, which will lead to the corresponding expected consequences. There will be new attempts to predict the future, to create an effective defense, or to counteract with the help of indictments.


The article "The US Navy has a severe missile gap with China and Russia -
http://businessinsider.com/missile-gap-us-navy-russia-china-lrasm-2017-3

The article "The US can't defend against the new cruise missiles - try it offense instead":
http://businessinsider.com/russia-inf-cruise-missile-us-no-defense-offense-2017-4
Author:
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. ImPerts
    ImPerts April 18 2017 06: 09
    +3
    Wow, lots of plans ...
    The main thing is not to tear yourself when climbing to the top of the Tsar Mountain.
  2. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 April 18 2017 06: 39
    +9
    A very predictable publication, especially on such tweaks given in the article: "... tensions between the United States, Russia and China in recent years have reached a peak. In particular, this is reflected in the fact that the Russian fleet, naval aviation and coastal forces regularly threaten NATO ships, and the naval forces of the People’s Liberation Army "Chinese, having received new weapons, prevent American formations from operating normally in the South China Sea."
    First, how can our coastal forces regularly threaten NATO ships if they behave wisely? In fact, we threaten them not regularly (from case to case), but always.
    Second, the PLA Navy in the South China Sea is at least nominally (from the name) acting in the case, but the American "connections"obviously got lost there.
  3. gla172
    gla172 April 18 2017 06: 44
    +1
    .... "snakes" are shaking ..... it means there is something ... our silence is silence, and then bam! Armata is ahead of bourgeois technology for years ..... and here it’s quiet and smooth, and then hop! .... and a rocket in the same spirit behind their collar))) soldier
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS April 18 2017 08: 34
      +9
      Quote: gla172
      .... "snakes" are shaking ..... it means there is something ... our silence is silence, and then bam! Armata is ahead of bourgeois technology for years ..... and here it’s quiet and smooth, and then hop! .... and a rocket in the same spirit behind their collar))) soldier

      All these publications are written in anticipation of the appearance of the RCC Zircon and ICBM Sarmat with the Yu-71 glider. So they freak out, maybe their hyperhigh-speed rocket in the test process is destroyed after a short time. And our Zircon is already undergoing state tests and apparently quite successfully. In addition, the dimensions of Zircon are the same as those of Caliber, which means that it is not necessary to plan new PUs on ships ...
      1. Max golovanovo
        Max golovanovo April 18 2017 10: 40
        0
        Interestingly, the name Zircon, is it a hint of the contents, by analogy with the fuel rod?
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS April 18 2017 12: 31
          +8
          Quote: Max Golovanovo
          Interestingly, the name Zircon, is it a hint of the contents, by analogy with the fuel rod?

          No ... this is the so-called "stone" series of anti-ship missiles ... Basalt, Granite, Onyx (Yakhont), Amethyst, Malachite and now Zircon ....
      2. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 April 19 2017 16: 42
        +2
        From the whole article I realized that Lockheed Martin is simply engaged in self-promotion ...........
      3. Delink
        Delink 29 June 2017 11: 38
        0
        Ours strive for universality and this cannot but rejoice.
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 April 18 2017 07: 11
    +5
    A brief summary based on the motives of Mr. Locky’s work: whatever Russia undertakes for its own defense, it should be flagged, and for persuasiveness, it should be resumed surrounding its missiles of all kinds. To do this, you must use any reason to accuse the Russian Federation of violating the agreement of the RMND, and under this raspberry begin to creatively master the Pentagon's military budget. As a result, everyone, except Russia, will be satisfied, but no one is interested in Russia's opinion on this matter.
  5. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz April 18 2017 07: 44
    0
    For me, so trying to adapt aircraft missiles to ship-based seems somehow inappropriate.
  6. gguess
    gguess April 18 2017 09: 45
    +2
    The created missile defense systems are focused on the destruction of maneuvering targets, and it is possible to intercept a hypersonic missile from the object it will be aimed at using a conventional anti-missile, as hypersound is possible only in the longitudinal direction of movement, and in the transverse direction the speed is normal - all the more so since a conventional engine is used before reaching hypersound! In addition, the shape of a hypersonic missile makes it less maneuverable and more difficult to control compared to a conventional missile! In general, 'the game is not worth the candle' ...
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS April 18 2017 09: 53
      +9
      Quote: gguess
      The created missile defense systems are focused on the destruction of maneuvering targets, and you can intercept a hypersonic missile from the object it will be aimed at using a conventional anti-missile,

      Do you understand what you wrote? If the missile is hypersonic, and even maneuvering, the time to intercept it is several times less. In addition, today's missile defense systems have limitations on the speed of the intercepted target and this figure does not exceed 4,5-5 misses so far there is a border of supersonic with hypersound. Let's say RCC zircon is declared with speed characteristics from 6 to 8 max ... and assuming that it also flies at very low altitudes and maneuvers, I’m interested to hear how you are going to intercept it ...
      1. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker April 18 2017 10: 15
        +4
        Quote: NEXUS
        and if we assume that it also flies at very low altitudes and maneuvers, then I’m interested to hear how you are going to intercept it ..

        What about a tennis racket?
        lol
        1. evil partisan
          evil partisan April 18 2017 12: 23
          +5
          Quote: stalkerwalker
          What about a tennis racket?

          No.
          not tried already:
          Hi Ilyich! drinks And I bought a new unit. I can install in your kindergarten ... repeat
          1. stalkerwalker
            stalkerwalker April 18 2017 12: 25
            +4
            Quote: Angry Guerrilla
            Hi Ilyich! And I bought a new unit. I can install in your kindergarten ...

            Yuri, hi!
            hi
            Right now in the seas ... enemy .. lol . You still need to get to the kindergarten.
            drinks
      2. gguess
        gguess 5 May 2017 12: 14
        +2
        To intercept a hypersonic missile, an ordinary anti-missile is enough to go on the opposite course, which does not take much time! And it's about the future ...
        Herbert Efremov, Professor, MSTU Bauman, 10.01.17/65/XNUMX: "When a hypersonic aircraft approaches a target, missile defense equipment will certainly detect it. And for the effective use of GLA it is necessary to protect it with our own means ... All hypersonic aircraft fly in plasma. An ionized cloud forms around, which affects communication GZLA control systems need to penetrate this plasma ... Turbulence begins in hypersound, the heat load on the device sharply increases, part of its shell collapses, but for GZLA this is unacceptable - a controlled product must but to maintain an aerodynamic shape. New materials are needed ... For normal combustion of fuel in a GZLA engine, it is necessary to create shock waves - to reduce the speed of the incoming air. The interaction of fuel and oxidizer must not break down, combustion must be stable. How to do this, in XNUMX years no one has come up yet. "
        Evgeny Fedosov, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 23.02.17/XNUMX/XNUMX: "We have long mastered hypersonic speeds on ballistic missiles. While working on guided planning blocks for them, we practically went through hypersonic control in the upper atmosphere. The planning block has a homing mode. And at lower altitude changes from hypersonic to supersonic. There will no longer be any hypersound at low altitude ... The second way to master hypersonic speeds is to build a supersonic ramjet engine, but such an engine has very complicated combustion physics. supersonic motion of the air mass inside the combustion chamber. Turbulence can occur there! And how combustion occurs in this turbulence, how efficient it is is a big question. The physics of hypersonic combustion is not yet clear ... Will an aircraft with such an engine be invulnerable to missile defense? I don’t think We and the United States are building missile defense in such a way as to be able to operate everywhere - both in space and at the entrance to the atmosphere, where maneuvers are possible. And here no forecasting works, continuous tracking is necessary ... Therefore, say, h It appears on some qualitatively new weapon that baffled missile defense, and generally becomes the main type of weapon - this is an exaggeration. "I don’t intuitively believe in the emergence of a hypersonic weapon paradigm."
    2. Operator
      Operator April 18 2017 10: 37
      0
      Mole-Blind Hypersonic Cruise Missile (> 5M) is a cardboard jerk compared to a supersonic maneuvering warhead of a medium-range ballistic missile (<5M) with RGSN.
    3. opus
      opus April 18 2017 11: 40
      +5
      Quote: gguess
      because hypersound is possible only in the longitudinal direction of movement, and in the transverse direction the usual speed - all the more,

      I got stuck ... to be honest.
      1 space (2,,, 3)) is also possible only in the longitudinal direction ..
      and 1aya (2, ah, 3я) also
      Quote: gguess
      using a conventional engine!


      Quote: gguess
      In addition, the shape of a hypersonic rocket makes

      it was necessary to make a sphere !!!!
      Quote: NEXUS
      with characteristics from 6 to 8 max ... and if we assume that it also flies at very low altitudes,

      on 6-8M you will not fly on SMV.
      You’ll burn and there’s not enough fuel to overcome the resistance of the environment
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS April 19 2017 16: 50
        +2
        Quote: opus
        on 6-8M you will not fly on SMV.
        You’ll burn and there’s not enough fuel to overcome the resistance of the environment

        Anton, maybe you’re right ... but at such speeds, by and large, no SMV is needed. There are no means of interception yet ...
        1. opus
          opus April 20 2017 18: 43
          +2
          Quote: NEXUS
          .but at these speeds, by and large, no SMW is needed.

          Yes, do not realize such a speed on SMV
          MIG-31: Maximum allowable speed:low altitude: 1500 km / h
          Quote: NEXUS
          There are no means of interception yet ...

          There are no means of interception on the level of 40-70 km.
          And so.
          48X6E3 / 48X6-2 / 48X6DM maximum speed of the intercepted target (radial) 4800km / hr
    4. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 April 19 2017 16: 46
      0
      Really? Do you think that all trials of Zircon are just a bluff? If your game is not worth the candle, why is the Moscow Region so persistently conducting state missile tests? Just don’t talk about cutting money ...
  7. Max golovanovo
    Max golovanovo April 18 2017 10: 37
    0
    "Now Russia has the opportunity to attack anywhere in Europe from its territory," amendment, not of Europe, but of the World.
  8. Pacifist
    Pacifist April 18 2017 11: 47
    +8
    The main idea of ​​these arrivals regarding the violation of the INF Treaty is to accuse Russia of what they are doing themselves and to do this as soon as possible so that there is reason to say "we first said." What about a unilateral withdrawal from the ABM treaty? or deploying missile defense systems with μ41 cells that you can easily cram instead of Tomahawks missile defense missiles? Another nonsense from the category of "I do not see logs in my eye." Let them put pressure on oranges in Florida, there will be at least an effect. They have a clearly misconception about a causal relationship regarding an INF agreement. They needed him no less than us. It is for this reason that they so desperate about the destruction of the Oka, and the humpbacked one - Paskuda, went on about it. They violated ALL the contracts that they concluded. They conclude them only when they need to. Up to this point, no reasonable argument leads to any agreement. Formally, they are not contractual due to the inability to fulfill obligations due to the structure of the political system. Repeatedly, agreements with them have been disavowed by the following administrations under the pretext of "Well, you, we didn’t promise, these are different, but they lost the election." They wanted to spit on international law. They remember about human rights when they need to raise another bogeyman with accusations of someone for their own benefit, and they themselves do such a thing, for which in a decent society they beat their faces.
  9. NicolasFrench
    NicolasFrench April 18 2017 14: 30
    0
    I am amazed at the scandalous utterances by the scribes that the United States Army is the most, and the fact that the not-so-modern Russian airplane mocked the most modern equipment - Cook and his team, they forgot about it or pretend to be silent. Or a completely fresh example with axes. And no one knows that Russia can reset everything that flies with amers. And all this will fall on the borders of eastern Europe, and they really need it? And what if (I fantasize) there are electronic warfare systems that will explode a nuclear sob right at launch, what the hell is not joking? Boys, do not put out, while you can sleep with a child's carefree sleep.
    1. Vz.58
      Vz.58 April 18 2017 22: 53
      +2
      It would not hurt you to understand the topic. And then in the headlines ... but maybe these are needed.
      I do not insult anyone, I do not scold, it is you yourself
  10. Vz.58
    Vz.58 April 18 2017 22: 49
    +2
    I looked at the winning broadcast, flipped through some physics and calmly, without fear from Russian missiles, I can fall asleep. Our slingshot kids have
  11. iouris
    iouris April 19 2017 12: 39
    +1
    In addition to the US administration, no one sets the goal of world domination. A constraining factor for the United States is the ability of the enemy to destroy cities in the United States (and not only), as well as super-yachts and secluded islands in the Pacific Ocean, as well as the determination of the enemy’s leadership to do so in the event of an attack. There is a need to constantly strengthen the confidence of the US administration that the answer will be just that.