New Russian missiles 9М100

According to the blog bmpd, during the International Aviation and Space Salon MAKS-2017, the opening of which is expected on July 18 2017 in Zhukovsky near Moscow, will be demonstrated short-range anti-aircraft missile 9М100 (under the open designation 9М100Е) developed by Concern EKR Almaz-Antey JSC. As indicated, the rocket is part of ZRK "Triumph"It is used as an active weapon of the ship-based air defense missile system. "

The single-stage short-range missile 9М100 is made according to the scheme with a carrying case, with lattice steering wheels and a solid-fuel engine with controlled thrust vectoring, which also greatly increases the maneuvering capabilities on the trajectory. In the middle section of the trajectory, the 9М100 rocket is controlled by an inertial system with radio correction from the shipborne radar, at the final section by a passive infrared homing system. Capturing the goal of the GOS is carried out immediately after the launch of the rocket. The missile warhead is initiated by a contact or proximity fuse.

Comments

[Alexey-74]

Such missiles are simply necessary, the "kids" cover the near zone of destruction ..... especially when they are part of the Triumph air defense system .....

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Alexey-74

"kids" cover the near zone of defeat

Wow, "baby" weighing 850 kg! (With such a mass, others fly away under or beyond 100 km ...)
Although the characteristics: reach at a height of 8 km and a range of 15 m, valid for missiles weighing less than 100 kg.
Some kind of uzhosss, not a rocket ...

[Alex777]

Captain! It is necessary to read what is written.
If it looks implausible - you need to re-read more.
To laugh at the mass-size model of a package of 4 missiles, calling it a rocket is a fake.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Alex777

Chuckle at the mass-size model of a package of 4 missiles, calling it a rocket -

Guilty, I will correct!
But 140 kg for such performance characteristics is too much (or 15km in range is not enough).
In general, it seems that this missile will have no targets other than anti-ship missiles and small boats - not a single strike aircraft will enter the affected area of ​​15 km, it doesn’t need it at all, and for no reason at all.

[Alex777]

HARM is the most obvious goal.

[Usher]

Quote: Captain Pushkin

Quote: Alex777

Chuckle at the mass-size model of a package of 4 missiles, calling it a rocket -

Guilty, I will correct!
But 140 kg for such performance characteristics is too much (or 15km in range is not enough).
In general, it seems that this missile will have no targets other than anti-ship missiles and small boats - not a single strike aircraft will enter the affected area of ​​15 km, it doesn’t need it at all, and for no reason at all.

Why not one? A-10 helicopters. Who will tell them that there is air defense, until they land a few)))

[venik]

And here is such a "long-awaited" 9M100 "lit up" !!!! At last!
True, judging by the pictures, two things remain completely incomprehensible:
1) - Actually, the infrared aiming head assumes the presence of a rather large photodetector lens in the bow (which actually gives such missiles a characteristic "blunt" appearance). And de she ?? Well, let's say the nose is covered with a drop-off “pointed-nosed” fairing - perhaps! But.....
2) - A lattice steering WHERE ????
Maybe I don’t notice something ??????

[opus]

1) on the photo is a layout that is 100 years old at lunch
2) Wikipedia, as always messed up: there is no solution. Steering wheel.
In my opinion there is a rotating tail unit.

On the topic ik- gsn, you are right.
There are no discarded fairings. This is pointless for such interception ranges.
Conclusion: either the layout is not complete or again the cant and we rl gn and only a passive ir sensor detonation.

See RIM-116, there is an IRG

[venik]

Quote: opus

1) on the photo is a layout that is 100 years old at lunch

=======
Well, I don’t know, in my opinion with previous versions - this layout is slightly different!
-----------

Quote: opus

There are no discarded fairings. This is pointless for such interception ranges.

=======
Well, here, you know, there is one "nuance" - the "speed of intercepted targets." Please note - The speed of intercepted targets is 3.6 thousand km / h !!! This means that the rocket should fly at least - FASTER!
Well, with regard to the fleet - then everything is clear ..... But in the case of the "land version" - the presence of a "protective" fairing is quite understandable: for the R-BB - it makes no sense, for the Navy - too! But for work "from the ground" - its presence may well be justified - dust and microparticles - may well "muddle" the "lens" (this, in fact, is not a lens, but a "fairing" - "transparent" in IR, UV and optical "ranges ......
In this case - the presence of a "protective" fairing is COMPLETELY justified!

[opus]

!!! This means that the rocket should fly at least - FASTER!

No, not at all.
What should she play catch-up?
Following up?
Why goat button accordion?
9m100 protects the object, i.e., what flies on it: radial and azimuthal speeds, relative to

[Dead duck]

Quote: venik

Maybe I don’t notice something ??????

This author was engaged in amateur performances.

[silver_roman]

still they would hit the target. There are many problems with it, or rather with the complex as a whole. she does not fly far

[maxim1987]

Quote: venik

2) - A lattice steering WHERE ???? Maybe I do not notice something ??????

I'm not special, but the steering wheels are probably not needed, as the engine with deflected thrust

[Dead duck]

Quote: maximNNX

I'm not special, but the steering wheels are probably not needed, as the engine with deflected thrust

There is no engine. Antigrave is worth it.
And that would not be declassified invented steering wheels and other nonsense.

[venik]

Quote: maximNNX

I'm not special, but the steering wheels are probably not needed, as the engine with deflected thrust

==========
Yes, in general, I’m also not a “specialist” in RVV (although I still had some relation, albeit distant to the R-73), but about the “engine with a deflected thrust” - forgive me, of course - an obvious “bust” ! This is a very expensive and complex design (for a "one-time" weapon!). Of course there are "gas rudders" (installed in the outlet nozzle), but they are not visible here either !! (see The source - http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2732719.html, there are MORE photos!)
Therefore, the "misunderstanding" came out!

[opus]

1. There are no lattice rudders - this is a mistake.
2. UVT is not only a nozzle deflected (which is a solid rocket engine. It is difficult and expensive), but let's say: gas-dynamic rudders, injection into the supercritical part of the nozzle from the “right side, central body, etc.
3. An inertial one is always needed whenever a capture occurs.
At the expense of radio correction it seems like a mistake, as with rudders

[opus]

Yes on solid propellant rocket engines.
Air-density is small (and mass), liquid is simpler: it evaporates.
You don’t have much: to break the axisymmetric flow and I didn’t write ... :(

Inertial, long ago and everywhere:
The inertial system and the airborne radar are made in one unit (Fig. 3), on the side panels of which are placed electronic circuits of the guidance system.



Plus (let's say) for some guidance systems inertial is mandatory.
TVM - Target Via Missile
Skyguard, SLIM, etc.

[venik]

Quote from rudolf

Secondly, does the nozzle deviate? And not fat for short-range missiles.

=========
I agree with this 100% !!!
---------------

Quote from rudolf

If the target is captured by its own seeker immediately after the launch of the rocket, then why the inertial with radio correction?

=========
Theoretically, an IR GOS (from “available” materials) can “grab” a target at a distance of 5-8 km. Even for 15-17 km - it is VERY expensive and terribly complicated design! Yes, and cumbersome .... For a "one-time" rocket - a "toy" - prohibitively expensive .....
That's why the "intermediate" option is used - with the "radio correction" after the start.

[vvs1978]

This is most likely the same for the new TOR-M2 TTX coincides.

[venik]

Quote: vvs1978

This is most likely the same for the new TOR-M2 TTX coincides.

==========
In-in! I thought about that too. Indeed, if the “updated” TORs could work not only in the “active”, but also in a purely “passive” mode, then for a “potential adversary” it would be such a “pain in the neck” - you won’t remove ANY “aspirin” !!!!! !!

[guerrilla]

Um ... 1000m / s? Those. the new Japanese anti-ship missile will no longer intercept ...
Oh polymers, polymers ....

[Alex777]

Nobody will intercept the new Japanese missile in Europe either.

[venik]

Quote: Guerilla

Um ... 1000m / s? Those. the new Japanese anti-ship missile will no longer intercept ...

=======
Well, to be honest, to intercept the "latest Japanese anti-ship missiles" - and OTHER means exist .......

[Alex777]

For example, what are other means?

[venik]

Quote: Alex777

For example, what are other means?

======
Well, the same "marine" TOP ...

[opus]

What is the relationship between the speed of missiles and the speed of the target?
Play catch-up?
And what is the sexual meaning of shooting the 9m100 zur at a target that has bombed and flies home?

A new Japanese PCR can also be brought down by a hunting rifle with buckshot, which has speed: 300-400 m / s

[venik]

Quote: opus

What is the relationship between the speed of missiles and the speed of the target?

========
I recommend to study the monograph by Irina Wenzel "Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics". It was written specifically for cadets of military schools of air defense and air force. There everything is very accessible stated !!!!!! (including the speed of the target and the "interceptor") !!!!!

[opus]

Quote: venik

monograph by Irina Wenzel "Theory of probability and mathematical statistics".

I was given other books

Quote: venik

There everything is very accessible set out !!!!!!

what nonsense.
What can be stated in Helena (and not Irina) Sergeyevna (literary pseudonym I. Grekova, nee Dolgintseva) by

Quote: venik

(incl. regarding the speed of the target and the "interceptor") !!!!!

?



Do I need to continue to "chew snot"?

[corporal]

with trellised rudders

And we have such a colander

[vvs1978]

I found out exactly the SAM for TOR-M2 range 16 km, height 10 km. (And the old 9m331 had 12 km and 6 km respectively)