Military Review

The main enemy of "Onyx" is almost in the series. Britain creates a problem of anti-ship potential of the Russian Navy

86



One of the most important elements in maintaining the combat stability of modern naval and carrier strike groups, without a doubt, are promising naval anti-aircraft missile and anti-aircraft missile and artillery complexes of self-defense of short and medium range, designed to cover both individual NK and warrants in general from massed "star" attacks by anti-ship and anti-radar missiles of the enemy. The list of the main requirements for this anti-aircraft / anti-missile armament in the XXI century includes: compactness of interceptor missiles, their high maneuverability, as well as guidance systems, allowing to realize the principle of “let-forget” and not overload the computing power of the multifunctional guidance radar and combat information and control system (we are talking about equipping missiles with infrared and active radar homing heads). Due to this, there is a quick release of target channels MRLS, as well as channels of simultaneously induced interceptor missiles, which greatly increases the fire performance of the ship or ground-based air defense missile systems.

As we have repeatedly noted in numerous previous works, the US Navy in this direction is still lagging behind the developed fleets of Western European states, as well as the Russian Navy. So that no one else has any questions about the current capabilities of the Aegis-ESSM ligament in confronting the massive use of small-size high-speed anti-ship and anti-radar missiles of the enemy, we recall that at the moment the ammunition assembly of universal launchers Mk 41 destroyers of the class Arleigh Burke and “Ticonderoga” missile cruisers are represented by the RIM-162 “Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile” anti-aircraft missiles of the Block 1 modification equipped with semi-active radar GPS. These interceptors require constant illumination from the side of the AN / SPG-62 radar; the latter aboard the Arleigh Burke are only 3, and therefore the number of simultaneously hit targets is 3 units, while the ZUR correction channels are 18 (the number of missiles simultaneously launched to intercept). At the same time, the approach of several dozen EHVs distributed over the echelons to the Aegis ship will “overload” the target channels, and the target will be hit.

RIM-174 ERAM (SM-6) ultra-long-range anti-aircraft guided missiles that use the AIM-120C AMRAAM air combat missile with an increased slot area Here, the simultaneous defeat of 18 VC can be implemented, since the SM-6 does not depend on the 3-4 illumination channels of the SPG-62 and use the data received from the main AN-SPY-1A / D (V). However, the use of a limited arsenal of SM-6 to destroy the attacking PKR, PRLR and other elements of high-precision weapons is an extremely expensive and inexpedient pleasure, capable of depriving a warship of an anti-aircraft arsenal in a matter of minutes, and therefore American sailors will have another two or three years to wait for their initial combat readiness with advanced RIM-162 Block II ESSM (this will happen no earlier than 2019). And the maneuverability of the SM-6 leaves much to be desired: the presence of only aerodynamic rudders does not allow intercepting vigorously maneuvering with overloads of more than 12-20 units. anti-ship missiles, while RIM-162 have an OVT gas-jet system that brings the available missile overloads to 50-55G during burnout of a solid propellant charge.

Unable to provide full protection from modern air threats and shipboard anti-aircraft missile systems modifications "RAM" and "SeaRAM". Complexes presented multiply modular inclined launchers Mk 49 (equipped with 21-th transport and start-up cell for NK large displacement), as well as more compact Mk 15 Mod 31 CIWS (performed in a "package" of 11 TPK with integrated opto-electronic and radar posts for ships of small displacement) are equipped with anti-aircraft short-range anti-aircraft missiles RIM-116A / B worth 350 - 450 thousand dollars per unit. Despite the fact that the latter are equipped with sufficiently effective and interference-free infrared-ultraviolet 2-range homing heads POST-RMP from the Stinger FIM-92B anti-aircraft missiles of the Stinger complex, the probability of interception of anti-aircraft maneuvers of supersonic anti-ship missiles remains extremely low, since the Mk XNUM solid propellant maneuvers Mod 36 (from AIM-11M air combat missiles) is not capable of maintaining high supersonic flight speeds for a long time at the level of 9-2,3М, especially at ultra-low altitudes, where the effect a erodynamic inhibition reaches the limit values. In particular, if the speed of the RIM-2,5A / B missiles reaches 116 km / h at the time of the solid-fuel charge of the main engine, then immediately after its burning it begins to decrease rapidly to 2520-1,5М when even maneuvering subsonic anti-ship missiles become impossible to intercept.

For example, RIM-116 Block I anti-aircraft guided missiles can destroy targets maneuvering with 10-12G overloads at a distance of no more than 5-6 km, while the Block II missiles with 1,3 times more long-playing engines - at a distance of 7-9 km As for the air attack tools operating with the G-limit in 15 and more units, SeaRAM cannot strike them at all due to the lack of advanced controls (gas-dynamic transverse control engines and / or gas-jet or interceptor thrust vector deflection systems). Moreover, the RIM-116A / B anti-aircraft interceptor missiles are not able to effectively counter high-precision missiles equipped with passive homing tools, as well as those approaching with a spent fuel charge. This category of targets includes corrected, guided bombs, as well as anti-radar missiles. All of the above weapons have almost zero infrared signatures (they are not capable of “capturing” IR GOS POST-RMP), and also do not emit electromagnetic waves, which are the main source of target designation for specialized paired passive radar sensors placed in front of the IKGSN fairing RIM-116B.

Nevertheless, these self-defense anti-aircraft missile systems are far from the most advanced anti-missile weapons to cover the near borders of Western ship and carrier strike groups. According to the TASS news agency, citing the British edition of The Daily Telegraph, December 21 of 2017, the advanced sea-level anti-aircraft missile system Sea Ceptor mounted on the HMS Agryll (F231) frigate of the Duke class was successfully conducted. During the dual launch of the CAMM, 2 aerial targets were destroyed. Recall that in the early summer of this year were conducted throwing trials of missile data, then, in September, the British Navy, together with the specialists of the British division of MBDA (Matra BAE Dynamics Alenia), conducted full-scale tests to intercept a single air target . An extremely valuable information base was obtained regarding the flight-technical features of the promising CAMM interceptor missiles and the operation of a two-way radio channel for data exchange between the missile and the ship's MRLS, or other means of target designation. This groundwork will make it possible to even more clearly optimize the software algorithms of the inertial navigation system and the homing heads of the CAMM missiles for use over the surface of marine / oceanic theaters of military operations.

What features can the CAMM anti-aircraft guided missile boast in comparison with our short range interceptors 9М330-2 / 9М338 of the Kinzhal / M-Tor complexes? Firstly, excellent network-centricity on the marine theater of the 21st century. This missile system was designed according to a modular scheme in the framework of the single FLAADS program (“Future Low-Altitude Air Defense System”) in parallel with the ground-to-air ground-to-air CAMM (L) missile and air-to-air CAMM (A) air defense missile. "Dog dumps" and medium-range air combat, and therefore it can be programmatically adapted for obtaining target designation from third-party sources (airborne aircraft E-3D, subtle F-35B fighter jets, etc.). In our 9М330-2 anti-aircraft missiles and the promising 9М338 (Р3В), this quality is not implemented even at the hardware level, especially since it does not allow to make radio command control strictly dependent on the control radio channel on the carrier. In turn, the radio command control reveals another well-known drawback of the M-Torov and Daggers - the limited target channel of the complexes, where one module / antenna post of the IRN9A331MK-1 or K-12-1 can provide simultaneous fire work no more than on four air targets.

The British Sea Ceptor anti-aircraft missile system is devoid of this problem, since the CAMM anti-aircraft missiles are equipped with active radar homing heads, making it possible to simultaneously fire up to several dozens of air targets (depending on the ship’s decimeter ЛRLS computational capability) . Similar parameters are possessed by Umkhonto-R short-range / medium-range anti-aircraft missiles used by the Umkhonto complex from the South African defense company Denel Dynamics. In comparison with the three-band homing head of the RIM-116B SAM (IR / UV and passive radar), ARGSN CAMM missiles do not impose restrictions on the interception of "cold" air targets with an inactive engine flying up to the defended object. Also, the probability of destroying a target by the kinetic method (direct hit) increases by several dozen times, which opens up certain “horizons” in the fight against ballistic objects.

Secondly, the CAMM anti-aircraft missiles have a maximum flight speed of 3700 km / h, which makes it possible to overtake such complex and high-speed anti-ship missiles like the Granit and even the Onyx 3М45 in flight from a short distance; moreover, such speed will allow to prolong the process of ballistic braking of a rocket, which increases the effective range for any type of targets, even after burning out the fuel. For maneuvering characteristics of CAMM rockets, aerodynamic tail rudders are responsible, and it is possible (not confirmed) and tail gas rudders. As is known, the latter are intended to induce the missile defense in the direction of the target immediately after the CAMM leaves the TPC of a vertical launcher, but can also be used at the moment of active turning to the target in addition to the aerodynamic planes.


If you look closely at the demonstration videos made at the MBDA laboratory stand, as well as during throwing tests and at the test site, you will notice that the rocket is equipped with a gas-jet thrust vector deflection system, represented by a cross-shaped nozzle tail, performing its function throughout the entire engine operation period. Elements OVT are mechanically synchronized with the servos controlling the aerodynamic control surfaces.


From all this it follows that CAMM missile interceptors, having a ridiculous mass of 99 kg and body elements based on high-strength composite materials and alloys, are capable of reaching 60-70 units, as well as their South African "relatives" Umkhonto-R ". As a result, the British CAMM missiles are able to withstand even the most nimble supersonic anti-ship missiles of the 3M55 Onyx, 3M54E Caliber-NK and X-41 Moskit types. As for the range, the standard version of the CAMM rocket (3200 mm long and 166 mm body diameter) can work on targets at a distance of up to 30 km, long-range (CAMM-ER, developed with the support of the Italian MBDA division) - 45-50 km . These missiles can be used both from the standard VPU GWS26 Mod.1 for Sea Wolf missiles, and from the Mk 41 UVPU using quad farms (4-fold increase in the ammunition load). With these parameters, Sea Ceptor air defense systems turn the ships of the British Navy into a rather serious headache for both individual strike submarines, “aircraft carrier killers,” and for the KMG in general for a very long period of time, before the transition fleet to hypersonic anti-ship missiles Zircon.

Information sources:
http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/4831015
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/sea_ceptor/
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/ram-rim-116a/
Author:
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Titsen
    Titsen 27 December 2017 06: 47 New
    +7
    The cast is removed, the client leaves?

    I believe that the article describes the most pessimistic option - teaching exercises, but in practice they forgot about the ravines ...
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow 27 December 2017 07: 18 New
      12
      Almost all Russian weapons tested only on exercises
      1. iouris
        iouris 30 December 2017 03: 26 New
        +3
        All nuclear charges too.
        1. Berkut24
          Berkut24 1 January 2018 21: 02 New
          +2
          And the Japanese in the 45th didn’t know that the exercises were going on ...
      2. drunkram
        drunkram 2 January 2018 11: 43 New
        +3
        Statement has nothing to do with reality
        To date, only Caliber (according to NK) and Onyx missiles for their intended purpose, Granite (testing these anti-ship missiles, in principle, are not required), some Air-to-Air missiles, and S-400 (Nuclear) missiles have not been tested in real combat operations. We don’t take weapons into account, Russia is not the USA). Everything else has long been tested or was recently tested in Georgia, Syria and with the support of the separatists in the Donbass.
        The vast majority of weapon systems and individual pieces of equipment have been tested.
      3. Dimmedroll
        Dimmedroll 3 March 2018 19: 01 New
        0
        Not certainly in that way;)
      4. Lex.
        Lex. 14 March 2018 22: 09 New
        0
        Almost all Russian weapons tested only on exercises
        And in Syria, what didn’t they experience and other countries do not test on exercises?
        1. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker 14 March 2018 22: 12 New
          0
          Have you experienced F-35? Will you finish it yourself? Or will you return it to the store?
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 27 December 2017 08: 31 New
      +2
      The classic confrontation between the Shell and the Armor, nowadays the Missiles and the ABM, What can only show stronger real clashes, God forbid, of course
    3. srelock
      srelock 27 December 2017 08: 50 New
      10
      Quote: Titsen
      I believe that the article describes the most pessimistic option - teaching exercises, but in practice they forgot about the ravines ...

      The article describes the personal opinion of the author, which has nothing to do with reality.
      1. vadim dok
        vadim dok 27 December 2017 15: 33 New
        +4
        DAMANTSEV- This is just a unique author !! Not a single publication is normal interesting, necessary! Just grass!
        1. ZVO
          ZVO 27 December 2017 19: 46 New
          +1
          Quote: vadim dok
          DAMANTSEV- This is just a unique author !! Not a single publication is normal interesting, necessary! Just grass!


          Damantsev. it is a pseudonym for literary slaves.
          When an assignment is given to write a squabble. "seeds", "romance", "finale" - are different. nothing (no brains, no knowledge, no civic position, just nothing) unconnected people.
          One wrote one. the second is another. third - third ...
          and it turns out here is such a vinaigrette.
          It seems that in one part something mature, reasonable, then a herak - a frantic wacky-wacky man and .... and fsё ...
          The article is over ...

          If Daman is a living person, and so writes - then his place in Kashchenko is not a split. and personality calculation ...
      2. Sergey Volkov
        Sergey Volkov 29 December 2017 07: 38 New
        0
        yes, having drunk well, he was very interested in imagination - it would be nice ...
  2. tchoni
    tchoni 27 December 2017 07: 11 New
    12
    Flocks of many dozens, or even hundreds of anti-ship missiles, attacking arly berki - this, apparently, is a matter of the distant future. The largest ammunition of anti-ship missiles in our surface fleet is at Petrusha, and I’m not sure that he can spit out all 24 missiles in one gulp. So let the author not worry about the bourgeois.
    It’s better that he transmits for us, because after 18 years flocks of anti-ship missiles can become a real threat to our fleet. So I would conduct an analysis of our capabilities in this area
    1. Sergey-8848
      Sergey-8848 30 December 2017 17: 07 New
      +1
      A flock of anti-ship missiles on enemy ships and a return flight on ours is possible only with a hard clash, flowing into the exchange of nuclear strikes. What is the difference in what the English rocket is painted in this situation? By the way, all advanced guidance systems after nuclear exchange will be covered by the same basin.
  3. Magic archer
    Magic archer 27 December 2017 08: 34 New
    +1
    There are two ways out. Or “invisibility” of rockets or hypersound. Like Onyx, this is a development of the last century. Caliber is the same Ax only more perfect. There remains Hope for Zircon.
    1. The Siberian barber
      The Siberian barber 27 December 2017 14: 56 New
      +2
      I apologize to ask: Have you seen Zircon? Even if yes, then I ask you to count the number of carriers of this weapon)
  4. Monarchist
    Monarchist 27 December 2017 10: 21 New
    +4
    Quote: Morrrow
    Almost all Russian weapons tested only on exercises

    God grant that it always has been. Or do you have a different opinion?
  5. Monarchist
    Monarchist 27 December 2017 10: 26 New
    +1
    Quote: srelock
    Quote: Titsen
    I believe that the article describes the most pessimistic option - teaching exercises, but in practice they forgot about the ravines ...

    The article describes the personal opinion of the author, which has nothing to do with reality.

    But he didn’t indicate this, but actually, how many people have so many opinions. Moreover, some suffer from delusions of grandeur and are offended if others do not agree
  6. Old26
    Old26 27 December 2017 10: 56 New
    +9
    And I liked the mention of "Caliber" as a "nimble" anti-ship missile. Extravaganza!!!! The subsonic rocket was already a nimble. As regards Moskit and Onyx, I can only imagine how they write out a "pretzel" at a low altitude of 5-10 meters above the sea surface ,,,,, Yes, Damantsev in his own repertoire. It brings any topic to its logical conclusion (to senility)
    1. just exp
      just exp 27 December 2017 14: 13 New
      +8
      the caliber has a version that in the final section accelerates to more than 2M.
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 27 December 2017 17: 11 New
        +7
        RCC 3M-54 is precisely dual-mode. Subsonic flight to target, 2M attack
        There would be more ...
        1. sd68
          sd68 27 December 2017 19: 35 New
          0
          Does it exist in reality or only on paper?
          1. ZVO
            ZVO 27 December 2017 19: 48 New
            +2
            Quote: sd68
            Does it exist in reality or only on paper?


            so far only paper ...
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 27 December 2017 19: 46 New
      +9
      Quote: Old26
      And with regard to Mosquito and Onyx, I can only imagine how they write "pretzel" at a low altitude of 5-10 meters above the sea surface,

      Hello old! hi
      In a dispute, one must be objective, otherwise truths cannot be found. This is in 1's.
      In 2's, I won’t say anything about Onyx, but the P-280 does wonders of “acrobatics” in random maneuvering in the middle part of the flight. This she then drops to 5 meters. And before that, he is very energetically maneuvering.
      Onyx overclock covers EW, also for the "twenty ruble" can not buy! So screaming "guard! Early. But the signal has already been given. It's time to think.
      IMHO
      1. sd68
        sd68 27 December 2017 23: 15 New
        0
        Excuse me, what is the p-280?
  7. Sergey Cojocari
    Sergey Cojocari 27 December 2017 13: 00 New
    +6
    Quote: Magic Archer
    There are two ways out. Or “invisibility” of rockets or hypersound. Like Onyx, this is a development of the last century. Caliber is the same Ax only more perfect. There remains Hope for Zircon.


    In fact, there is no way out at all. Any armed conflict between Russia and NATO countries will develop into a nuclear cataclysm, and after it, as you know, there are no winners.
    1. sir_obs
      sir_obs 27 December 2017 13: 38 New
      0
      Three-torpedo exit
  8. sir_obs
    sir_obs 27 December 2017 13: 37 New
    +8
    The Coventry destroyer during the Falkland conflict also had advanced air defense for those times, which the British were very proud of. But this did not stop the two, not the newest Argentinean attack aircraft, from drowning it. Moreover, conventional, non-adjustable bombs. Drowned and left unscathed, although Coventry was paired with another destroyer.
    You can make any forecasts, but practice makes its own adjustments.
    1. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 28 December 2017 16: 50 New
      0
      Quote: sir_obs

      3
      sir_obs Yesterday, 13:37
      The Coventry destroyer during the Falkland conflict also had advanced air defense for those times, which the British were very proud of. But this did not stop the two, not the newest Argentinean attack aircraft, from drowning it. Moreover, conventional, non-adjustable bombs. Drowned and left unscathed

      I have a different story in my memory. Coventry was attacked by three A-4 Skyhawks. Two were shot down by missiles, and the third after a missile defense with free-falling bombs hit Coventry.
      1. sd68
        sd68 28 December 2017 17: 17 New
        +1
        RCCs in that war confirmed that using them against a combat-ready combat ship is a pointless exercise.
        Only the bombs remained.
        1. Captain Pushkin
          Captain Pushkin 28 December 2017 19: 26 New
          +1
          Quote: sd68
          sd68 Today, 17:17 ↑ New
          RCCs in that war confirmed that using them against a combat-ready combat ship is a pointless exercise.
          Only the bombs remained.

          In the Falkland War, Argentina had, from memory, only 6 pieces of RCC Exoset. They drowned one destroyer with this amount, one container ship and damaged something, almost an aircraft carrier. One anti-ship missile missed the frigate, which covered itself with interference (the French before the war gave the British all the information on the Exocet guidance head).
          1. sd68
            sd68 29 December 2017 11: 02 New
            +2
            seven from other sources.
            they hit the warships only twice, the destroyers Shefield and Glamorgan (the Atlantic conveyor was a civilian vessel and there were no EW on it).
            in both cases, the ships were not in a state of readiness for an attack - on the ill-fated Sheffield the radars were so simply turned off, it prevented chatting on the phone, and on Glamorgan they did not know that the islands had a makeshift launch of the Exosets.
            Not a single warship was drowned.
            Glamorgan received minor injuries and returned to duty, Shefield suffered more significant damage on May 4, primarily due to poor construction and materials, and also because he was ordered to stop fighting the fire and leave the ship.
            Nevertheless, Shefield did not sink, the fire stopped by itself and they began to tow it to England for repairs - it sank during towing a week later, on May XNUMXth. The ship's commander was tried in England - and rightly so, for what. The fact that Shefield drowned is not a direct consequence of Exozet’s hit, but the result of a shockingly organized struggle for the survivability of the ship.
            In all other cases, Exocetes did not hit the target due to the use of electronic warfare.
            Cast iron bombs were more effective against warships than anti-ship missiles.
          2. Dalailama
            Dalailama 29 December 2017 18: 38 New
            +2
            They quickly finished chatting and the Plymouth, which got up incorrectly, was prevented by the combat ready Sheffield. The air patrol covering both ships was ordered to withdraw so as not to interfere with the firing of SAMs.
            Cast-iron bombs turned out to be cast-iron because almost all did not explode, just like the Exocet warhead got into the Sheffield, a fire arose because its engine continued to work.
            About the same sabotage was organized for the defeat near Tsushima, only 80% of the ammunition did not explode there and for all 90. As a result of the defeat in the conflict, leftists came to power in Argentina.
            1. sd68
              sd68 30 December 2017 20: 18 New
              0
              Nonsense full.
              At Sheffield the radar was turned off
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 30 December 2017 20: 27 New
                0
                And on Plymouth, which was next to him there was not a single one?
  9. ZVO
    ZVO 27 December 2017 14: 04 New
    19
    All the time it surprises me where people get such grass from, that they are seriously discussing the implementation of anti-aircraft maneuvers, and even with overloads of 10-20G.
    Heavy missiles.
    Has anyone tried to calculate what forces will occur in Caliber when overloaded in 10G?
    Or 20G?
    What trajectories should be when performing maneuvers with such overloads?
    I know only one maneuver carried out by an anti-ship missile at the terminal site is the execution of the Gorki before the strike.
    Other maneuvers - I simply have never heard, seen, or read.

    And yes, at what distance does the rocket, in the opinion of the author, start to “dance”?
    At a distance of 100 miles? Where does AWACS see her and can she put the Standard SAM on the NIF-Ke?
    Or at a distance of 50 miles? Where does the order guard ship see her?
    Or already over 20 miles? Where does the radar object see her?
    Or for 3-5 miles, where the metal cutting machine is already starting to shoot at it?
    Or is she dancing 100 Tectonic style with overloads of 10-20G all XNUMX miles?
    Can you believe it yourself?

    Omar Khayyam was right - do not multiply entities beyond measure ...

    After all, no one except the Russian-speaking military-patriotic channels speaks of anti-aircraft maneuvers of anti-ship missiles ...
    Ours themselves fantasized - and themselves believed in their fantasies ....
    1. The Siberian barber
      The Siberian barber 27 December 2017 14: 58 New
      0
      "In Baghdad, everything is calm" (c) ...
    2. sd68
      sd68 27 December 2017 19: 38 New
      +3
      In RuNet this is a very common myth. In reality, the main anti-aircraft weapon of the current anti-ship missiles is ultra-low altitude, and you won’t make any protivitennye maneuvers on them. And of course overload, as you wrote correctly
      1. Captain Pushkin
        Captain Pushkin 28 December 2017 16: 55 New
        0
        Quote: sd68

        2
        sd68 Yesterday, 19:38 ↑
        In RuNet this is a very common myth. In reality, the main anti-aircraft weapon of the current anti-ship missiles is ultra-low altitude, and you won’t make any protivitennye maneuvers on them.

        Why is it a myth right away? And the hill in front of the target and the attack from above?
        At what distance? Well, this depends on the specific means of air defense of a particular ship and the characteristics of a particular RCC.
        1. sd68
          sd68 28 December 2017 17: 22 New
          0
          The slide is not an anti-aircraft maneuver, it is just a trajectory for attacking targets that are hardly protruding above the water, like a submarine that has surfaced.
          Can you give a link to a serious source describing such anti-aircraft anti-aircraft missiles RCC?
          If this is not a myth.
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 28 December 2017 17: 48 New
            +1
            How often do submarines float now?
    3. Lock36
      Lock36 27 December 2017 22: 51 New
      0
      Quote: ZVO
      Omar Khayyam was right - do not multiply entities beyond measure ...

      I look. You are a well-known specialist in literature - are you confused with Occam?
      1. ZVO
        ZVO 28 December 2017 13: 04 New
        0
        Quote: Lock36
        Quote: ZVO
        Omar Khayyam was right - do not multiply entities beyond measure ...

        I look. You are a well-known specialist in literature - are you confused with Occam?

        confuse, admit ..
  10. Old26
    Old26 27 December 2017 15: 17 New
    10
    Quote: just EXPL
    the caliber has a version that in the final section accelerates to more than 2M.

    Accelerates. In the last twenty kilometers. But at the same time he does not prescribe a pretzel, that is, he is not a nimble. It goes in a straight line. 20 km pass in 20 seconds of which the first 2-3 acceleration to 3M. A rocket fragment (warhead) with a rocket engine flies. Without planes and everything else (maximum gas rudders). And at the same time "nimble" ???

    Quote: ZVO
    All the time it surprises me where people get such grass from, that they are seriously discussing the implementation of anti-aircraft maneuvers, and even with overloads of 10-20G.
    Heavy missiles.
    Has anyone tried to calculate what forces will occur in Caliber when overloaded in 10G?
    Or 20G?
    What trajectories should be when performing maneuvers with such overloads?

    I once "liked" the expression that "Mosquito" is a "snake" at 20g EMNIP. It is enough to calculate the "size" of this snake in order to understand that when passing the left or right part of the sinusoid of the "snake", the homing head will lose its target, because she will just leave the "zone". But it’s so “pleasant” to read that we don’t care, we can be a “snake”. and the lizard. and "elephant" .... In every way we can, and the adversary will only change diapers
    1. Falcon5555
      Falcon5555 27 December 2017 16: 08 New
      +2
      Damantsev’s thought is “a snake” and maneuvers with an overload of 20 units (or even more). Therefore, it is so difficult to intercept without overloading the computing power of the brain. laughing
      1. ZVO
        ZVO 27 December 2017 17: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: Falcon5555
        Damantsev’s thought is “a snake” and maneuvers with an overload of 20 units (or even more). Therefore, it is so difficult to intercept without overloading the computing power of the brain. laughing


        He would have to understand that not a single missile ship in the anti-ship or tactical version can, due to the design, experience overloads over 5G ...
    2. Vlad.by
      Vlad.by 27 December 2017 17: 24 New
      +1
      So how does it not fall without planes then? Or are gas rudders constantly creating an angle of attack? What prevents them from writing out a pretzel? Moreover, given that the rocket under the control of gas rudders is a very dynamic substance, the control system will have to constantly make adjustments to the trajectory so that the rocket ultimately hits the target - can this be called very decent "pretzels" alone, don’t you?
      For the air defense system, this is also the task of pointing into an object that makes constant oscillatory movements, even if it is around a certain axis. Deviations are not a meter or two, but after the rocket engine is turned on 20 km from the target, it will be tens of meters.
      1. sd68
        sd68 27 December 2017 19: 41 New
        +1
        Read more about pretzels at a height of 10-20 meters, the usual approach height of modern anti-ship missiles.
        And about their overload by itself.
        Have you seen at least one video?
  11. nikvic46
    nikvic46 27 December 2017 15: 34 New
    0
    That's the pike, so that the crucian would not doze off.
  12. Clone
    Clone 27 December 2017 16: 10 New
    0
    "...The US Navy in this direction still lags behind the developed fleets of Western European states... "
    Of course, I am not special in the problems of foreign navies, but ... repeat yet none of the "pre-African Americans" has not shared a secret info with the "normal Americans" ??? If it exists ...
    "I do not believe!!!"
  13. Protos
    Protos 27 December 2017 16: 13 New
    +2
    Quote: Morrrow
    Almost all Russian weapons tested only on exercises

    At the "exercises" in Syria ... laughing
  14. tigoda
    tigoda 27 December 2017 16: 58 New
    +2
    CAMM anti-aircraft missiles are equipped with active radar homing heads, enabling

    Do you think this is a virtue? Are small, weak radars an advantage? EW funds born in 1970 will nullify such "active heads" over 200 km.
    1. ZVO
      ZVO 27 December 2017 17: 07 New
      +2
      Quote: tigoda
      CAMM anti-aircraft missiles are equipped with active radar homing heads, enabling

      Do you think this is a virtue? Are small, weak radars an advantage? EW funds born in 1970 will nullify such "active heads" over 200 km.


      These missiles are part of the FLAADS system - of which you apparently have not read anything.
      The trick is that the rocket, in addition to its GOS, has a permanent communication channel with the surveillance radar, and constantly receives target data through this channel. And she doesn’t need the highlight of the target.
      And of course, its own ARLGSN will work ...
      Duplication of the guidance system does not harm anyone.

      Now tell us what should be the power and size of electronic warfare equipment (70 years of manufacture) for the “zeroing” of the ARLGSN? What will they be on? On calibers? Instead of GOS, warhead, fuel tanks and engine?
  15. Lexus
    Lexus 27 December 2017 19: 13 New
    +3
    As for the range, the standard version of the CAMM rocket (3200 mm long and 166 mm body diameter) can work on targets at a distance of up to 30 km, long-range (CAMM-ER, developed with the support of the Italian division of MBDA) - 45-50 km .

    Very good performance. I would like to see this in the format of "Tor / Dagger / Blade", and not a miserable 12/15 km with a rocket mass of about 200 kg.
  16. sd68
    sd68 27 December 2017 19: 52 New
    0
    Today, the main tool against RCC is electronic warfare and traps, which is confirmed by all military conflicts, starting with the Doomsday War.
    Cases of shot-down anti-ship missiles are isolated and often random rather than regular, in fact, everyone writes about the first such case, when the British immediately shot down Iraqi anti-ship missiles in 1991.
    But electronic warfare is another matter; during the Yom Kippur war, not one of the fifty Soviet anti-ship missiles issued by the Arabs was hit.
    Of course, GOS RCCs are being improved, but EWs are not standing still, except for classic traps with foil, traps in the form of floating corner reflectors, traps with active interference such as Nulki, the capabilities of EW stations have increased greatly, and they are much superior in power to aircraft ones.
    And from this point of view there is no big difference whether the RCC will be subsonic, like Harpoon, or hypersonic, like mythical Zircon.
    The main thing is that the EW station has time to work out the appearance of anti-ship missiles from the radio horizon line, and they know how to do it now with a huge margin in time.
    1. sd68
      sd68 27 December 2017 20: 04 New
      +1
      Today, more important is the ability of the GOS RCC to capture the target than the speed of the RCC itself.
      By the way, the Americans did not really appreciate the capabilities of the ARLGSN used in anti-ship missiles in terms of real effectiveness in combat conditions, and not at the training ground, so for many decades they have actually developed one single Harpoon + the ability to use SAMs as self-defense missiles for self-defense in fact.
      In real conditions, the RCC has one more problem - they are on the first target that they get, and if you shoot at the AUG, it will be the destroyer of the air defense barrier - the GOS aircraft carrier will simply not be seen.
      A serious problem of supersonic anti-ship missiles is the small radius of action when flying at low altitudes - and at high altitudes, they easily become victims of modern missiles.
      And just now they began to develop RCC with a new type of seeker, such as LRASM, in which the matrix infrared seeker is combined with a passive “siker” and stealth technology.
      1. Dalailama
        Dalailama 28 December 2017 04: 22 New
        +1
        Let LASM and Harpoon have it if they still cannot make supersonic.
        In reality, anti-ship missiles have long been distinguished by distinguishing the “signature” of a target. About what goals were distributed among themselves another P-500 (SS-N-12 Sandbox) in foreign magazines should have been written.
        A serious problem for SAMs is that before entering its damage zone, RCC is reduced and there is no pilot in it, therefore anti-aircraft maneuvers are performed with greater overload.
        1. sd68
          sd68 28 December 2017 11: 49 New
          +2
          Another primitive myth of Runet.
          As soon as the RCC sees the target, it will drop to extremely low altitudes and will not see any other targets due to the radio horizon.
          So there is nothing to distribute.
          About the signature of the goal is generally a masterpiece.
          You missed another crazy myth from Runet-pro-rocket-gunner.
          And about the "anti-aircraft maneuvers" at a height of 10-20 meters, read above.
          I’ll tell you a secret, in the missiles, too, there is no pilot.
          But ESSM has OBT
          1. Dalailama
            Dalailama 28 December 2017 15: 08 New
            +1
            Read somewhere about the "mythical" P-500, there will be nothing to distribute later. Anti-aircraft maneuvers will have to be made to intercept, they are much more dangerous for a rocket for low-altitude interception. SAM against aircraft with OBT in which the pilot is.
            1. sd68
              sd68 28 December 2017 16: 03 New
              0
              Here, take and read, also not mythology, but reality
              1. Dalailama
                Dalailama 28 December 2017 16: 16 New
                +2
                Which one is your alternative?
                1. sd68
                  sd68 28 December 2017 17: 24 New
                  0
                  I look forward to a link from you with a description of the tests "distribution goals" in a serious source
                  1. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 28 December 2017 17: 41 New
                    +1
                    Look for yourself on YouTube, there professional military men and production workers talk to the camera about such a feature.
                    What, in general, can this be apart from unwillingness a fundamental difficulty?
                    They are waiting for you when you return to the discussion on another topic.
                    1. sd68
                      sd68 29 December 2017 11: 09 New
                      0
                      I expect from you a specific link to a serious source, where and when has this been tested and the results
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 29 December 2017 15: 40 New
                        +1
                        I need to go Google for her, and I don’t need it, so please come there myself. Interviewing pros on YouTube is a serious source.
                        You and your "swarm of drones" are still far from this, as with the drones of this class themselves.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                    2. ZVO
                      ZVO 29 December 2017 11: 20 New
                      0
                      Quote: DalaiLama

                      What, in general, can this be apart from unwillingness a fundamental difficulty?


                      Great difficulty ...
                      It is in terms of information exchange protocols. And the subsequent coordination of actions.
                      The level of electronics and algorithms - this has been achieved only in the last 5-6 years.
                      This is actually a complex system.
                      This was not the case before.
                      Fiction writers as early as 30 years talked about flying to the moon in their works.
                      And some, reading, experienced these books as reality.
                      But you yourself understand that flights to the moon appeared in fact after many years.
                      This situation with the flock, coordination - was a fantastic invention.
                      Which just now implemented.
                      1. Dalailama
                        Dalailama 29 December 2017 15: 51 New
                        +1
                        Thanks, laughed. Nothing complicated. In the west - maybe. They had 1-2 pilots in each deck, the Japanese in WWII had problems even with homing, so there was a kamikaze.
                      2. sd68
                        sd68 30 December 2017 21: 14 New
                        0
                        This is not the only point.
                        For a network for exchanging information about goals, you need 1. Accurate knowledge of the coordinates of each RCC, which simply did not exist before, especially considering that they will see different goals in the general case. 2. If the targets do not go side to side, but are scattered over considerable distances, and the AHU will do so, the RCC should fly at altitude for some time, collecting information about the goals. In practice, PKR, we see the target is reduced to very low altitudes, so as not to be shot down, the radio horizon for it is decreasing and it simply will not see other targets, except for the EW traps.
                  2. Dalailama
                    Dalailama 30 December 2017 21: 57 New
                    0
                    Quote: sd68
                    This is not the only point.
                    For a network for exchanging information about goals, you need 1. Accurate knowledge of the coordinates of each RCC, which simply did not exist before, especially considering that they will see different goals in the general case. 2. If the targets do not go side to side, but are scattered over considerable distances, and the AHU will do so, the RCC should fly at altitude for some time, collecting information about the goals. In practice, PKR, we see the target is reduced to very low altitudes, so as not to be shot down, the radio horizon for it is decreasing and it simply will not see other targets, except for the EW traps.

                    Are these all the problems that Indian programmers and systems engineers faced in Boeing, Lockheed, Microsoft, etc.?
  17. Old26
    Old26 27 December 2017 21: 08 New
    0
    Quote: BoA KAA
    Quote: Old26
    And with regard to Mosquito and Onyx, I can only imagine how they write "pretzel" at a low altitude of 5-10 meters above the sea surface,

    Hello old! hi
    In a dispute, one must be objective, otherwise truths cannot be found. This is in 1's.
    In 2's, I won’t say anything about Onyx, but the P-280 does wonders of “acrobatics” in random maneuvering in the middle part of the flight. This she then drops to 5 meters. And before that, he is very energetically maneuvering.
    Onyx overclock covers EW, also for the "twenty ruble" can not buy! So screaming "guard! Early. But the signal has already been given. It's time to think.
    IMHO

    Hello Boa !!! There was no conversation for the middle section. I cited the "opinion of some expert" that the "Mosquito" can go as a snake at a height of 5 meters with an overload of 20 units. And caught the phrase Damantsev about the nimbleness of "Caliber", "Onyx" and "Mosquito"
    Maybe in the middle section they maneuver energetically, but the article deals with what is called the last line of defense. And I don’t really believe that Onyx maneuvers energetically in combat. Although it may be wrong. But this is my IMHO
  18. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 28 December 2017 13: 48 New
    +2
    There is no need to completely discard everything from the armaments of small-shavens, so as not to regret it later. After all, there is useful grain in the article - the speed of small-shaved rockets is higher than our Onyxes, Caliber, and therefore we need to think what to oppose them right now, except for hope for Zircon.
  19. asr55
    asr55 29 December 2017 01: 04 New
    +1
    At Damantsev, as always, verbal p ... p. Let the mosquito practice on PCR so far. So far, both the Americans and the British, having used a PCR mosquito without charges, were not the only ones who could not bring down. The last time a rocket blank turned the floor of the destroyer. Somewhere there was a photo, I can not find. If Russia still agrees to sell them another batch. T.ch. let them train on the birds.
    1. 9lvariag
      9lvariag 21 August 2018 21: 32 New
      0
      asr55 (asr) That yes, I started for health about US NAVY. Like - they are all bad. He graduated from the repose of British Great Flit. They have everything in openwork. We advise their AUG to allocate a British frigate / destroyer / cruiser to the warrant. Well, then it turns out that the finely shaved in the House of Lords is full of skoppidoms and there wasn’t enough money for everything. And then what Mr. Damantsev and similar NATOphiles + all-crawlers, will become a runderer in runet? Probably: look, Trump is launching yet another “weapon of retaliation” into Jeronimo - you know, it’s not funny already, everything took place in the 60s and 70s.
      Yes, the task of detecting in the ocean (especially for the northern and Far Eastern borders of the Russian Federation) AUG and KUG and counteracting them is an extremely difficult task. Well, and interesting. I read that in the late 70s the theme of the Poseidon ICBM ICBM was developed (it was recognized as a raw and extremely barbaric unit), where the Chinese with their DF-2 infantry-fighting ballistic registers and in the late 80s of the KBYu base R-36.
      In general, I don’t think at all why why give everyone a pretty defenseless huge aircraft carrier ?! By occupation, he often came across even Soviet tales: One MRAD and one aircraft carrier in total. Hello, dear comrades / gentlemen, I’m far from thinking: that in the fleets of NATO countries in the admirals and ship commanders there are some torn out stupid people without fear and reproach and steel eggs (well, or with a bundle of diapers under uniform). Personally, my IMHO (especially based on a rocket in the side of the Stark frigate and in the drowning of an Iranian airbus by the Vincentenes cruiser), I’ve got even a conventional warhead, in any of the "KUG or AUG" or it’s blown up by a mine at full speed - admirals " invincible fleet "immediately smeared bast shoes. All people have a sense of fear, only manifested in different ways and developed in different ways.
      PS: I recalled from my memory that I had read how, during the tests of the first anti-ship missile system, the flying pterodactyl cut off all ship superstructures to one of the Soviet destroyers and broke through the decommissioned Soviet battleship. Well, this is if we assume that the armor was then not a couple of modern lumini.
      What the hell with DNS, I'm not a proto-Ukrainian! Have I been credited to the domain of the prophets and the Sumerians? Do we already have Russian IT companies working against Crimea?
  20. sd68
    sd68 30 December 2017 20: 21 New
    0
    Dalailamaor a link or stop honoring any nonsense
    1. Dalailama
      Dalailama 30 December 2017 20: 27 New
      +1
      under the link again awaiting answers from you
  21. Svarozhich
    Svarozhich 31 December 2017 00: 44 New
    0
    As far as I understand, our missiles have not only electronic warfare, but even towed false targets, and where are their smart mole rats going to aim?
  22. zombirusrev
    zombirusrev 31 December 2017 21: 04 New
    +1
    The author’s passage is especially amusing: “Secondly, CAMM anti-aircraft missiles have a maximum flight speed of 3700 km / h, which makes it possible to catch up with complex and high-speed anti-ship missiles such as the 3M-45 Granit and even 3M55 Onyx from close range ( c) i.e. their missiles are designed to let our missiles miss the target. All of our anti-ship missiles, such as Granite Mosquito, are so heavy that they have .... let them guess and even after several hits of such missiles reach the target. About Mosquito, I generally keep quiet he missiles in the final section do not shoot down, in principle, only RBU. Why, I’ll keep silent about this. There are fundamentally new solutions.
    1. 9lvariag
      9lvariag 21 August 2018 22: 02 New
      0
      Hmm, if you ask; But will anyone risk their cabbage and epaulettes / academic ranks in USA & NATO, load on the battlefield, with the help of the Kyrgyz Republic, even old ones, any adequate order?
      I doubt that beyond the hill, there is a madman repeating the “Syrian fireworks” from 85-120 KR in the opposite direction, one AUG each. Only, the Anus is not steel!;) This is not for you in greenhouse conditions ONE BRDS and ONE SM-3.
      By the way: even a kind of trouble-free “Phalanx” has a lot of stocks when shooting in combat conditions. There is something to refuse, well, a 20-mm gun., Feed and radar with drives.
  23. Oleg Petrov
    Oleg Petrov 1 January 2018 10: 42 New
    +1
    Missiles, planes, tanks ..... I’ve been living for 50 years - the song is the same, and why not build a road from, say, Argentina to South Africa? Through the Suez Canal, the Bering Strait, Siberia, Europe - this would be a breakthrough in the economy of ALL countries! To and train. , and the expressway, and for heavy trucks there were lanes. In areas with bad weather conditions (Alaska, Chukotka, Siberia - indoor to make (a lot of heavy oil, just from the paraffins that reduce its quality, and make transparent coatings, the car industry would have a jerk! Not 90 - 120 are already speed, and 400 -
    500 were required, a breakthrough for nuclear power (mobile energy supplying stations) And how much work is needed for the road workers, entire regions would be involved in the world economy!
  24. asr55
    asr55 10 January 2018 22: 28 New
    -2
    Quote: ZVO
    Quote: vadim dok
    DAMANTSEV- This is just a unique author !! Not a single publication is normal interesting, necessary! Just grass!


    Damantsev. it is a pseudonym for literary slaves.
    When an assignment is given to write a squabble. "seeds", "romance", "finale" - are different. nothing (no brains, no knowledge, no civic position, just nothing) unconnected people.
    One wrote one. the second is another. third - third ...
    and it turns out here is such a vinaigrette.
    It seems that in one part something mature, reasonable, then a herak - a frantic wacky-wacky man and .... and fsё ...
    The article is over ...

    If Daman is a living person, and so writes - then his place in Kashchenko is not a split. and personality calculation ...

    Well said. And then I did not find anything besides the mat on Damantsev.
  25. asr55
    asr55 10 January 2018 22: 41 New
    -1
    Another nonsense from the pseudonym of literary slaves. Like Damantsev, so drain the water. By the way, the Americans did not learn how to bring down our PCR mosquito. They bought them several times from us without warheads and used them as training targets. Not a single rocket was shot down. One of the missiles hit the destroyer and turned around so it almost sank.
  26. asr55
    asr55 15 January 2018 00: 45 New
    +1
    Quote: Morrrow
    Almost all Russian weapons tested only on exercises

    Well, of course, "in training" in Syria. Even "on the teachings" of the Egyptians, the Israeli destroyer PKR termite p-15 was sunk. Does it make sense to continue further.
  27. asr55
    asr55 15 January 2018 01: 24 New
    -1
    The most advanced complex of Franco-British production of medium and long range sea-based PAAMS Aster-15/30 was tested for five years - until May 2001. During these tests, firing was carried out on targets of various types that mimic an airplane, a missile defense, and a ballistic missile defense. The most common were Aerospatiale C.22 and GQM-163 Coyote. The former imitated subsonic Raman scattering, the latter imitated supersonic Raman scattering. Both targets are quite large and angular, have an EPR from 1 to 5 square meters. For example: F-16 with ammunition suspended on pylons has a frontal projection of 1,7 square meters, TU-160 - 1 square meter. Most likely, according to experts, PAAMS simply will not notice targets with EPRs slightly smaller than SAMs. And according to a review by The Sunday Times, British destroyers rumbled "like a box of wrenches" and are heard by submarines 100 miles away. The engines are not suitable for operation in hot climates, which is why one of the ships lost speed in the Persian Gulf in 2016. But our expert Evgeny Damantsev can launch any rocket to the moon without a radar. He only has Petyunya, the main competitor with his plum salomet.
  28. vinni-puk
    vinni-puk 3 March 2018 18: 58 New
    0
    Shavers have long been subject to complete and final destruction.
  29. asr55
    asr55 7 August 2018 23: 57 New
    -1
    As always, I write with a small letter Eugene Damantsev, Deputy Dave Majumdara. a praiser of American weapons. I don’t mind, but actually it turns out - "I haven’t seen it, I won’t lie, the peasant told me .....". Here is this little article. Some affirming expressions and words of the type are most likely capable of equal access, such speed allows, etc. .. There are no convincing arguments for only muddy water and a name. We have already heard about the iron dome developed jointly by the Israelis and Amers, which does not even protect against primitive rockets. You can give more examples. More convincing evidence is needed on how to bring down a few subtle PKRs that fly in the final section at a speed of 3m and 3-5 meters above water.
  30. okroshka79
    okroshka79 3 February 2019 18: 50 New
    0
    If the author indicates the speed of an anti-aircraft missile in kilometers per hour, then there is especially nothing to read. I read, however. Solid technocracy. Not a word about tactics.