Military Review

Bild: Super weapon of modernity

54
The defense industry has traditionally made a significant contribution to the development of science and technology. The results of the military industry always attract the attention of specialists and are of particular interest to the public. In addition, they are eyeing the press. The state of affairs at the forefront of military technological progress interested the German edition of Bild, and it has prepared extensive material on the latest achievements of defense enterprises.


On January 13, the German edition of Bild published an article entitled “Unsichtbare” Flugzeuge und schwimmende Militärbasen: Die Superwaffen der Gegenwart (“Invisible” Airplanes and Floating Military Bases: A Super-Weapon of Modernity ”) authored by Niklas Renzel. As the name suggests, the article is dedicated to the newest models. weapons and military equipment, created in different countries and embodying the latest successes of the military industry.



The epigraph to the article is the aphorism of the British writer Martin Amis: a weapon is like money - no one knows how much it will be enough.

Faster, higher, worse. When it comes to developing weapons for war, the human mind has almost no limitations. At all times, certain armies had weapons that gave a serious advantage and did not leave the enemy a single chance. The Bild publication intends to consider super-weapons from different eras, and in this article draws attention to modern designs.

N. Renzel recalls the events of the last century. In the 20th century, mankind survived two world wars, which claimed more lives than all other conflicts combined. It was hoped that peaceful coexistence would follow military catastrophes, but it did not justify itself. After World War II, the Cold War began. The USA and the USSR were now at enmity with each other, but did not bring the matter to an open clash. At the same time, the arms race and nuclear confrontation brought the world to the brink of disaster several times. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War ended, but conflicts in different areas continued. The current asymmetrical wars are a new challenge for armies.

Aircraft carriers

During the First World War, aircraft carriers first went to sea and solved combat missions. During World War II, such ships became a strategically important factor. Today, floating military bases with thousands of people on board are unique tools for power projection.


The US aircraft carrier USS Carl Winson in the Pacific. Photo HANDOUT / Reuters


The United States, Britain and Japan were the first countries to master the full operation of aircraft carriers. At first, these were ships rebuilt from ships of other classes, and in the early twenties, the first special-built aircraft carriers appeared. Hitler's Germany formed plans for the construction of aircraft carriers before the start of the Second World War. She wanted to build two ships of the Graf Zeppelin type, however, shortly after the start of the war, construction actually stopped.

Aircraft carriers played a crucial role in the Second World War Pacific Theater, where the United States and Japan fought. Carriers of the time were very different from modern ones. So, they had only a straight flight deck. The corner deck, which made possible simultaneous takeoffs and landings of several aircraft, appeared later. Not less important innovations were takeoff catapults and arresting gears.

The largest fleet of aircraft carriers at the moment is available in the United States. Their Navy has 10 such ships project Nimitz. The lead aircraft carrier, after whose name the entire series has been named, has been serving since 1976. This means that the first ships of the project had become obsolete to a certain extent. In this regard, in the next two decades, the oldest aircraft carriers will be replaced by new ships of the project Gerald R. Ford. The lead ship of this type has already been handed over to the US Navy, another one is under construction. The third will be laid in the near future.


Russian aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov", October 2016. Photo DPA


In addition to the USA, 12 countries also own aircraft carriers: Egypt, Australia, Brazil, China, France, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, Spain, South Korea, Thailand, Turkey and the United Kingdom. N. Renzel writes that the Russian aircraft carrier, due to its dilapidated condition, may encounter problems of a technical nature. At the same time, China and the UK are building modern ships with high performance.

Precision Ammunition

T.N. smart bombs and missiles are able to independently find a target and point at it. Specialist analytic organization RAND Corporation George Nakuzi, quoted by Bild, believes that high-precision munitions completely changed the nature of the fighting. During World War II, armies needed hundreds of bombs to destroy one factory, but now only a few ammunition is enough to solve the same problem.

One of the advantages of precision weapons, experts believe, is a sharp reduction in collateral damage and civilian casualties. The most important component of such capabilities is satellite navigation such as GPS. Without such means of determining the location, in the opinion of N. Renzel, modern weapons would not be so effective.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Unmanned aerial vehicles are already considered one of the main means of warfare in the future. The first experiments in this area refer to the 1931 year, when the British biplane aircraft Fairey III with remote control became a target for training fighters. Now, UAVs of different classes and types are part of the basic equipment of many armies. They are able to observe at a long distance from the operator or carry and use weapons.


The newest aircraft carrier in the UK - HMS Queen Elizabeth. Photo by Steve Parsons / AP Photo / dpa


A UAV is able to quietly reach a given area and stay there for hours, observing. It is much easier and cheaper than using manned aircraft. The signal from advanced opto-electronic devices can be transmitted to the operator via radio, including using communication satellites. For example, US drones operating in the Middle East were driven from bases in Nevada, Texas or California.

Supporters of unmanned systems indicate that the use of such equipment allows to protect operators. The control panel is at a great distance from the aircraft, and therefore its operators are not at risk. The crews of the "traditional" aircraft, in turn, are exposed to danger during departures. When using precision weapons, both manned and unmanned aircraft show high combat effectiveness.

Opponents of the UAV have concerns about lowering the threshold for the use of lethal weapons. In addition, the use of such technology may be contrary to international law. In some cases, UAVs were sent to attack terrorists in the territories of third countries without formal notification or declaration of war. So, the United States uses its reconnaissance drones over the territory of Yemen. There are attacks by armed groups in Pakistan, which have no justification from the point of view of international law. In addition, there are known deaths of civilians as a result of the use of drone drone.


American UAV Reaper. AP / dpa photo


Unmanned aerial vehicles are most actively used by the United States. They use such equipment for reconnaissance and surveillance, as well as for hunting terrorists. UAVs are in service in other countries, in the UK, France, Israel, Russia, etc. Western defense experts are concerned that China has begun developing its own drone drone. According to several assumptions, the DPRK has launched its project.

F-22 Raptor

According to the manufacturer, Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor is the best fighter in the world. It is a fighter of air superiority that promises complete control over the sky. N. Renzel believes that there are several factors that ensure the superiority of F-22.

Due to the use of so-called. F-22 stealth technology can hardly be detected by enemy radar equipment. It has high maneuverability and is distinguished by a serious combat potential in the context of air combat. Also, the machine is capable of attacking ground targets, although in this case it carries a relatively small ammunition load. A fighter, without using afterburner chambers, is capable of speeds of the order of M = 2.

The development of the F-22 aircraft began about 30 years ago, but until recently it was not able to participate in real combat. Only recently, within the framework of the fight against terrorists in the Middle East, such aircraft carried out several strikes against ground targets and thereby proved their combat effectiveness.


Fighter F-22 Raptor. AFP Photo / Getty Images


As the author of the publication “Bild” notes, now critics of the Raptor project have fewer arguments. Now they will have to give up their doubts that F-22 will ever be used in battle. Indeed, these planes were never used during the conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq, which caused controversy even in the Pentagon.

One of the problems of the F-22 project was the excessive cost of the work. Each production aircraft cost 189 million dollars. Taking into account the associated costs (project development, pilot training, operation, etc.), the cost of each machine reached 400 millions. Thus, any serial Raptor was more expensive than a new football stadium in Munich. The total cost of the F-22 program is 77 billion dollars.

In the recent past, many American commanders considered the F-22 fighter to be a relic of the end of the Cold War. However, later, China began to build up its military power, and Vladimir Putin’s Russia shows its strength in Ukraine. In such an environment, many are beginning to see miracle weapons in existing fighters that can fight new and old enemies.

B-2 Spirit

In the bomber field, the United States was also able to get outstanding results. Until now, the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit strategic bomber remains unsurpassed. This inconspicuous aircraft was created at the final stage of the Cold War; It was intended for the quick and secret delivery of nuclear warheads to enemy rear facilities.

Bild: Super weapon of modernity
Soldiers of the cyber armies of the Bundeswehr. Photo by WOLFGANG RATTAY / Reuters


B-2 was built according to the “flying wing” scheme and has special forms, due to which it remains invisible to the enemy radar. The machine is controlled by two pilots. She is able to fly without landing to 11 thousand. Km. When adopting each of the aircraft Spirit, without taking into account the cost of development and weapons, cost about 700 million dollars.

Unobtrusive bomber participated in the fighting in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya. In order for the existing fleet of B-2 aircraft to maintain the required capabilities and remain in the ranks, a modernization program is planned. 10 billion dollars is planned to be spent on updating two dozen cars.

Digital war

N. Renzel recalls that now in battle they win not only with the help of missiles, tanks and fighters, but also with the use of computer systems. Such a “weapon” is notable for its relatively low cost, and tracking its actions is associated with certain problems. To monitor enemy troops, as well as to monitor its infrastructure, you can use virus software. The ultimate goal of such actions, as in the case of traditional weapons, is to weaken the enemy by any available means.


Start anti-missiles complex "Iron Dome". AP / dpa photo


J. Nakuzi of RAND Corporation recalls: computers are everywhere, and it’s almost impossible to protect yourself from cyber attacks. Therefore, no matter what protection programs are created and used, there is already a new malicious software that is ready to launch.

Computer attacks have long become a reality. So, back in 2016, Bild learned from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution that the Russian special services of the FSB and the GRU carried out targeted attacks against state and non-governmental organizations in Germany. Such attacks use significant resources and great technical capabilities.

"Iron dome"

To protect against missile attacks from armed groups such as Hamas, Israel created the “Iron Dome” anti-missile defense complex (“Kipat Barzel” or Iron Dome). Mobile defense systems deployed near cities at risk of becoming a missile target.

The launcher of such a complex is a metal box with a height of about 3 m, inside which the 20 anti-missile fits. Due to its small size, the launcher can be transported by existing army trucks. The battery of the "Iron Dome" is worth 50-80 million US dollars. The interceptor missile costs the army 50 thousand. The battery includes a radar station, fire controls and three launchers.


MOAB Bomb Description


The complex’s radar finds an enemy missile already in flight, and this is followed by the command to launch an anti-missile missile. A three-meter rocket weighing 90 kg is displayed at a calculated meeting point where it hits enemy ammunition. There are some limitations. Thus, the Iron Dome cannot repel a massive missile strike. In addition, it is known about the existence of the order, according to which the antimissile can only be launched in cases where an enemy missile could fall on an Israeli settlement.

The Israeli army reports that Kipat Barzel intercepts 85-90% of missiles launched by armed groups. The complex affects ballistic ammunition with a range from 4 to 70 km.

"Father of all bombs"

In 2007, Russia first tested the world's most powerful non-nuclear bomb, which immediately stuck the nickname "Father of all bombs." Aviation the ammunition showed a power equivalent to the explosion of 44 tons of TNT.


Tank T-14 "Armata". Getty Images Photos


This product is a thermobaric bomb equipped with a special liquid or combustible powder. First, an explosion sprays a combustible substance in the surrounding space, and then the resulting aerosol is ignited. The explosion of such a bomb creates a giant fireball, burning all combustible objects and destroying buildings. Bomb mass 7 t is proposed for use by bombers.

A little earlier, the United States created the Mother of All Bombs - a product of the GBU-43 / B Massive Ordnance Air Blast. 13 April 2017, this bomb was first used against a real target. In 19: 30 local time, the United States Air Force raided terrorist targets in northeastern Afghanistan. The bomb destroyed the tunnels, which served as a shelter for terrorists. 36 militants were eliminated, civilians were not injured. The product GBU-43 / B can be considered the most powerful bombs ever used in a real operation.

DF-21D

Like no other project, China’s “Dongfeng” (“East Wind”) rocket shows China’s aspiration for leadership in its region and in the world. The DF-21D system is said to be a ballistic missile designed to destroy enemy ships. According to some reports, this rocket can not be programmed before launch. All the necessary data can be transferred to it after entering the atmosphere, which allows you to attack moving targets.

According to the Bild publication, the DF-21D rocket is able to reach speeds of up to 12 thousand km / h and fly to a range of up to 1500 km. The existence of the DF-21D project was known for a long time, but until a certain time official Beijing did not specify its details. With a certain delay, the official newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party told about the possibilities of the new rocket.


American tanks M1 Abrams on exercises. REUTERS Photos


The idea of ​​creating a ballistic anti-ship missile capable of attacking aircraft carriers emerged during the Taiwan crisis of the nineties. A little later began the development of weapons with such capabilities. A few years ago, the finished rocket DF-21D entered service. If this rocket is really capable of what its creators promise, it can be an important milestone in the field of rocket weapons. However, the real characteristics and capabilities of the anti-ship "East Wind" are still unknown.

T-14 "Armata"

From the moment they appeared on the battlefield a century ago, tanks caused fear and horror. Their size and firepower impressed the enemy and forced them to respect themselves. To date, the role of tanks has changed, but armored forces still remain the basis of almost all the armies of the world.

During the times of asymmetric warfare, the profile of the combat work of tanks changed. The fight of tanks with tanks is still relevant, but armored vehicles need other qualities to fight terrorists. It should have improved protection, more powerful weapons and improved means of masking.


Tank Leopard 2. AUTO BILD Photos


Experts believe that the main novelty of the last time in the field of tanks was created in Russia - this is the main tank T-14 "Armata". The armored vehicle received an uninhabited tower, completely controlled from the consoles in the cockpit. The 125-mm smooth-bore gun is capable of making up to 12 rounds per minute and firing various projectiles, as well as guided missiles with a range of up to 8 km.

The military weekly Army Times, which N. Renzel refers to, claims that the Russian T-14 tank differs from the American M1 Abrams family of cars with a more powerful gun and improved mobility. According to the data of this edition, the combat weight of the "Armata" is 48 t, the maximum speed is 80 km / h. The American Abrams can only develop 64 km / h.

However, the newest Russian tank has not yet shown itself on the battlefield, while foreign armored vehicles actively participate in wars. Both the American Abrams and the German Leopard 2 passed the test of actual operation and combat. The author of the German edition notes that the latter was repeatedly declared by experts to be the best modern tank used in real battles. In various comparisons and empirical "contests", the Leopard-2 armored vehicle regularly outperforms its competitors from the USA, France and the UK.


Unsichtbare article Flugzeuge und schwimmende Militärbasen: Die Superwaffen
der Gegenwart:
http://www.bild.de/bild-plus/news/ausland/militaerwaffen/die-superwaffen-der-gegenwart-50557804
Author:
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 26 January 2018 06: 06 New
    10
    With the further development of hypersonic weapons, aircraft carriers will inevitably be vulnerable to them ... so I would not risk investing in these giants suitable for fighting Papuans.
    1. poquello
      poquello 26 January 2018 20: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: The same Lech
      With the further development of hypersonic weapons, aircraft carriers will inevitably be vulnerable to them ... so I would not risk investing in these giants suitable for fighting Papuans.

      just read today, our from some research institute announced the end of the era of aircraft carriers, it makes no sense in serious warfare it is easy to destroy
    2. A_L_F
      A_L_F 26 January 2018 21: 57 New
      0
      Americans are most afraid of Perimeter, but not a word about it in this article
    3. Philip Staros
      Philip Staros 28 January 2018 00: 38 New
      0
      On the other hand, airfields in the ocean may be necessary ... Aircraft carriers are vulnerable near foreign shores. And in the depths of the ocean it’s completely
      1. KaPToC
        KaPToC 28 January 2018 01: 00 New
        0
        Quote: Philip Staros
        On the other hand, airfields in the ocean may be necessary ...

        How used to be airfield jumps?
        Quote: Philip Staros
        Aircraft carriers are vulnerable near foreign coasts. And in the depths of the ocean it’s quite ...

        It is necessary to increase the radius of action of the aircraft, and not to fence it is not clear what.
        1. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 28 January 2018 01: 36 New
          +1
          Quote: KaPToC
          It is necessary to increase the radius of action of the aircraft, and it’s not clear that

          to give the fighter a radius of action of a strategic bomber (that’s about 5-10 kilometers), and at the same time (apparently on a leash, in a glider) to carry five shift crews?
          Yeah, and immediately complain - what kind of little animal is this unknown in the end?
  2. Konatantin 1992
    Konatantin 1992 26 January 2018 06: 29 New
    +3
    Leo 2 the best modern tank))) ha ha ha ha, remember El Bab
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 26 January 2018 06: 38 New
      +4
      What kind of crew are such and tanks ... if cowards are sitting in the tank and stupid people no super equipment will help.
    2. poquello
      poquello 26 January 2018 20: 33 New
      +1
      Quote: Konatantin 1992
      Leo 2 the best modern tank))) ha ha ha ha, remember El Bab

      no need to laugh at stupid people, you have to feel sorry for them
  3. NEXUS
    NEXUS 26 January 2018 07: 49 New
    +7
    The USA has the largest fleet of aircraft carriers

    Let's see what Western experts will say when the serial Zircon appears.
    Now they will have to abandon their doubts that the F-22 will ever be used in battle.

    Used against which enemy? Work on ground targets is not to use in combat conditions for a fighter, to gain air supremacy.
    The T-14 differs from the American cars of the M1 Abrams family in a more powerful gun and improved mobility.

    It’s complete stupidity to compare the new tank with the trash that was developed almost 50 years ago.
    In order to defend against missile attacks by armed groups such as Hamas, Israel created the Iron Dome missile defense system

    And we have a BUK-M2, which is in no way inferior to the Dome.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 08: 00 New
      +8
      Quote: NEXUS
      Let's see what Western experts will say when the serial Zircon appears.

      If it appears, they can say something.
      Quote: NEXUS
      It’s complete stupidity to compare the new tank with the trash that was developed almost 50 years ago.

      Complete stupidity to compare an existing tank with nonexistent.
      Quote: NEXUS
      there is a BUK-M2, which is in no way inferior to the Dome.

      These are generally systems of different classes.

      And the article is rather miserable. You usually expect more from the Germans.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 26 January 2018 08: 10 New
        +3
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Complete stupidity to compare an existing tank with nonexistent.

        Definitely not with the existing one? But for example, with the T-90A, is it also not fate to compare? Let me remind you that the 90th is the same 72nd, which is rightfully considered the most warring tank in the world, and which more than once in local wars burned both Abramsa and Leopards ... and for me, the T-90 is by far the best tank in the world, and in the performance of the T-90M (breakthrough-3), it generally has no competitors from existing tanks.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        These are generally systems of different classes.

        Seriously? BUK-M2 is a medium-range air defense system. Its action is up to 75 km (if sclerosis does not change me), which is comparable to the range of the Dome.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        And the article is rather miserable.

        Not miserable, but stupid and naive.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 11: 08 New
          +3
          Quote: NEXUS
          But for example, with the T-90A, is it also not fate to compare?

          Can. If, say, Algerians and Egyptians fight through Libya.
          Theoretically, the meeting of Abrash with the T-90 could occur in Syria (Iraqi with Syrian). The Iraqis generally have both of them, you can ask them.
          Quote: NEXUS
          the same 72nd, which is rightfully considered the most warring tank in the world, and which more than once in local wars burned both Abramsa and Leopards

          I don’t remember.
          Quote: NEXUS
          BUK-M2 is a medium-range air defense system. Its action is up to 75 km (if sclerosis does not change me), which is comparable to the range of the Dome.

          The dome is a missile weighing 90 kg and a target selection system, the task of the dome is to shoot down NURSs of semi-handicraft production relatively cheaply. 75 km later he was clocked up for fun / advertising
          BEECH - full-fledged medium / long-range air defense, 500 kg rockets, so that the Boeing 777 is enough. It’s quite difficult for them to shoot down NURSES.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 January 2018 14: 43 New
            +2
            "the task of the dome is to shoot down the NURSs of semi-handicraft production relatively cheaply." ///
            Here you are wrong. The dome is ground for 122 mm Grad missiles. The better their ballistics, the better the Dome knocks them down. Handicraft Kasams are more difficult to shoot down, because they are crookedly made, and they, accordingly, have a "curve" ballistics.
            Elongated Grads, with a reduced warhead (Sudanese production) The dome shot down well 70 km from the launch site. And I even personally observed it (lying on my back in the street).
            Larger caliber rockets for the Dome are a problem. For this, the David Sling was made with a completely different rocket. And mortar mines, distances less than 7 km, for the Dome - a problem (the missile does not have time to intercept).
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 18: 03 New
              +2
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Here you are wrong. The dome is sharpened for 122 mm Grad missiles

              Apparently, unsuccessfully put it.
              It was meant that the Dome is designed to protect against numerous (in total) few (in one salvo) NURSs. City, Katyusharokets, Kasamy, factory, artisanal, which are. The task of the dome, among other things, is to bring them down for a reasonable price. I think that to shoot down several hundred rockets during the “rock” by Buk might seem unprofitable. Increasing the range, you're right, allows you to cover more objects.
              Sling, as I understand it, is generally about something else. Israeli THAAD.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 26 January 2018 21: 56 New
                +3
                Of course, a volley of 40 Grad missiles from a car will not survive any Dome. But our opponents do not shoot with full-fledged trucks. Aviation knocks out such trucks long before they are used, so they are not used. Militants shoot from 3-7 rockets disguised, often underground, or urban small positions.
                David's sling is not exactly THAAD. She is imprisoned for tactical BR from Tornado to the Point and the like. Iran produces them in a wide variety.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 23: 17 New
                  +3
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Of course, a volley of 40 Grad missiles from a car no Dome can not stand

                  I don’t discuss it. The dome was made for a specific situation, and, as I understand it, it fits in quite well.
                  I argued that the dome is not a Buk, although the range is similar.
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  David's sling is not exactly THAAD. She is imprisoned for tactical BR from Tornado to the Point and the like.

                  You know better.
      2. KaPToC
        KaPToC 28 January 2018 00: 31 New
        0
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        And the article is rather miserable. You usually expect more from the Germans.

        You have inflated ideas about the Germans.
    2. activator
      activator 26 January 2018 22: 02 New
      0
      Quote: NEXUS
      Let's see what Western experts will say when the serial Zircon appears.

      They will also build aircraft carriers, because besides Russia there is still someone to fight with and who should carry democracy, and an aircraft carrier as a means of delivery of this democracy itself is much more preferable than zircon. So it will be something like this: with the help of aircraft carriers, the Americans will grind another banana republic into palm oil, and the zircons will be in the launchers and as if everyone will be afraid of them.
      Quote: NEXUS
      Used against which enemy? Work on ground targets is not to use in combat conditions for a fighter, to gain air supremacy.

      In Syria, airplanes of the Russian vks were used in exactly the same way. What enemy is there?
      Quote: NEXUS
      It’s complete stupidity to compare the new tank with the trash that was developed almost 50 years ago.

      God forbid that the armata would equal the aiming range with fifty-year-old trash, no one has removed the curse of separate loading from the armata.
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      The T-90 is by far the best tank in the world, and in the performance of the T-90M (breakthrough-3) it generally has no competitors from existing tanks.

      Assuming that when meeting with western rubbish at distances approximately starting from 4 km in t 90, elongated uranium scraps will begin to fly in and how can t 90 respond to this? Kuv? freshly imparted.
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      the same 72nd, which is rightfully considered the most warring tank in the world, and which more than once in local wars burned both Abramsa and Leopards ..
      and where did he burn them?
      1. activator
        activator 26 January 2018 22: 07 New
        +1
        belay And what the hell is this site? Quotes from the comments of the Nexus, and the site attributed them to the cherry nine. Wonderful.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 23: 14 New
          +1
          You selected the text of the nexus, and the quote button was clicked in my message.
          1. activator
            activator 27 January 2018 08: 42 New
            0
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            You selected the text of the nexus, and the quote button was clicked in my message.

            I can’t understand how I could have done so.
      2. Same lech
        Same lech 27 January 2018 03: 42 New
        0
        So it will be something like this: with the help of aircraft carriers, the Americans will grind another banana republic into palm oil, and the zircons will be in the launchers and as if everyone will be afraid of them.

        A banana republic may well buy a dozen such missiles from Russia into its bins ... which will inevitably cause a nervous tick from the Americans ... not without reason WASHINGTON sang a famous song about the worldwide prohibition of the spread of hypersonic weapons.
        1. activator
          activator 27 January 2018 08: 45 New
          0
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          Banana Republic may well buy a dozen of these missiles

          Yeah, maybe, except for Russian money.
      3. KaPToC
        KaPToC 28 January 2018 00: 34 New
        0
        Quote: activator
        activator

        I wanted to answer all your blizzard, but when I saw the flag I realized that it wasn’t horse feed.
        1. activator
          activator 28 January 2018 16: 38 New
          0
          Quote: KaPToC
          Quote: activator
          activator

          I wanted to answer all your blizzard, but when I saw the flag I realized that it wasn’t horse feed.

          And if I change the flag you will answer? if there is something to answer. wink
    3. Philip Staros
      Philip Staros 28 January 2018 00: 39 New
      0
      I can be mistaken, but I believe that the analogue of the Dome is Thor or, to some extent, the Shell (it was in that capacity that he worked in Syria)
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 28 January 2018 12: 19 New
        0
        Quote: Philip Staros
        the analog of the Dome is Thor or, to some extent, the Carapace

        Partly yes, but expanded to the level of strategic missile defense. Strategic for protected objects (cities), but against NURSs, such a theater
  4. dog breeder
    dog breeder 26 January 2018 07: 50 New
    +2
    He sang an ode to the Spirit, and forgot to mention in this ode what he landed on. As always, they talk about exploits, forgetting to mention that these exploits were accomplished when “democracy” was instigated by terrorist methods against other countries.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 11: 30 New
      +4
      Quote: dog breeder
      what landed him

      Spirit was lost once during takeoff on Guam in 2008. You are confused with the Yugoslav F-117
      1. dog breeder
        dog breeder 26 January 2018 12: 09 New
        +1
        Yes, I'm sorry. But also a good pepelats, F-117 "stealth" - SAM "Neva".
        1. sd68
          sd68 26 January 2018 16: 16 New
          +5
          A great. Thousands of sorties on the most difficult missions - and only one accidentally shot down
      2. vlad007
        vlad007 26 January 2018 14: 46 New
        +4
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        You confuse with the Yugoslav F-117

        By the way, I read that F-117 in Yugoslavia was shot down not only due to skillful air defense actions, but also due to skillful intelligence actions: the plane flew along the same route from the airport in Italy and at the same time - just like the "Red Arrow "Petersburg-Moscow - this train is NEVER late for one minute. It was precisely known where and at what time he would appear, etc.
  5. sd68
    sd68 26 January 2018 10: 46 New
    +1
    While there is no evidence that the DF-21 is able to get into the ship in principle.
    As anti-ship missiles, short-range ballistic missiles exist among the Iranians, for example, but they easily go astray, since the speeds are not very high.
    They tried to make medium-range ballistic anti-ship missiles in the USSR, they even took the submarine into service, but nothing happened with the rocket, the boat was later decommissioned.
    It is difficult to create a guidance system for a moving target for a BR.
    In any case, the main means of combating anti-ship missiles is electronic warfare, but they don’t care, a ballistic missile or a cruise missile
    1. Photon
      Photon 26 January 2018 19: 22 New
      0
      "So far, there is no evidence that the DF-21 is capable of entering the ship in principle." I do not see any problems.
      “It’s difficult to create a targeting system for a moving target for the BR.” I do not see any problems either.
      You probably wanted to say about the difficulty of over-horizon target designation?
      1. sd68
        sd68 27 January 2018 11: 40 New
        0
        Precisely hit.
        You don’t see any problems, but in reality no one has yet been able to create — the maneuverability of the BR is limited, the GOS cannot work normally.
        The USSR tried, but abandoned, although the boat was already adopted for ballistic anti-ship missiles.
        Target design is a huge problem, as is the evaluation of results
    2. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 28 January 2018 01: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: sd68
      It’s difficult to create a moving target guidance system for a BR

      Quote: sd68
      USSR tried, but abandoned

      When did the USSR try to do this and how much water has flowed since then? By the way, even then, the R-27K missile provided fairly acceptable accuracy - out of 31 launched missiles, 26 missiles hit the conditional target, and on the last launch in November of 73, the target was hit directly with a direct hit. The missile, in general, was not ruined by technical problems, but by covert games, the fight of the “winged lobby” (supporters of cruise anti-ship missiles), as well as the lack of a target designation system, and then OSV-2 arrived in time.

      Now there is optics, there are miniature and fairly accurate ARLGSN. With guidance in the final section there will be no problems. But to bring down such a BPCR will be very difficult
  6. Valery Saitov
    Valery Saitov 26 January 2018 13: 58 New
    +1
    Weapons gain power with competent and fearless warriors. Everything else is lyrics.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 26 January 2018 14: 47 New
      +7
      If they are in such a desert, and above them a high-altitude drone with guided missiles, literacy and fearlessness will help them little. Maximum, disperse and will be saved one by one.
      1. WapentakeLokki
        WapentakeLokki 26 January 2018 19: 36 New
        +1
        If they are on their own, that’s the only way for them to stay, but if the State is behind them, then the game will go according to other rules, where there will be support from the air (both from the satellite and from the drone), and here you’ll also take control of the altitude or destruction of it with the same distant air defense system and all in order to ensure these same `` fearless ''. And you gentlemen are already accustomed that our guys alone and Motherland are ready to write them off to 200 cargo, times are changing.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 26 January 2018 23: 12 New
          +5
          In Syria, the Russian special forces acted perfectly, but, as it turned out later,
          NOBODY helped him, no one supported. Neither art nor air. Hence, heroically killed art correctors and miraculously repulsed the attack in Aleppo.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 23: 13 New
          +4
          The state will say that it has withdrawn its troops a long time ago (3 times it seems), and it does not know who it is. Maybe tractor drivers, maybe miners. Not the first time.
  7. nikvic46
    nikvic46 26 January 2018 14: 35 New
    0
    Yes, of course, the military equipment described in the article is impressive. In an arms race, oddly enough, laggards have an advantage. Firstly, they know the data and shortcomings of already created weapons. Secondly, in real hostilities,
    this advertised weapon will turn into metal.
    1. sd68
      sd68 26 January 2018 16: 18 New
      0
      Where did they get it?
  8. Costeneshty
    Costeneshty 26 January 2018 21: 42 New
    0
    Quote: NEXUS
    Quote: Cherry Nine
    Complete stupidity to compare an existing tank with nonexistent.

    Definitely not with the existing one? But for example, with the T-90A, is it also not fate to compare? Let me remind you that the 90th is the same 72nd, which is rightfully considered the most warring tank in the world, and which more than once in local wars burned both Abramsa and Leopards ... and for me, the T-90 is by far the best tank in the world, and in the performance of the T-90M (breakthrough-3), it generally has no competitors from existing tanks.

    Abrashi and Leo burned, this is vyser, I’ll scream, throw off the people, they will tear over you, here’s some more pink glasses for you to glasses))) undefeated never t 90)))))
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 26 January 2018 23: 10 New
      0
      Quote: Costeneshty
      undefeated never t 90)))))

      Spreading like this is completely not constructive. There are no invulnerable tanks. And the Abrashi lost with crews, even American ones, when, for example, bearded men managed to dig 200 kilograms of explosives under the road
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 27 January 2018 09: 30 New
        +2
        With the T-90 in Syria, at least for the first time I saw clearly how the DZ tower works normally and does not allow a rocket to break through the tank.
  9. Macross
    Macross 27 January 2018 12: 48 New
    0
    Turkey is already thinking how to change to the T-90, the best tanks in the world!
  10. Catfish
    Catfish 28 January 2018 14: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: activator
    Quote: The same LYOKHA
    Banana Republic may well buy a dozen of these missiles

    Yeah, maybe, except for Russian money.

    Remember the Falkland company. Argentina, without any Russian money, bought the French Exoset and safely drowned the latest British ships with them. It’s a pity they didn’t get to the aircraft carrier. As for the modern American fleet, one should not confuse, let alone compare the training of today's crews of ships with those people who at one time turned the neck of the imperial fleet. So it is doubtful that with the struggle for survivability, and with everything else in US NAVY, everything is as before.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 28 January 2018 17: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: Sea Cat
      So it is doubtful that with the struggle for survivability, and with everything else in US NAVY, everything is as before.

      I don’t know what you have there for “everything else”, but with BZZh in the American Navy it is brilliant. Oh, and the Americans know how certainly the best. Including better than the former. In the 40s, simulators the size of a real ship were not built.
  11. abrakadabre
    abrakadabre 29 January 2018 15: 11 New
    0
    One of the advantages of precision weapons, experts believe, is a sharp reduction in collateral damage and civilian casualties.
    Nonsense. All Western countries are deeply shame on the number of peaceful victims, if these victims are not in their countries. But the reduction in the number of ammunition required and the number of delivery vehicles / sorties / transport flights, etc. very attractive.
    The battle between tanks and tanks is still relevant, but armored vehicles are needed to fight terrorists other qualities. She must have improved protection, more powerful weapons and advanced camouflage.
    What kind of terrorists are those with more capabilities than normal national armies? Not a more powerful weapon, but just a few other parameters. To combat the machine-gun nest does not require the same power as to combat the bunker. And to defeat a shahid mobile, armor penetration per meter of armor is not required. But such things as pointing angles like anti-aircraft guns, etc. are required.
    1. Grigory_45
      Grigory_45 29 January 2018 16: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: abrakadabre
      What kind of terrorists are these

      for example, such as in Syria. They are also called terrorists. Both tanks and anti-tank systems - all in stock. Or do you remember Chechen companies calling them? "Counter-terrorist operation."
      Quote: abrakadabre
      but to fight terrorists, armored vehicles need different qualities

      meaning for conflicts of low intensity. Where there are no ultra-modern tanks, the latest generation aircraft and the latest high-precision systems, it is full of simple and cheap, such as RPG-7 and all kinds of ersatz armored vehicles and self-propelled guns, as well as the frequent actions of tanks in urban areas.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 29 January 2018 19: 34 New
        0
        meaning for conflicts of low intensity.
        So what? For a low-intensity conflict, does a tank need a more powerful babah?
  12. From Germany
    From Germany 31 January 2018 04: 14 New
    0
    I’ll tell you a little about this Bild newspaper, so that you understand what kind of miraculous judo it is.

    This is the best-selling print publication in Germany, which comes out on weekdays. So where did it come from?

    The CIA swelled 7 million bucks into its puppet named Axel Springer, at that time just huge money (the newspaper has been published since 1952). In fact, either directly or through dummies, this newspaper is still the CIA and belongs, and of course promotes their interests in German-speaking territory.

    Journalists of this newspaper are obliged to write in writing about the United States and Israel, as well as capitalism exclusively in a positive way. The newspaper itself is so yellow that it’s already orange. Even homeless people are attracted to its distribution.

    The newspaper is designed for not very distant people, there are many articles with titles like "Shock !!! Mother killed 8 children and ate 9 of them" - that is, the lowest standard. Very Russophobic and propaganda publication (which is not surprising with such and such owners). Unfortunately I must admit that many simple hard workers buy this newspaper. Well, it’s probably not because of political articles, but these very “shock ... etc.” But if in 1998 for the quarter they were selling 4 milliliters each, now they are only 1,6 milliliters, which is good news. (Although it may be that people simply subscribe to them more via the Internet and read on smartphones)