Military Review

US Air Force receives first batch of smart bombs SDB II

78
Raytheon transferred the first batch of SDB II batch production to the US Army.


The contract for the supply of an experimental batch of SDB II ammunition (144 units) of the US Department of Defense concluded in 2015 year. After successful tests, the US Air Force signed a contract for the supply of a serial lot and Raytheon supplied the bombs ordered under the first contract (Lot 1). In addition, the press service of the manufacturer indicates that contracts for the production of bombs have been signed with the military in the framework of the Lot 2 and Lot 3 deliveries.

US Air Force receives first batch of smart bombs SDB II


SDB II does much more than hit a target with GPS coordinates. She discovers, classifies and destroys targets. When bombs are integrated into the F-35A, this weapon will help the most advanced fighters in the world to reach completely new heights
- said Mike Jarrett, vice president of Raytheon Air Warfare Systems.

SDB II (Small Diameter Bomb II) is a bomb-class 100-kilogram class (the mass of ammunition is 113 kg). A key feature of the SDB II is the guidance system, which uses three types of guidance at once - the built-in radar, an infrared camera and a semi-active laser head. The bomb can communicate with the aircraft during the flight (which allows you to retarget it after the reset) and can hit static targets at a distance of 110 km, and moving equipment - at a distance of 70 km from the point of discharge. The military department plans to partially replace SDB II guided missiles, the cost of which is much higher with similar capabilities, reports "Warspot"

Photos used:
defence-blog.com
78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 14 February 2018 17: 16
    +4
    I put my brains in these bombs, so I see that it became bad with adequate people in the USA wassat
    1. Inquisitive
      Inquisitive 14 February 2018 17: 18
      +11
      Quote: Spartanez300
      I put my brains in these bombs, so I see that it became bad with adequate people in the USA.


      No, a smart bomb differs from a fool in that you drop it. She is smart and wants to live on :)
      If the ammunition is more expensive than the destroyed target, is it really necessary? Ours took the path of improving the scope, it is better to replace the scope and accurately throw cheap silly bombs. In Syria, it seems to have established itself.
      Americans are constantly bombing then weddings or excavators. And if a crazy pilot drops a smart bomb, what will be the result?
      1. MOLODCHIK
        MOLODCHIK 14 February 2018 18: 44
        +1
        a stupid bomb with a good aim will hit at best 20 meters from the target. motionless.
      2. seregatara1969
        seregatara1969 14 February 2018 20: 04
        0
        our bombs are not stupid - albeit cheap but reliable
      3. ROM1077
        ROM1077 15 February 2018 11: 34
        0
        it became envious?
    2. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter 14 February 2018 17: 18
      +4
      When the bombs are integrated into the F-35A, this weapon will help the most advanced fighters in the world reach completely new heights

      If the SDB II is as perfect as the Fu-35, then the words here are superfluous ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 14 February 2018 17: 29
        +6
        The same generation of avionics. Therefore, the F-35 will be able to
        redirect directly in flight to another target if
        would need. Conveniently. No need to fly over the target.
        Dropped from afar and from a safe height and "lead" or correct it from an airplane.
        Such bells and whistles were not before.
        1. Inquisitive
          Inquisitive 14 February 2018 17: 32
          +5
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The same generation of avionics. Therefore, the F-35 will be able to
          redirect directly in flight to another target if
          would need. Conveniently. No need to fly over the target.
          Dropped from afar and from a safe height and "lead" or correct it from an airplane.
          Such bells and whistles were not before.

          When you bomb the territory of a country that has air defense, do you send a lot after the reset? Your flyers out of the air defense of the 70s of the development did not have time to dump not only to put a bomb ...
          Another desire to make an expensive shnyag and vparit through lobbyists in the army, the budgets are sawing all over the world, though in America they saw him not even with the Druzhba saw, but at the factory sawmill :)
          1. MadCat
            MadCat 14 February 2018 17: 53
            +8
            Quote: Inquisitive
            When you bomb the territory of a country that has air defense, do you send a lot after the reset? Your flyers out of the air defense of the 70s of the development did not have time to dump not only to put a bomb ...
            Another desire to make an expensive shnyag and vparit through lobbyists in the army, the budgets are sawing all over the world, though in America they saw him not even with the Druzhba saw, but at the factory sawmill :)

            Do you know a lot of air defense systems capable of operating at 70km? 70km this means that everything is medium-range air defense in flight.
            1. Midshipman
              Midshipman 14 February 2018 18: 13
              0
              But for the S-200 and older, the ideal goal since discharge height is large.
              1. Viktor1111
                Viktor1111 14 February 2018 18: 57
                +2
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Dropped from afar and from a safe height and "lead" or correct it from an airplane.

                Nothing to fix.

                The main feature of this battle is ATR mode - Automatic target recognition.

                SDB II does a lot morethan hit the target in GPS coordinates. It discovers, classifies and destroys targets.. When the bombs are integrated into the F-35A, these weapons will help the most advanced fighters in the world reach completely new heights.

                - said Mike Jarrett, vice president of Raytheon Air Warfare Systems.


              2. Kurare
                Kurare 14 February 2018 19: 30
                +2
                Quote: Midshipman
                But for the S-200 and older, the ideal goal since discharge height is large.

                This target still needs to be detected, even if it is at high altitude.
              3. Cympak
                Cympak 15 February 2018 10: 39
                0
                S-200 bombs do not work. Learn the materiel first, and then show everyone your level of knowledge
        2. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 14 February 2018 17: 32
          +5
          Thanks for the clarifications . hi But still, I think that calling the “raw” plane “the most advanced fighter in the world” is like drilling a hole for an order that has not yet been received (and not deserved).
          1. cniza
            cniza 14 February 2018 17: 41
            +5
            The smarter the bomb, the more likely it is to take control of this thing.
            1. Andrey K
              Andrey K 14 February 2018 17: 49
              +6
              Quote: cniza
              ... The smarter the bomb, the more likely it is to take control of this thing ...

              Victor hi
              The previous generation, too, had super-sophisticated bombs; it did not stop geldings from equaling schools, hospitals, weddings.
              Woodpecker, a glass ball for a short while - either break the ball or cut his hands.
              1. cniza
                cniza 14 February 2018 17: 52
                +1
                Andrey ! hi so Russian hackers are to blame ... but seriously, there can always be failures, failures with electronics, they won’t bring to mind the F-35.
                1. Andrey K
                  Andrey K 14 February 2018 18: 10
                  +7
                  Quote: cniza
                  ... still on F - 35 still can not bring to mind ...

                  If without slander.
                  This poor F-35 is already sawed by geldings. They won’t bring anything back to normal.
                  Big budget - I don’t want to drink.
                  The Pentagon is on the hook - we bought these super-waffles, and now if you want it or not, you need to finish it up to the mind.
                  And then a new toy: “smart” SDB II bombs to the most advanced fighters.
                  Let them cast out, the more they cut there, the less will be left for the maintenance of all evil spirits.
                  1. cniza
                    cniza 14 February 2018 18: 30
                    +2
                    Quote: Andrey K
                    Let them cast out, the more they cut there, the less will be left for the maintenance of all evil spirits.


                    So they have a very large cut on the content of all bases around the world, and it’s a shame that manufacturers also want a bigger piece.
            2. bouncyhunter
              bouncyhunter 14 February 2018 17: 50
              +3
              This is also an important point, by the way. If there is a channel of communication with this bomb, no matter how protected it is, there will always be a sophisticated mind that can crack it.
              1. MadCat
                MadCat 14 February 2018 17: 56
                +8
                Quote: bouncyhunter
                This is also an important point, by the way. If there is a channel of communication with this bomb, no matter how protected it is, there will always be a sophisticated mind that can crack it.

                depending on what encryption, it will help you a lot if you get the key a day after the bomb has already smashed everything, enough can already count Americans as idiots?
                1. bouncyhunter
                  bouncyhunter 14 February 2018 17: 59
                  +2
                  “Enigma" was once also considered completely protected from hacking.
                  Quote: MadCat
                  enough can already consider Americans as idiots?

                  I don’t consider them as such, but they don’t intend to sing praises.
                  1. sharp-lad
                    sharp-lad 15 February 2018 00: 54
                    0
                    But hacked only by capturing a working sample!
            3. Cympak
              Cympak 15 February 2018 10: 40
              0
              But how and with what?
          2. Thunderbolt
            Thunderbolt 14 February 2018 17: 52
            +1
            Quote: Inquisitive
            If the ammunition is more expensive than the destroyed target, is it really necessary? Ours took the path of improving the scope, it is better to replace the scope and accurately throw cheap silly bombs. In Syria, it seems to have established itself.

            Of course, it’s cheaper, and therefore better. But only the whole question is not the price, but the opportunity. What price do you agree to pay to hit the equipped enemy and the ground-based air defense systems will have fighters (many fighters)? And will it be possible to the required range (and this is a steep flight point) in principle?
            They will conduct such bombs in the corresponding system (that is, they fired one, but re-aimed the other). And another. Such means are good at the beginning of an air operation, for destroying enemy systems, his aircraft, paralyzing the rear. And during the operation, when dominance is superiority if it is conquered in the air, then it will come for ammunition easier to defeat a weakened enemy. We also try not to stand still in this matter, does this mean that ours are also “sawing” or, like the Yankees, they are just stupidly mistaken in the vision of the concept wars of the future?
            1. Inquisitive
              Inquisitive 14 February 2018 18: 09
              +1
              Quote: Thunderbolt
              Quote: Inquisitive
              If the ammunition is more expensive than the destroyed target, is it really necessary? Ours took the path of improving the scope, it is better to replace the scope and accurately throw cheap silly bombs. In Syria, it seems to have established itself.

              Of course, it’s cheaper, and therefore better. But only the whole question is not the price, but the opportunity. What price do you agree to pay to hit the equipped enemy and the ground-based air defense systems will have fighters (many fighters)? And will it be possible to the required range (and this is a steep flight point) in principle.

              Do we have a panacea for aviation? In such cases, use of CR. Why risk the life of a pilot? Gauges in Syria have worked well. Americans with Axes went to bed, still reduce how many flew and how many flew.
              1. Morrrow
                Morrrow 14 February 2018 21: 42
                0
                Can I proof?
              2. Cympak
                Cympak 15 February 2018 10: 46
                0
                How much is the caliber and how much is SDBII? I remember that when the Americans in the first war in the Gulf massively used cruise missiles in Iraq, our cheer patriots were choked with comments that they were firing at the sparrows from the cannon and throwing money away. And when ours began to shoot cruise missiles at the "spirits", it immediately became the right counterguerrilla weapon.
        3. poquello
          poquello 14 February 2018 18: 51
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Dropped from afar and from a safe height and "lead" or correct it from an airplane.
          Such bells and whistles were not before.

          will they be now? ))))))))))))))))))))))))) 00
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi 14 February 2018 19: 35
            0
            Quote: poquello

            will they be now? ))))))))))))))))))))))))) 00

            Has already. It’s been three years since we adopted a similar weapon.
            1. poquello
              poquello 14 February 2018 20: 01
              +2
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Has already. It’s been three years since we adopted a similar weapon.

              Quote: poquello
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Dropped from afar and from a safe height and "lead" or correct it from an airplane.

              )))))) direct from the plane? and who will look at the road signs?
        4. The comment was deleted.
    3. Vladimir 5
      Vladimir 5 14 February 2018 19: 02
      +3
      According to your statement, this is off scale in our country. The next generation of ammunition, and no MANPADS and shells do not dance on carriers .. So they launch under a hundred and out of hundreds of kilometers, beat half the expensive S-400, part of Buki, and the rest work out for targets, which is several times cheaper in cost and mass efficiency Tomahawks and different X-101s .... Here a headache should happen at our military-industrial complex and the General Staff ...
      1. Midshipman
        Midshipman 14 February 2018 19: 12
        +3
        To launch these things at a maximum distance of 100 km, the carrier must fly at an altitude of 5-10 km, which makes it the target for the C300, which will see it beyond 200 km.
        1. Vladimir 5
          Vladimir 5 14 February 2018 19: 45
          0
          As the Israeli Air Force launches, from neighboring states, Lebanon, etc. And until these SDB-11s appear, the carriers will be inaccessible. There are various dirty tricks and set-ups possible, and the US Air Force is famous for it ....
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 15 February 2018 01: 31
          +1
          F-16 - they will see. F-35 - no.
      2. Tusv
        Tusv 14 February 2018 20: 35
        0
        Quote: Vladimir 5
        So under a hundred they’ll launch and from over hundreds of kilometers, half will be beaten by expensive S-400s, part of Buki, and the rest will work out for goals,

        Not that the height of the carrier should be decent for the bomb to plan 100 km? At such a height, the carrier is destroyed in the lung before it reaches the attack range. An attack on the air defense systems of Russia and the United States is akin to approaching a kamikaze target. Another thing. Not everyone has such systems. Mostly up to 75
    4. smart ass
      smart ass 15 February 2018 01: 25
      0
      And also this bomb can beat a potential opponent in chess
    5. The comment was deleted.
  2. win
    win 14 February 2018 17: 19
    +1
    Like in a joke: "What do you take - money or mind?"
    ...
    Whoever lacks, then takes it.
    Did the Americans realize that they lacked intelligence ... fool
  3. Labor
    Labor 14 February 2018 17: 20
    0
    Well, at least now the price tag may come closer to our SD
  4. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 14 February 2018 17: 21
    +3
    Planning bomb.
    So she looks in flight.
  5. ul_vitalii
    ul_vitalii 14 February 2018 17: 24
    +8
    If only she didn’t fly along the way to have a bite to some pub and did not take part in the next wedding.
  6. Simon
    Simon 14 February 2018 17: 28
    +1
    Something I did not understand! They showed a plane, a rocket, a moving car, and then, somewhere in the ruins, an explosion. It looks like a fake! fool wink
  7. Simon
    Simon 14 February 2018 17: 30
    +4
    Quote: Spartanez300
    I put my brains in these bombs, so I see that it became bad with adequate people in the USA wassat

    It seems they don’t have anything, and they concocted the film, as it flew to the moon exactly, in the 60s! laughing wink
    1. bald
      bald 14 February 2018 18: 11
      +1
      She's secret! Therefore comp. graphic arts. Although the flight was stunned, the nozzle was open, then closed, Even before the goal to fly (to plan) - the wings disappeared. Yes, and the collector (he is unlikely), he smiles slyly slyly. winked
      1. Simon
        Simon 14 February 2018 18: 15
        +1
        Yes, again, probably in Hollywood they shot! There they were already star wars with aliens led and won. laughing wink
        1. bald
          bald 14 February 2018 18: 29
          +2
          But seriously, exaggerating a little, they at least somehow need to show that they do not stand still. Russia, in recent years, has created so many new products and many have actually passed the tests, in fact. But if it’s worth something, then showing the assembly place and the person next to it is absurd.
          1. Simon
            Simon 14 February 2018 18: 35
            +2
            Clearly, false window dressing! They consider themselves to be the navel of the land - an "exceptional" nation! laughing
            1. bald
              bald 14 February 2018 18: 43
              +1
              Not always a carnival, or rather a zebra (striped).
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 14 February 2018 22: 57
        +1
        The pluses of these mini-bombs are the noise-protected seeker, a large flight range, with smaller dimensions and ammunition much more, on one carrier.
        1. bald
          bald 15 February 2018 01: 14
          +1
          It would be nice to see their natural test, wait.
  8. Vlad Morozov
    Vlad Morozov 14 February 2018 17: 47
    0
    They called the FAK-35 a perfect airplane. You give the same bombs!
  9. Cympak
    Cympak 14 February 2018 17: 57
    +4
    When there is nothing to show anything, at least close in capabilities and characteristics to the "miracles of hostile technology", our sofa-patriots immediately recall that the domestic is cheaper, simpler and nicer.
    So soon, he is indulging in fighting Dubov against lazergans.
  10. Hurricane70
    Hurricane70 14 February 2018 17: 59
    0
    I hope the bombs are smarter than their owners !!!
  11. Hurricane70
    Hurricane70 14 February 2018 18: 02
    0
    Quote: Cympak
    When there is nothing to show anything, at least close in capabilities and characteristics to the "miracles of hostile technology", our sofa-patriots immediately recall that the domestic is cheaper, simpler and nicer.
    So soon, he is indulging in fighting Dubov against lazergans.

    Why is Alex from Perm so evil? Didn’t you hit Smash? fellow
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 14 February 2018 18: 25
      +8
      It is necessary to know and objectively evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the technique of a potential adversary. So that later it would not be “painfully painful” for the “Wagnerites” who underestimated the enemy’s capabilities and paid for this mistake with their lives ....
      3-sensor GOS (semi-active laser, active radar, passive infrared) - this is a serious argument on the battlefield. It doesn’t matter how much a rocket costs, it matters how much a target costs that it can destroy the first time. I will especially note that it’s destined to destroy the base.
      A TOR can fight SDBII from the “near” air defense, but its missile costs more than SDB. A US tactical plane carries 1 bombs on one suspension node. Those. One aircraft with 4 SDBs can be placed on 2 pylons is guaranteed to destroy TOR-8M + 2-2 targets, including movable, optional. In this case, the aircraft will strike without entering the air defense zone.
      The “Shell-1C” missile is cheaper, but in general the complex, like the TOP-2M, is destroyed by 1 tactical aircraft, without risk to the aircraft and the pilot.
      The task. Calculate how much the “Shell-1C”, TOR-2M, T-72MZ, T-90S costs in SDBII?
      The cost of training the crew and payments to families who have lost the breadwinner can be neglected according to the old Russian tradition.
      1. sabakina
        sabakina 14 February 2018 20: 45
        +3
        It feels like Dusk buried us alive ...
    2. Cympak
      Cympak 14 February 2018 18: 48
      0
      Smash is what?
  12. Simon
    Simon 14 February 2018 18: 17
    +1
    Quote: Hurricane70
    I hope the bombs are smarter than their owners !!!

    Do you want to say that they will surrender! So as not to fight. laughing
  13. Force
    Force 14 February 2018 18: 39
    +6
    But there really is nothing to rejoice about.
    Quite possibly the Americans made a very “interesting” bomb.
    The ratio “weight” - “range of application” is particularly impressive, the same F15 can carry 28 such bombs, -28 CARL !. (according to foreign sites).
    That is, one F 15 is able to unwind the column on the march along with the air defense systems covering it, while being outside the zone of its defeat.
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 14 February 2018 19: 00
      +2
      In practice, they will not hang more than 8 - 16 SDBs on one tactical aircraft. But these planes do not fly one at a time. As a rule, 4 pcs. in the link
      1. Force
        Force 14 February 2018 19: 33
        +3
        Even 16 under tactics is impressive.
    2. JD1979
      JD1979 14 February 2018 20: 46
      0
      Gospadi, u have disappeared! urgently looking for white sheets.
      1. Watch the video carefully. The video shows a typical example of the fighting that the Americans have been waging for the past half century: they drive the Bedouins on donkeys in the desert, who have only an old karamultuk with a bent barrel. Those. no opposition is expected.
      2. We are considering the composition of the means of a normal army: ground-based air defense of near, medium and long-range radius, air component, electronic warfare equipment, and we believe that there will be few enough bombs in the future and there will hardly be enough to carry them, how many aircraft can simultaneously direct these bombs to to overload the same carapace, of which there are many in the battery? In the event of a bamboo attack, will air defense airplanes give bombs to smoke or will they still check their passport? the bomb is not a rocket, it flies slowly, it also radiates and is clearly visible on radars, problems with interception are unlikely to occur. And finally, the electronic warfare systems that interfere with the operation of GPS, optical sensors and jamming radars with interference have not been canceled by anyone. And do I need to panic about the toy for hunting tractors? here is LRASM-ER when it goes en masse, yes it may be.
      1. Force
        Force 14 February 2018 21: 33
        0
        Yes, there is not much information on this “toy” to panic.
        But you should not underestimate it either.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 14 February 2018 23: 02
        +1
        "Means of electronic warfare" Against bombs with a triple seeker will not help, and from any air-to-ground missiles, too.
  14. A.
    A. 14 February 2018 18: 51
    0
    The bombs are smart, themselves dumb, no recovery is expected. Head to eat it.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 February 2018 23: 06
      +1
      Designers and engineers in the United States, no worse than ours.
  15. Lexus
    Lexus 14 February 2018 19: 19
    +1
    capable of hitting static targets at a distance of 110 km, and moving equipment - at a distance of up to 70 km from the discharge point.

    It can be used without entering the air defense coverage area up to and including "BUK-M3". Even much farther than the X-25 flies.
    It uses three guidance methods at once - a built-in radar, an infrared camera and a semi-active laser head.

    To "confuse", you have to try.
  16. APASUS
    APASUS 14 February 2018 19: 32
    +1
    capable of hitting static targets at a distance of up to 110 km, and moving equipment - at a distance of up to 70 km from the discharge point

    Not too much without an extra engine? Or what should be the minimum discharge height
    1. poquello
      poquello 14 February 2018 20: 07
      0
      Quote: APASUS
      capable of hitting static targets at a distance of up to 110 km, and moving equipment - at a distance of up to 70 km from the discharge point

      Not too much without an extra engine? Or what should be the minimum discharge height

      according to the glider, the Americans have worked off the shuttle yet, characteristics can be good
    2. Tusv
      Tusv 14 February 2018 20: 41
      0
      Quote: APASUS
      Not too much without an extra engine? Or what should be the minimum discharge height

      Ideal for s-400. Even if it will sharply climb for attack
      1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
        Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 15 February 2018 10: 13
        +1
        such goals are not for the 400s, too expensive
      2. Cympak
        Cympak 15 February 2018 11: 09
        0
        If for each SDBII shoot from s-400, then you can immediately give up. The economy can’t stand it, because S-400 interceptor missiles are several times more expensive than SDB, even without taking into account the difference in labor costs in the Russian Federation and the USA.
        You need to deal with carrier aircraft, but they can use electronic warfare, use stealth technology, HARM-type PRP, briefly go into the long-range air defense strike zone, conduct a massive launch of the homing SDB and immediately dump the strike zone. An air defense missile doesn’t immediately appear next to the plane, it still has to fly there and fly
  17. Mih1974
    Mih1974 14 February 2018 20: 39
    0
    I would like to bomb all these mattresses - to remind the operation in the Ardennes, when the Nazis drove the weather with bad weather and drove the mattresses with pissed rags and had them in every sense good . At the same time having one fueling and one ammunition. If they were Russian, I would call them heroes, and so simply - good warriors. So - what will you do mattresses on the European theater in the cloudy off-season?
    And the “smart” bomb is not much smarter and hardly much cheaper than the UR. negative Our "hephaestus" already mentioned is doing your system to the fullest. Now, to the redirection function - well, they dropped it, no matter how it rested, but it "falls" - this is what could happen so that the MTR (and who else) had time to report this information to the coordination center, so that there managed to think over and make a decision "bomb another" and only then have time to inform the pilot, who should already have time to "redirect"? fool How much I’m not strong, I couldn’t understand this.
    1. MadCat
      MadCat 14 February 2018 20: 46
      +2
      Quote: Mih1974
      I would like to bombing all these mattresses - to remind the operation in the Ardennes, when the Nazis drove the weather with bad weather and drove the mattresses with pissed rags and had them in every sense good. At the same time having one fueling and one ammunition. If they were Russian, I would call them heroes, and so simply - good warriors. So - what will you do mattresses on the European theater in the cloudy off-season?

      the generals are preparing for the last war, especially the sofas. wassat
      Quote: Mih1974
      And the “smart” bomb is not much smarter and hardly much cheaper than the UR.

      she's lighter than ur
      cheaper ...
      managed to communicate this information to the coordination center, so that they could manage to think over and make the decision “bomb another” and only then have time to inform the pilot, who should already be able to “redirect”? fool I do not care how much, I could not understand this.

      But besides this "ingenious" scenario there are no others?
  18. Redfox3k
    Redfox3k 15 February 2018 00: 00
    0
    Judging by the comments: boss, everything is gone, the plaster is removed, the client is leaving .... you can wrap yourself in sheets and you know where to go. three guidance methods at once - built-in radar, infrared camera and semi-active laser head - it's like a swan, pike and cancer. static targets up to 110 km Well, it’s already clearly designed for Aboriginal people to have a bomb fly 110 km - you need to go up to a height of at least 10 km, from where the carrier will glow with everything and everything, even though it’s supposedly “stealth”, and it’ll overwhelm it at a distance less than 150 km; and moving equipment - at a distance of up to 70 km from the discharge point and if the technique stops moving or disappears from the field of view of the "bomb" ... in short, there are a lot of questions, but the most important thing is that the dough has been drunk, the American people are doing it. It would be better if we thought how to give an external actually $ 200 trillion. duty, and they get into it even deeper.
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 15 February 2018 00: 55
      0
      No, not everything is lost. But it's worth asking from Rogozin and Manturov.
  19. zlideny
    zlideny 15 February 2018 09: 57
    0
    still weak. with such funding and for so many years to dazzle this bomb is still weak.
  20. The comment was deleted.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 February 2018 00: 55
      0
      This bomb is not something to hit, but it won’t be able to capture for escort, for Thor M 2 the minimum reflecting surface of the target should be 0,1 m for Carapace C2 the minimum effective reflecting surface is 0,03-0,06 m², for Buka M2 it is effective reflecting surface up to 0,05 m² - for this new bomb this figure is 0,015 m2. Our short-range and medium-range air defense systems are useless against it. Baby is very dangerous