Military Review

Chinese martial art. Missiles against aircraft carriers

57
Chinese martial art. Missiles against aircraft carriers



The strike of the 10 sound combat stage is similar to lightning. In one instant, the fire arrow pierced the flight, gallery, hangar, third and fourth decks of the aircraft carrier. The contact fuse did not fulfill its function, and the warhead continued its way down through the gut of a giant ship. Through, through the hold of the deck, platforms and bottom plating. Overcoming 70 meters of steel structures, she roared deep into the water. After a second to plunge into the bottom sediments of the South China Sea, disturbing the operators of seismic stations off the coast of Japan ...

Not. Everything happened differently.

... hugs of icy emptiness and bright caustic stars. The descent from space orbit took 150 seconds, another quarter of a minute the flight continued through a shaky stratosphere. Every 10 seconds automatics, according to accelerometers and gyroscopes, transferred the system to a higher state of readiness. At first, weak and discharged, the air whistled violently overboard, swaying in its streams a little deadly ammunition. Until inside, in a device the size of a coffee machine, there was no command to undermine. The reaction began, passed and just as suddenly ended at an altitude of 600 meters. During this time, flying at a speed of 3 km / s, the warhead managed to cover a distance less than the thickness of a human hair.

The “coffee maker” brought down 300 kilotons of fire. Reflected from the water, the front of the shock wave spread along the surface of the sea, in a split second it clashed with the second wave, which came straight from the point of the explosion. The fire trap closed within a kilometer from the epicenter, just where the enemy ships were ...

In general, pretty lyrics. All these colorful descriptions are the combat use scenarios of the Dongfeng DF-21D (East Wind) anti-ship ballistic missile. With the difference that they have nothing to do with reality.

About the benefits of this weapons more was said than about its shortcomings. Among the key points that impede the combat use of “Dongfeng-21D”:

In the first minutes, the trajectory and parameters of the DF-21D taking off will be indistinguishable from the flight parameters of the ICBM. The launch of an anti-ship ballistic missile can be perceived by missile attack warning systems (EWS) of other countries for the start of a nuclear war.

I believe that few will agree to sacrifice themselves because China, in the context of any local “complication of relations”, fires the ships of the United States or Japan with ballistic anti-ship missiles.

A group launch of a BR in a tense geopolitical environment can lead to unpredictable and completely undesirable consequences. To prevent the threat of a local conflict escalating into a full-scale nuclear war, special security measures and arms control are necessary. A multi-level mechanism for coordinating the start-up and fluctuations in command regarding the compliance of the situation with the use of DF-21D will sharply limit the tactical use of such a missile, compared to “conventional” means.

Dreams of creating a naval super-weapon are extremely far from reality.

Many discuss with interest the effects of a 10-swing-out warhead entering the deck, while simultaneously reflecting on the problem of plasma formation, shielding radio wave radiation and making missile guidance impossible. As if not paying attention to the fact that the appearance of plasma is the result of intense inhibition in the atmosphere. The transformation of the kinetic energy of the warhead into megajoules of thermal energy.

Combat units of ballistic missiles develop high speeds in near-Earth space, sharply slowing down when entering the atmosphere. In practice, the speed of the fall of the combat units of ICBMs and INF of the final section does not exceed 3-4 Mach.

In maneuvering warheads (for example, “Pershing-2”) because of their larger size and additional resistance due to the presence of control surfaces (aerodynamic control surfaces), the speed in the last minutes is even lower than that of the usual carrots.


The full name of this hellish machine is Martin-Marietta MGM-31C "Pershing II"


At an altitude of about 15 km, the warhead slowed down to 2-3 sound speeds. At this moment, the radar of the RADAG system came to life under the remains of the ablation fairing. The warhead received an annular image of the underlying relief by scanning with an angular velocity of 2 rev / sec. In memory were stored four reference images of the target area for different heights, recorded in the form of a matrix, each cell of which corresponded to the brightness of this area in the selected range of radio waves. The stage of trajectory correction began, which ended with a controlled dive to the target.

There could be no impact at speed 10M. The speed of a guided ballistic missile warhead at the moment of a meeting with a target is comparable to supersonic cruise missiles. And, in this sense, the Chinese ballistic anti-ship missile does not have any advantages compared with the anti-ship onyx cruise missile or the ZM-54 Caliber anti-ship craft.

The “unsolvable problem” associated with the formation of plasma clouds shielding radio waves was unexpectedly solved by slowing down the speeds of sound to 2-3, at which this effect becomes invisible. It was at this point that the rocket homing system began to work, which had been inactive until then. Most of the way the warhead flew along a ballistic curve defined by the starting impulse of the 1-th and 2-th engines.

* * *

According to experts, if necessary, two-way radio communication can be carried out even in the presence of shielding plasma around a hypersonic aircraft. As an antenna, it is proposed to use ... the plasma cloud itself, since its electrical conductivity is comparable to the characteristics of metals. At the same time, compared to metal structures, plasma antennas demonstrate better noise immunity and the ability of inertialessless changes of parameters (radiation direction, operating frequency, etc.).

However, this topic is beyond the scope of the presented article, since the existing guided warheads do not use radars at high altitudes (low-power radar still does not see anything from space).



J. Hettinger's plasma antenna (1919 Patent)



Controlling compartment "Pershing-2", the number 5 marked gas rudders, 12 - aerodynamic rudders


The combat unit “Pershing-2” also had jet wheels to correct its position in near-Earth space and, probably, for a more accurate exit to the target area. For the correct orientation of the combat stage when entering the atmosphere and during descent, during which it was required to slow down the warhead from more than 10-ti to 2-x sound speeds. Corrective pulses were produced according to the inertial navigation system (INS), i.e. only according to indications of internal devices and gyros.

Exact guidance was made already at the terminal part of the flight: the radar scanned the terrain from low altitudes, and the warhead, vigorously maneuvering at the expense of the 4's mobile "petals", was aimed at the chosen point target.

Common tasks dictate similar design decisions. That is why when describing the Chinese ballistic RCC, many sources refer to the concept of MGM-31 “Pershing-2”. In fact, the only reliably created and adopted for the design of a similar purpose with a radar GPS. The design and performance characteristics of which were declassified long ago and are now in the public domain.

Indeed, it is unlikely that the Chinese could change the laws of nature and create weapons on new physical principles. Currently, the simplest and most logical solution remains a controlled warhead with a guidance system at the terminal stage (RLGSN) combined with aerodynamic controls.

In the presented material the Soviet R-27K was unfairly deprived of attention. The world's first self-guided ballistic missile for the destruction of ships (the project was carried out in the period 1962-1975). On the other hand, the Soviet specialists did not manage to create anything like a deadly masterpiece from “Martin-Marietta”. Option “A” with a guided warhead was rejected at the level of sketches, due to its inadequate complexity. As a ballistic missile, the option “B” was chosen with a rather clever, but primitive guidance system.


P-27K, option "A"


P-27K, option "B"


As conceived by the designers, during the take-off, the P-27K was supposed to reclaim the radar emission from enemy ships from a distance of several hundred kilometers. Further, according to the data of the multidisciplinary LRE radio direction finder, it produced a starting impulse that would launch a missile along a ballistic trajectory to the target area. No correction at the end was made. Of course, the defeat of point moving targets (ships) could not be a direct hit. The anti-ship P-27K was equipped with a 650 CT thermonuclear warhead, which partly resolved the problem. But only in part. Thus, the deviation of only 10 kilometers meant the failure of the task: at such a distance, AUG ships could hardly be seriously damaged. Also, the question itself remained with passive targeting only to working radio emission sources, which limited combat capabilities quite a bit.

The extent to which the power of nuclear fire is exaggerated and the stability of large ships against such threats can be detailed and the illustrations can be found in these articles in “VO”:

https://topwar.ru/?newsid=70833
https://topwar.ru/70937-korabli-i-yadernye-vzryvy-chast-vtoraya.html

For this reason, further discussion of the Soviet version in the context of the current article can be considered complete. According to the published pictures of the Chinese side, in the 2 of the Chinese Military Academy they are working on a direct hit on the ship. In order to avoid undesirable complications, the rocket is planned to be equipped with a conventional warhead.


Images from the rocket test site in the Gobi Desert


Based on the above materials, the anti-shipping BR “Dongfeng 21 mod. D ”appears in a completely different light, different from the one that paints the colorful imagination of ordinary people and journalists.

Among the strengths of this weapon is the range of destruction (the declared value is 1500 km), which exceeds the indicators of all existing RCCs, including heavy giants of the Chelemey school (Granit-Vulkan, etc.).

Such characteristics allow you to fight with enemy ship groups in open sea areas, without the need for rapprochement with the enemy. At the same time, the main “likely enemy” of the DF-21D, the US Navy ship groups, will be forced to take special measures to ensure their safety, still on the way to the shores of Asia.



The need for early inclusion of the Aegis radar to detect a possible threat from space will lead to the unmasking of the AUG and will contribute to a more efficient use of other anti-ship vehicles. The position of the AUG will be easily monitored by means of electronic reconnaissance, which will solve the problem of target designation for the PLA air and naval forces.

As for the own combat capabilities of the DF-21D, they, in the opinion of the author, in modern conditions look doubtful. The main reason is the high altitude trajectory (ie visibility) and the speed is too low in the final section. Based on the characteristics of the existing shipborne air defense missile systems and families of anti-aircraft missiles (Aster, Standard), a supersonic target at an altitude of 10-15 km is a typical and desirable goal for them. Moreover, the appearance of the threat will be known in advance - a few minutes before the DF-21D enters the “Standards” affected area.

Also, it is impossible to dismiss overseas efforts in the field of missile defense: an approaching missile can be intercepted even in the extra-atmospheric space with the help of kinetic interceptors SM-3.

Reflections on the high cost of a 15-ton two-stage rocket as an anti-ship agent are not without foundation. Ammunition - not a luxury, but consumable. Inadequate size and cost make it difficult for personnel to be trained, making it impossible for them to gain experience with weapons, to detect and eliminate in advance all deficiencies in the structure. Ground layouts and stands are not a substitute for full firing. At a time when the Americans and their allies were used to releasing dozens of small-sized "Harpoons" at sea exercises.

On the other hand, the opinion of the prohibitively high cost of the DF-21D may be erroneous. The bulk of the ballistic “Dongfeng” falls on its TDR, i.e. compressed gunpowder. At the same time, the cost of any modern aircraft is determined by a high-tech filling, the main element of which remains the sensitive GOS. And in this aspect, the Chinese ballistic RCC does not stand out in comparison with other heavy anti-ship missiles.

“Even if you have to use a sword once in a lifetime, it’s worth it to carry it all your life.”
Lao Tzu.




The article used materials from the otvaga2004.ru website and data from the Pershing II Weapon System application guide.
Author:
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Titsen
    Titsen 22 February 2018 07: 02
    +17
    When reading such articles you try to guess - Kaptsov or Damantsev ...

    Ha, guessed it today!

    Dear moderators, I have repeatedly asked you - write the author’s last name IMMEDIATELY after the title of the article!
    1. Kibb
      Kibb 22 February 2018 09: 01
      +14
      C'mon - Kaptsov guesses from the very first lines wink
    2. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 22 February 2018 09: 56
      +7
      Quote: Titsen
      When reading such articles you try to guess - Kaptsov or Damantsev ...

      Ha, guessed it today!

      Dear moderators, I have repeatedly asked you - write the author’s last name IMMEDIATELY after the title of the article!

      And I got pierced. About metalwork was, but not a word about armor. Well, I think another science fiction.
    3. Monarchist
      Monarchist 22 February 2018 10: 43
      +3
      Titsenu, yeah if you do as you want there will be no intrigue and some authors may not be read
    4. vadim dok
      vadim dok 22 February 2018 14: 30
      0
      Yes! I don’t know who is "BETTER" !!!!
    5. uskrabut
      uskrabut 22 February 2018 14: 45
      +3
      Quote: Titsen
      Kaptsov or Damantsev

      Ilf and Petrov.
      For that, it is sentimental
  2. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 09: 44
    +11
    In practice, the fall rate of the ICBM and RSMD warheads at the final section does not exceed 3-4 Machs.

    Where did you get this from?
    Sorry Oleg - frank nonsense.
    Already I counted ballistic trajectories at one time.
    Usually, the entire descent in dense layers of the atmosphere lasts no more than 1 min, and the ICBM SLBM warhead reaches the earth at a speed of 3 km / s. + -
    1. Santa Fe
      22 February 2018 10: 05
      +4
      DimerVladimer, Thank you for your fair comment.

      It is always interesting to know the opinion of a specialist who directly counted the ballistic trajectories of an ICBM.
      1. Alex_59
        Alex_59 22 February 2018 12: 04
        +8
        Quote: Santa Fe
        It is always interesting to know the opinion of a specialist who directly counted the ballistic trajectories of an ICBM.

        Oleg, make yourself a "calculation" in Excel for ballistics. I’ve done this to myself, there’s no need to be an expert. Newton's equations along the X and Y axes, plus the law of change in density and temperature of air depending on height. On the rocket (any) there is enough open data - the specific impulse of thrust, mass, cross-section, the operating time of the stages. Cx can be roughly estimated, there his role is insignificant. Roughly allows you to calculate the trajectory, with all speeds, angles, heights and ranges. He put various rockets into his model. Enemy MX, our 8K14, RT-2P and something else. The error did not exceed my 3% range for all missiles, according to the apogee of the trajectory no more than 5% of height. The Iowa artillery shell was still stuffing - also about 3%.
        After you do this, your questions will immediately disappear about whether the X-32 can fly to 800 km at altitudes greater than 30 km while maintaining the mass, dimensions and engine of the X-22. How else can.
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 14: 27
          +5
          Quote: Alex_59
          He put various rockets into his model. Enemy MX, our 8K14, RT-2P and something else. The error did not exceed 3% of the range for all of my missiles; according to the apogee of the trajectory, not more than 5% of the height. The Iowa artillery shell was also stuffing - also about 3%.


          When I was studying at the faculty of aircraft, we had a program that allowed us to consider, as a first approximation, the design of ballistic missiles, according to the applied design solutions (weight coefficients were set in advance).
          There was one funny case with this:
          - Each student wants to give out a masterpiece.
          I put in the program all the best that was invented by our defense industry.
          The parameters are a single-stage, recessed engine, a waffle shell, I select the THA and the boost parameters so that the walls are not crushed, the walls are thin - the material has high strength reserves - you will pierce the shell with your finger, take the most energy fuel, payload of 1500 kg. Sending for calculation - after minutes of painful waiting I get a printout and BOTH! No! BOTH BOTH ABOUT !!!
          I’m running with a joyful screech: “My one-stage professor“ shoots ”at 7500 km! (Not every two-stage at such a range flies with such a load).
          To which he, a green student from space, returns me to the sinful earth: - this is an ideal program, if you take real production, then you need to lay a reserve, but here it’s too thin, they won’t do that, then you need to finish it with a file, and welded add more seams ... in general, add an error of 25-35% to real production :(
          Then my enthusiasm landed on the sinful earth.
          Conclusion - every calculation is good when it is backed up by practice :)
          1. Alex_59
            Alex_59 22 February 2018 15: 03
            +4
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            Conclusion - every calculation is good when it is backed up by practice :)

            No one disputes, in fact, the fact that I did it on a knee in exel is a very rude work, giving only a general idea of ​​the behavior of the rocket.
            However, what you and I have described is somewhat different. You calculated what is not in iron. And I simulate the flight of what really exists. In the model, I insert not hypothetical, but real TTX of live rockets. You have something like extrapolation, but I have interpolation - an attempt to obtain intermediate values ​​(speed, angle, altitude and range at each moment of flight time) from exactly known data. Naturally with a certain accuracy. For general conclusions, it’s quite suitable - well, somehow it flies there okay. )))
          2. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 22 February 2018 22: 20
            +6
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            every calculation is good when it is backed up by practice :)

            Exactly ... Therefore, in my time, KBRs always practiced hand-to-hand combat on SLBMs so that nothing could interfere with the calculation of the firing data when the D-4 fails ...
            But I'm not talking about this, I am essentially.
            1. Missile strike on ships - the essence of a strike on the territory of the flag that this ship carries. This is not a tank, not a plane. This is the sovereign territory of the state. Therefore, this is essentially an attack on the sovereign flag. This is a declaration of war. But it’s well known that they don’t cry when they take off their hair ... And if it’s a nuclear power, then it’s a complete paragraph! With otvetku, you can’t stop even China with all its mob power ...
            2. I do not agree with the author on the question of determining the nature of the salvo of a ballistic missile defense ... Now ballistic computers calculate the aiming point in seconds ... Call the input data or will you find it yourself?
            3. Regarding DF-21D. If the Yankees weren’t afraid of them, they wouldn’t cut them on the “globe” of the A2 \ AD zone ... Then, what did you all come up against in the last century with its radar-seeker !? For a long time there are ECO and IR receivers, which can see the wake trace from space so far! Ionization!? Plasma!? so it is already being used as a conductor ... Now the main thing is the microminiaturization of the side and brain RES - BCM! analog technology is a thing of the past, LSIs are also yesterday ... And we all wonder on the site: how is it, what is it !?
            But the question is of course interesting: why the iron ship does not sink, and the iron plane flies ... And you are here about plasma, damn it, powder the brains of the average citizen! It would be better "about the native Soviet tractor," as V.S. Vysotsky said ...
            Well, if it’s absolutely unbearable, then you can try on ABM rods from orbit through AVM ... Amy, by the way, is closely involved in this ...
            IMHO.
    2. Spez
      Spez 22 February 2018 10: 43
      +1
      Quote: DimerVladimer
      Usually, the entire descent in dense layers of the atmosphere lasts no more than 1 min, and the ICBM SLBM warhead reaches the earth at a speed of 3 km / s. + -

      Exactly what is the speed at the finish of 9max? In open sources, there are numbers from 300m / s to 1,5km / s, which corresponds to 1-4.5Mah. Do not explain where the error is?
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 11: 28
        +2
        Quote: Spez
        Exactly what is the speed at the finish of 9max? In open sources, there are numbers from 300m / s to 1,5km / s, which corresponds to 1-4.5Mah. Do not explain where the error is?


        The speed of a particular combat unit depends on the shape and trajectory (angle) of entry into the atmosphere.
        Almost all uncontrolled blocks fall within the range of 2,5-3,5 km / s - closer to 3 km / s
        The higher the range of "firing" - the higher the speed on the active site, the higher the speed of entry into the atmosphere.
        I counted the trajectories of 2-3-speed SLBMBMs with a firing range of 5000-10000 km.
        For 5000 km this will be approximately closer to the indicator of 2,5 km s, 8000 km about 3 km / s, respectively 10000 km - 3 km / s and higher. this is without taking into account maneuvering and the angle of entry - along a ballistic trajectory.
        It is possible that ballistic missiles with a range of 2000-3000 km have a speed of about 2 km / s and lower - I did not count.
        Aerodynamic drag in dense layers is negligible.

        Here are such products had to "cheat"
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 11: 43
          +4
          Perhaps high-speed data for the blocks of "blunt" first series - when they could not do thermal protection at the modern level and a less streamlined BB cone (such as a sphere) was used.
          We considered modern pointed gaskets with a disconnected shock - by that time materials (carbon-carbon) had been created and used that could withstand such aerodynamic heating without erosion of the fairing.
          Or you come across data for short-range tactical missiles 400-1000 km
        2. Spez
          Spez 22 February 2018 11: 48
          +1
          Now it is clear. And then the difference in speeds by an order of magnitude really caught my eye.
          But based on the article, the rate of descent into the atmosphere and approach to the target differ significantly. Those. is aerodynamic drag still significant, or am I confusing something again?
          1. DimerVladimer
            DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 12: 34
            +6
            Quote: Spez
            But based on the article, the rate of descent into the atmosphere and approach to the target differ significantly. Those. is aerodynamic drag still significant, or am I confusing something again?


            This is not true. If you do not accept the appropriate design techniques (block size, flow pattern, forced braking), a block entering along a steep path will not lose much speed.
            Again, it depends on the specific design of the unit - modern warheads for ICBMs are little susceptible to inhibition in the atmosphere - this is not a ball on the R-7.

            How the Chinese engineers solved the issue of guidance and target designation, I do not know.
            How would a Russian design bureau do?
            Rather, I would go along the path of upgrading the “blue / liner” - removing part of the warheads and replacing them with 3-4 correctable ones and building up the target designation system (for example, radar location / thermal imaging) at the stage of “distribution” - in the manner of “technical nonsense” - discussion of the concept. The “delivery stage” would carry out additional reconnaissance of the target at an altitude of 300-350 km outside the Aegis strike zone and would display correctable blocks on the target that, having accelerating engines, could “break” the trajectory and perform an anti-ballistic maneuver.
            It may well be that according to the weight and size characteristics, the blue / liner allows the “delivery stage” to be equipped with both a target reconnaissance system and an electronic warfare system to suppress Aegis - this is again just a discussion without any calculations.
            Creating a system with a carrier is also not cheap.
            Ours do not bother with this because they think it makes no sense to get a direct hit on the ship, because if it comes to the AUG attack, it means "it’s gone ruinously" and the AUG’s area is bombarded with nuclear blocks :)
            1. Spez
              Spez 22 February 2018 12: 36
              +1
              It is intelligible, thanks.
            2. Alex_59
              Alex_59 22 February 2018 12: 57
              +2
              Quote: DimerVladimer
              would bring to the target correctable blocks, which, having accelerating engines, could “break” the trajectory and perform an anti-ballistic maneuver.

              Breaking a trajectory outside the atmosphere? Then the correction engine for such a unit should have an impressive thrust and fuel supply in order to give a momentum in a split second that can significantly change the trajectory. And there is more than one such maneuver. Plus, low-thrust engines for orientation in the right direction - where you need to “shoot” the adjustment engine to edit the trajectory. The heavy and dimensional block will turn out - in fact a separate mini-step of breeding "on board". How many of them will fit in the thrown weight, such maneuverable? One? Two? If only so.
              Isn’t it better to outside the atmosphere to spoil the space around the block with inflatable LCOs and other rubbish and let it not maneuver at all outside the atmosphere?
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 26 February 2018 08: 57
                +1
                Quote: Alex_59
                Breaking a trajectory outside the atmosphere? Then the correction engine for such a unit should have an impressive thrust and fuel supply in order to give a momentum in a split second that can significantly change the trajectory. And there is more than one such maneuver. Plus, low-thrust engines for orientation in the right direction - where you need to “shoot” the adjustment engine to edit the trajectory. The heavy and dimensional block will turn out - in fact a separate mini-step of breeding "on board". How many of them will fit in the thrown weight, such maneuverable? One? Two? If only so.
                Isn’t it better to outside the atmosphere to spoil the space around the block with inflatable LCOs and other rubbish and let it not maneuver at all outside the atmosphere?


                And there were similar blocks, back in my student days in the laboratory lay course-corrected blocks - each three times as heavy as usual.
                Remove 8 standard units from the Liner (there is a reserve for the load to overcome missile defense), work with the layout of the delivery stage and reduce the dimensions of the second stage tanks - do we not need the intercontinental range? This will allow, without changing the dimensions of the rocket to be placed on the submarine, to fit 3-4 larger and heavier correctable blocks - in general, the issue of re-arrangement can be solved at relatively low cost.
                As for the guidance system, here I am not an expert - just a process engineer and then a former;)

                The use of CLO is implied from a standard missile defense system.
              2. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 26 February 2018 11: 31
                0
                Quote: Alex_59
                Breaking a trajectory outside the atmosphere? Then the correction engine for such a unit should have an impressive thrust and fuel supply in order to give a momentum in a split second that can significantly change the trajectory.


                So why did I suggest that the corrected blocks sit “risky” on the delivery stage to the minimally safe Izhis interception line - the delivery stage will not only perform additional reconnaissance, but will also give a braking impulse and correction with standard engines - accordingly, a powerful block will not need to be fenced off the motor system, and only course correction engines are enough - this stage has been technically carried out for quite some time.
                In general, such a system will have:
                - range of use of several thousand km (must be considered),
                - have a sea base (where the mine "stick" - on the submarine, which will give the "strategist" tactical qualities or bulk carrier ",
                - Carrier used in production with minimal changes.

                In principle, the appearance of such a system with a firing range of 3000-5000 km and a preliminary target designation complex will make the entire large-tonnage fleet, including the combat fleet, extremely vulnerable.
                To imagine a situation when a submarine is not required to break through an AUG order, and it can “get it from the base” is not only quite realistic, 75% of the components have been developed and exist for this.
                Just as aircraft carriers “killed” battleships at one time, so strategic submarines equipped with such weapons will move away the AUG zones and displace them from the oceans as an anachronism.
                Quote: Alex_59
                Isn’t it better to outside the atmosphere to spoil the space around the block with inflatable LCOs and other rubbish and let it not maneuver at all outside the atmosphere?

                When the delivery stage begins before the border of interception, correction maneuvers (range of 1000 km, altitude of 250-350 km - it can be identified with high reliability.
                Therefore, consider the possibility of deploying 3-4 heavy false targets with aerodynamic drag compensation engines in the atmospheric section - this would be useful for breaking through missile defense.
                With missile defense is also not so simple.
                Both against anti-ship missiles and anti-atmospheric impact, ACG can interfere.
                For example, electronic warfare or passive interference - deploy an "umbrella" of a millimeter "noodle" above the order ships at an altitude of 3-10 km, which will complicate the work of the radar order, but it will disrupt target designation and correction, etc.
                Moreover, to disrupt the correction in the optical range or in the IF range - also does not represent an overwhelming task.
                In general, for the Moscow region, nuclear weapons apparently seem to be a simpler and more radical solution :)
        3. yehat
          yehat 22 February 2018 12: 18
          0
          Aerodynamic drag in dense layers is negligible.

          oh I feel your calculations are very different from reality.
          air resistance grows squared of speed, if human.
          but in fairness, they intercept warheads at high altitude, where they still do not have time to slow down much, because truly dense atmosphere no higher than 5-7 km.
          1. DimerVladimer
            DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 12: 44
            +5
            Quote: yehat
            oh I feel your calculations are very different from reality.
            air resistance grows squared of speed, if human.
            but in fairness, they intercept warheads at high altitude, where they still do not have time to slow down much, because truly dense atmosphere no higher than 5-7 km.


            You do not feel;)
            - 6 years in a specialized university and you will be sure that the atmosphere is ordered to be counted from 55 km, and its influence is from 30 km or less.
            And if for hypersonic conditions, shift the seal jump from the entire surface of the block to a cone with a 5 cm square cowling - then only these 5 cm square will slow down, the rest of the surface is practically removed from aerodynamic drag. And the block practically does not lose speed - at least not at times as pointed out by the respected author of this article.
            1. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 12: 50
              +1

              As the apocalypse of AUG is seen by Chinese designers :)
            2. yehat
              yehat 22 February 2018 12: 53
              0
              my only claim is that the warhead is stuck in the ground at a speed of 3 km / s (for the most part the trajectory is true, but the speed is still less than a meter from the ground.)
              on the last 2-3 kilometers of the trajectory, the drop in speed is still large.
              and your model is simplified.
              again, in the lower atmosphere, it looks different.

              to understand this, solve a simple problem - at what angle you need to blow on a mug of tea that it has cooled faster.
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 13: 59
                +5
                Quote: yehat
                my only claim is that the warhead is stuck in the ground at a speed of 3 km / s (for the most part the trajectory is true, but the speed is still less than a meter from the ground.)


                Believe me, this is the “tenth thing” for ICBMs.
                The algorithms use a simplified - "ideal" model of the atmosphere with a fixed density distribution along the height.
                This is enough that the correction of the delivery stage would allow us to put, at a range of 10000 km, BB in a circle of 100 m. And at what speed this will happen - to the chandelier. The special charge will work at a given height, if it is an area target.
                Only large-sized items or buried charges intended to destroy mine-based assets or strategic command posts, etc. are found on the ground.
                1. businessv
                  businessv 22 February 2018 21: 13
                  +2
                  I join in the thanks expressed earlier to you! You rarely see such sensible and competent comments!)) Thanks for the educational program!
            3. Operator
              Operator 22 February 2018 19: 03
              +3
              A modern conical warhead with a small opening angle when firing at a range of 12000 km during flight in the atmosphere loses speed twice - from 7 km / s (24M) to 3,5 km / s (12M).

              Plasma formation of air stops at a speed of 1,5 km / s (5М), i.e. the maximum speed in airless space must not exceed 3 km / s (10М). Therefore, a ballistic missile should be exclusively medium range.

              The carbon-carbon composite is not suitable for the RGSN radome fairing, since carbon conducts electricity and therefore shields radio waves. High temperature ceramics are suitable as fairing material.

              In any case, a ballistic missile with a speed of 3 km / s and a range of about 2000 km has no competitors among cruise missiles, including those equipped with rocket engines (speed 1 km / s and range 900 km).
              1. Kokarev Mikhail
                Kokarev Mikhail 25 February 2018 11: 41
                0
                Don't reveal all the secrets! Yo! Yomayo! A little can be taken away from primitive ballistic calculations, otherwise their superman in the first stage will not reach the goal! :)
                1. Operator
                  Operator 25 February 2018 12: 30
                  0
                  Do not deviate from ballistic calculations, otherwise we will miss you laughing
                  1. Kokarev Mikhail
                    Kokarev Mikhail 25 February 2018 12: 59
                    0
                    Sorry There was always a triple in Russian! If you have not been taught at school, then this is forever !!!
          2. Alex_59
            Alex_59 22 February 2018 13: 03
            +1
            Quote: yehat
            air resistance grows squared of speed, if human.

            The force of aerodynamic drag depends on the square of the speed - it’s more correct. But there is still air density in the formula. Which at altitudes of more than 30 km can almost be neglected as a value vanishingly small.
            1. yehat
              yehat 22 February 2018 13: 14
              +1
              there are no complaints about this.
              Throughout the trajectory suitable for interception, you can score for resistance.
              but I was distorted by what was said about the completion of the trajectory.
  3. Northern warrior
    Northern warrior 22 February 2018 11: 18
    +1
    Aegis is easily neutralized by a powerful high-altitude nuclear explosion, so there will be nothing to intercept the DF-21. Even if the radar of the missile defense system does not burn, it will be blinded by the EMI for ten minutes, which guarantees the delivery of 300 ct of a “gift” to the carrier of democracy.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 11: 50
      +3
      Quote: Northern warrior
      Aegis is easily neutralized by a powerful high-altitude nuclear explosion, so there will be nothing to intercept the DF-21. Even if the radar of the missile defense system does not burn, it will be blinded by the EMI for ten minutes, which guarantees the delivery of 300 ct of a “gift” to the carrier of democracy.


      You forget that the guidance system of the DF-21 warhead, when passing the nuclear cloud, will fail due to ionization of the antennas / sensors.
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 February 2018 13: 16
        0
        depending on how to do)))
        You can make a hydraulic or pneumatic system)
        There were precedents, though the warhead will be a bit larger - the size of an elephant.
    2. yehat
      yehat 22 February 2018 12: 20
      +1
      you know, this is a somewhat outdated position of the 60s. For any bunch, use a nuclear explosion.
      Now there are many other ways to induce powerful EMP.
      1. Northern warrior
        Northern warrior 22 February 2018 15: 59
        0
        The VMG does not roll - the radius of damage is too small.
        1. yehat
          yehat 22 February 2018 16: 04
          0
          what is vmg?
          1. Northern warrior
            Northern warrior 22 February 2018 20: 10
            0
            Explosive magnetic generator, also called shock-wave emitter. Due to the compression of the explosion of a special crystal, an EMR is created, but its power is not very large.
            1. yehat
              yehat 24 February 2018 21: 41
              0
              in the 90s, I saw work on a project to create EMP using the energy of a volumetric explosion.
  4. Kibb
    Kibb 22 February 2018 11: 31
    0
    In the course of the play, the Chinese themselves do not understand whether they need this prodigy, then they cancel it, then they finish it
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 11: 52
      +1
      Quote: Kibb
      In the course of the play, the Chinese themselves do not understand whether they need this prodigy, then they cancel it, then they finish it


      Why cancel - improve at an accelerated pace! Is it a joke - the ability to neutralize the AUG with a long hand :), Even before they enter into combat contact.
      1. Kibb
        Kibb 22 February 2018 12: 54
        +2
        C'mon, than getting into the AUG with a 300 kiloton warhead absolutely doesn’t matter, the main thing is to get there and not be shot down. Absolutely any launch, from the primitive Harpoon to this wunderwaffle, will mean that the global nuclear war is either already underway or has begun from that launch and soberly no matter what kind of warhead there will be.
  5. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 22 February 2018 12: 00
    +4
    ((The warheads of ballistic missiles develop high speeds in near-Earth space, sharply slowing down as they enter the atmosphere. In practice, the speed of incidence of ICBM and RSMD warheads in the final section does not exceed 3-4 Machs.))
    What does this mean? belay Fools Americans !? fool They muddied their project “Spear of God” (or whatever it is there?) ... promised the final speed (at least 8-10 Makhov); and Kaptsov exposed them !!! 3-4 Maha and cue them to the pool table! We must urgently send a dispatch to the Russian Ministry of Defense so that they don’t spend a penny on Yu-71 (otherwise the men don’t know!)
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 13: 00
      +2
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      in the final section does not exceed 3-4 Machs. )))


      Cuts a rumor.
      But who considers ballistics in the numbers M? In addition to journalists.
      When do war blocks pass dense layers of the atmosphere in seconds?
      Exceptionally km-meters / second.
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 February 2018 16: 09
        +1
        in fact, measuring atmospheric speed in mahs is an Orthodox matter,
        because the speed depends on the height, and the Mach number is more stable.
        in general, for an amateur.

        simply, if we consider the speed in the atmosphere, then we are mainly talking about the completion of the trajectory by diving and if the rest, the larger part of the trajectory is easier to describe in parrots per second, then a short segment for uniformity is easier to describe in them. You probably meant it.
  6. Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 22 February 2018 12: 56
    +2
    In practice, the fall rate of the ICBM and RSMD warheads at the final section does not exceed 3-4 Machs.
    I think - this is nonsense. wassat
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 22 February 2018 13: 35
      0
      Of course, nonsense. The author either does not understand the issue, or uses outdated information. Some where he lies openly.
  7. shinobi
    shinobi 22 February 2018 13: 32
    0
    Earlier warheads were specially braked by brake shields. Due to the lack of materials that can withstand impact on the atmosphere. Yes and now they slow down to 5-6 max. So 10 max for aerodynamic discs is not worth discussing a detail. The Chinese have very clearly spoken out under what conditions they will use own Wind. This is a strategic weapon and there is no time for sentiment.
  8. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 22 February 2018 13: 45
    +6
    It’s hard to surprise me with pictures of a gobi rocket range with a funnel in a white square - hitting a static target is not some great achievement.
    The guys at the Kura training ground in Kamchatka, said that the warheads demolished the reference points - they hit so accurately - the deviation is zero :).
    But such funnels are left by a mass-dimensional warhead at a speed of about 3 km / s.
  9. Operator
    Operator 22 February 2018 18: 19
    +3
    The author - all without exception, ICBM warheads accelerated to a maximum speed of 6-7 km / s, after braking in the atmosphere when they collide with the earth's surface, they have speeds from 3 to 3,5 km / s (10-12 M), so they fly to the very end in a cloud of plasma. Video of the landing of Russian BB on the Kura training ground
    https://youtu.be/PiUkTSxe1y4
  10. Vladimir SHajkin
    Vladimir SHajkin 22 February 2018 21: 50
    0
    It was read, but it’s better not to tell stories, but to give real available characteristics.
  11. Eflintuk
    Eflintuk 22 February 2018 23: 58
    0
    Somehow strange and sharply anti-ship missiles suddenly slipped into a discussion of ICBMs and all sorts of pershings. But for some reason no one here remembered the magical and so-caressing word “zircon” from which the entire US fleet is already in a panic, although this is its Chinese counterpart.
  12. siem-x
    siem-x 24 February 2018 20: 16
    0
    Against the aircraft carrier, any missile is powerless.
  13. Grafova Irina
    Grafova Irina 25 February 2018 00: 57
    +1
    It’s not entirely clear (although I’m a complete amateur here) why the AMG’s mobility and the fact that there are a lot of ships in addition to the main target itself — the aircraft carrier itself — are not taken into account. More than one aircraft carrier radar works there, if the guidance is carried out on its radar ... Yes, and the connection itself is scattered over a fairly large area, they do not go side-by-side there ... And if there is something else in the group, commensurate with an aircraft carrier - a UDC of some kind, for example (or supply transport), it is extremely difficult to get into an AB. Or again - crush missiles, only now Chinese ...
  14. krokus792
    krokus792 26 February 2018 10: 11
    0
    Perplexed, as in the Chinese wind, Dong or hair dryer. It seems like both words fit.