Five days ago, in the “Military Technologies” section of the “Free Press” news and information and analytical resource (svpressa.ru), an interesting and highly thought-out article from the technical point of view entitled “The Feature of the Russian“ Kitchen ”: the cruisers and destroyers of the US Navy will go to feed the fish. " For an intended eye, it becomes instantly clear that we are talking about long-range multipurpose tactical missiles of the X-22 family, which in the North Atlantic Alliance were assigned the identification code AS-4 "Kitchen" even at the end of distant 60's. Our product was called "Storm".
Nevertheless, the regional and global maritime theaters of the 21st century are gradually evolving into real network-centric arenas with state-of-the-art missile defense based on advanced RIM-162 ESSM, RIM-174 ERAM anti-aircraft missiles, against the background of which the aircraft’s technical and physical characteristics are X -22 gradually lost their share. For example, the relatively low flying speed to the target in 2500 km / h (2,05М), with a huge effective scattering surface of the order of 1 sq. m, the lack of execution modes intensive anti-aircraft maneuvers (similar to "Onyx"), as well as diving at a target at a relatively small angle of 30 degrees (starts at a distance of 60 km from a surface ship), made it possible for the ship's IRRLS / ANY-1A without difficulty “Capture” X-22 at a distance of up to 150 km and begin interception with the help of far from the most advanced SAMs RIM-67D and RIM-156A starting from 80 - 100 km.
As a result, active flight tests of the modernized X-2000 cruise missile (32-A-9) began with the 2362-s, which we will try to examine in detail in our today's review. The development of the X-22 update package up to the X-32 version was carried out by the specialists of the ICB Raduga since the 80-s of the 20th century. And already in 2016, the rocket entered service with the Tu-22М3М long-range bombers. And now let us try to analyze whether the new product from Raduga has reached the level that the existing naval air defense and missile defense systems of the US Navy and the United Navy of NATO set, as well as set more advanced anti-missile systems that are preparing for operational readiness in 20's years?
In the above article on “Kukhne”, the issue of the combat effectiveness of the X-32 RCC is expressed by Captain First Rank, Doctor of Military Sciences and Vice-President of the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences Konstantin Sivkov, who made an analytical review taking into account the tactical and technical characteristics of the new missile, as well as the well-known parameters of the American anti-aircraft missile ultra-long-range missiles RIM-174 ERAM "Extended Range Active Missile". For the most part, Konstantin Valentinovich considered the capabilities of X-32 for overcoming the air defense system of the American naval and carrier strike groups (CUG / AUG) as well as the anti-missile properties of RIM-174 ERAM (SM-6) up to the smallest details. In particular, even such an imperceptible detail for a simple browser was indicated as a significant decrease in the maneuverability of the RIM-174 ERAM SAM at heights exceeding the official interception ceiling figure in 33 km (stated by the manufacturer - “Raytheon”), which is observed due to critical sparseness the atmosphere. Here everything is absolutely true.
If at an altitude of 33 km the pressure is of the order of 11,5 mbar, then at an altitude of 40 km (here the march section of the X-32 trajectory passes) does not exceed 3,1 mbar. Consequently, the SM-6 aerodynamic rudders sharply lose their efficiency and the rocket maneuvering becomes much more viscous (the angular turn rate decreases), which does not allow it to effectively intercept the X-32, which performs anti-zenith maneuver. This result is also observed due to the lack of a gas-dynamic “belt” of transverse-control impulse engines (compensating aerodynamic planes) and low flight speed in 6 — 3700 km / h, which does not allow to realize all the best qualities of aerodynamic control surfaces at high altitudes. (for example, the 3800B5A missile system of the C-21 complex was perfectly controlled by aerodynamic rudders at altitudes up to 200 km due to the impressive speed of 40 km / h). Against this background, the X-9000 has indisputable advantages: flight speed in 32 - 5200 km / h at the march, and hence the possibility of vigorous maneuvering.
A very important advantage of the X-32 main flight mode (unlike the X-22) when performing an anti-ship strike is that the rocket supports the flight trajectory at an altitude of 40 km up to the target and does not begin a dive at a distance 50 - 60 km from it . In practice, this further complicates the process of intercepting the updated “Storm” (the native name is X-22) by means of the RIM-174 SAM with all the flight and technical flaws of the latter. The situation changes drastically at the moment of the X-32 transition from horizontal flight to steep dive mode on the target, or diving at angles of more than 70 degrees. Decreasing to 25 km altitude, X-32 falls into an area where the maneuverable capabilities of the SM-6 interceptor rocket are at the proper level due to the higher density of the lower stratosphere layers, in the same turn, this reduces the flight speed of the Kitchen to 3,5 - 4M . As a result, the chance of interception increases several times. At such heights, the SM-6 is able to realize an overload of approximately 15 units, a heavier and slower X-32 - also no more than 15 units.
One of the main advantages of the X-32 is the near-hypersonic speed on the initial segment of the sustainer portion of the trajectory, which does not allow it to be intercepted by all types of missiles of western production in pursuit. The main drawback is the huge radar signature, comparable to the Rafal EPR, as evidenced by the weight in 5780 kg (as in the X-22М), due to the lack of introduction of composite and radio absorbing materials
We proceed to the following points. The article states that despite the high permissible overload of the combat stage of the RIM-174 ERAM, it is not able to intercept X-32 due to the fact that the speed of the target being hit is only 2880 km / h, while the speed of X-32 approaches 5400 km / h on the march. Firstly, according to the statements already made in the article, the SM-6 has an extremely scarce “window of ability” to intercept a maneuvering target at an altitude of 40 km in a rarefied atmosphere (for this, X-32 should not perform maneuvers so that less rapid and less “vert "RIM-174 was able to intercept it). Consequently, the emphasis had to be made at that time of the final trajectory segment, when the rocket swooped on the target through the denser layers of the stratosphere, and the speed here was already fairly reduced (not only because of the greater aerodynamic resistance, but also due to the sharp turning X-32 pitch) to 3,5 - 4M.
Secondly, it is impossible to agree with the maximum speed of the target hit for the SM-6, voiced in the article, at only 800 m / s. So, on December 14, 2016, offshore of the Hawaiian Islands, field tests of two advanced missiles of the SM-6 Dual I modification were successfully carried out to intercept a simulator of a medium-range ballistic missile, the speed of which significantly exceeds the 2,5M figure described in the material on svpressa. ru, and can reach 3,5 - 5M. Moreover, specialists of the manufacturing company Raytheon and representatives of the American fleet have already stated that the SM-6 of the new “blocks” (modifications) will be designed not only for the horizontal destruction of low-altitude tactical and strategic cruise missiles at a distance of 100 - 150 or more kilometers, but also against operational-tactical ballistic missiles, as well as medium-sized ballistic missiles range, including the Chinese DF-21 DPS on the descending branch of the trajectory in the denser layers of the stratosphere.
As far as we know, the speed of the HF promising anti-ship MRFM DF-21D at an altitude of 25 - 30 km can reach 1500 - 1800 m / s. This means that approximately in the same framework is the maximum speed of the target to be hit for the RIM-174 ERAM SAM, but not the 800 m / s. There is no point in thinking here for a long time, since back in the summer of 2008, the standard SM-2ER Block IV anti-aircraft guided missile (obviously, RIM-156A) launched from the universal vertical launch Mk 41 missile cruiser CG-70 "Lake Erie" during firing tests, was able to destroy a medium-range ballistic missile simulator over the Pacific Ocean. RIM-156A has an interception ceiling in 29 km. Remarkably, this SM-2 Block IV anti-aircraft missile is not a highly specialized interceptor for hitting ballistic missiles, but is designed to intercept standard high-speed aerodynamic objects, including both high-altitude and low-altitude, traveling "above the crest of a wave."
The article “Features ...” indicates that the probability of intercepting X-32 on the flight path using the RIM-174 SAMs is about 0,02 if target designation is performed via Link-16 radio channel from the E-2D deck aircraft or other Aegis "- ship and with probability 0,07 when targeting from a destroyer / cruiser carrier. The argument of such a low interception probability is the presence of SM-6 ARGSN, made on the basis of the homing head of air-to-air missiles of the AIM-120C AMRAAM family, which are capable of capturing a target with 1 ESR. m at a distance 12 km. With a total convergence speed in 2,2 km / s, the on-board computer system of an anti-aircraft missile will only have 5 seconds for an exact correction, which will reduce the chance of interception to a minimum.
This can be easily explained: during the exercises, the SM-6 intercepted an even faster simulator of the BRSD, since it did not perform anti-aircraft maneuvers, and the X-32 is capable of such maneuvers. Moreover, the improved "Kitchen" can be equipped with an on-board EW complex, complicating the work of the active RGSN SM-6. But the EW station with the current perfection of ARGSN is partly a double-edged sword, since modern ARGSN can work not only in active mode, but also be guided solely by the radiation source of interference. As a result, the SM-32 X-6 interception probability indicated in the article is perceived with a fair amount of caution. It is possible that, given the first maneuvering, this probability ranges from 0,15 to 0,2.
It should be noted that the Pentagon, with its own hands, has closed the opportunities for the US Navy to more effectively oppose our anti-ship missiles X-32. It consists in canceling the anti-aircraft guided missile RIM-2001B (SM-156 Block IVA) project in 2, which differs in a two-channel guidance system consisting of an IR sensor whose lens is recessed into the hull generator immediately behind the radio transparent radome of the homing head and semi-active radar homing head . The IR module ensured an increased accuracy of interception of a small-sized ballistic object, since the AN / SPG-62 X-band radar searchlight may not be sufficiently illuminated.
So, equipped with an infrared sensor RIM-156B (SM-2 Block IVA) would have much more potential to intercept X-32. Why? Launched in advance of the anti-missile can detect and accompany the anti-ship missile X-32 at a distance of several tens of kilometers, even before the moment when the vertical dive begins. The main channel of guidance in this case will be assigned to an infrared sensor capable of ideally operating in the clean and cold stratospheric layers. The sensor will focus on the infrared signature of the wings heated from the aerodynamic drag and the X-32 nose fairing. Shortly before the “meeting” of the X-32 and SM-2 Block IVA rockets, the first one will already enter a dive mode in denser stratospheric positions. Consequently, the aerodynamic heating of the front edges of the wing and the radome of the GOS will lead to an even more expressive “thermal portrait”, which means a more stable capture using the IR module of the RIM-156B anti-aircraft missile. Integration of the IR channel with a semi-active radar channel can increase the probability of X-32 interception to 0,35. Moreover, the IR sensor compensates for possible errors of the radar channel at the time of our radio-electronic jamming. Fortunately, the RIM-156B project is currently closed. But there are concerns that it will be embodied in the temporarily secret project of the SM-6 Dual II interceptor, the first tests of which are scheduled for the 2019 year.
Attention should also be paid to the fact that the SM-6 is not the only anti-aircraft guided missile that is used by the Arleigh Burke class destroyers and the Ticonderoga cruisers to set an anti-aircraft umbrella over the AUG order. Very predictable consequences can be expected from the development of a promising modification of the anti-aircraft guided missile RIM-162B ESSM. If modification “A” is equipped with only semi-active radar homing head, which required the mandatory use of AN / SPY-1D and single-channel illumination radar SPG-62, then RIM-162B ESSM Block II will receive an active X-band radar homing head. The trick here is that the AN / SPY-1D multifunctional radar and the AN / SPG-62 continuous-radiation / illumination radars do not cover the elevated angle of our today's heroine, the anti-ship missile X-32, with its elevation angle of view. This means that RIM-162A will not be able to be effectively used against our RCC. Modification "B" with its active radar guidance can. Moreover, in contrast to the second stage of the SM-2 / 6 with the maximum overload of maneuvers in 27 - 30 units. at medium altitudes, “Developed Sea Sparrow” (as the ESSM abbreviation is translated) is capable of pursuing a goal with its own overloads of at least 50G.
ESSM Block II Tests
These qualities became available to the US naval air defense system thanks to equipping all types of ESSM with a gas-jet thrust vector deflection system, which continues immediately until the solid-fuel charge of the sustainer solid propellant rocket mode is burned out. With flight speeds in 1200 m / s in the dense layers of the troposphere, RIM-162B provides ideal conditions for countering X-32. This could also be mentioned in an article on svpressa.ru. Currently, the RIM-162B ESSM Block II is at the final stage, while the adoption of the fleet is planned at the end of the 2019 and the beginning of the 2020.
In the final part of the article on the Free Press, the final conclusions are made that the ship assault group of two destroyers of Arleigh Burke class missile defense or two cruisers of Ticonderoga class missile defenses cannot repel the blow of a pair of Tu-22М3М long-range bombers with 4 to get counter-strike from a pair of long-range bombers of TU-32М26М with 2 and anti-bombers with heavy bombers -41 on the suspensions of both cars. I would like to believe in such an outcome, but the harsh technological reality does not allow this. Obviously, such a scenario would correspond to reality if the Thirty-second Kitchens were opposed by Ticonderoga class cruisers in an early modification with Mk 6 girder launchers (had much lower firing performance) and outdated SM-10ER Block II anti-aircraft missiles . Today, when the US Navy’s high-performance Mk 12 launchers are in service, but the SM-32 Dual II and ESSM Block II are not yet in place, 5 to 6 X-22 with 3 or 32 T-XNUMXXXNUMX must be used to defeat a pair of American destroyers. When they begin to enter the ammunition of American ships, the number of X-XNUMX needed to defeat will increase one and a half to two times.
A more unpleasant situation arises when using the X-32 against the AUG / CUG of the Royal Navy of Great Britain and the AUG of the French Navy. Let us dwell on the British. As part of their naval forces, 6 of the Daring class 45 air defense destroyers are included, each of them is equipped with a powerful multipurpose AFAR-radar Sampson working in decimeter S-band, which is capable of displaying 2000 tracks in the review mode in maintenance mode on the aisle. Typical target with EPR around 300 square. m (our rocket X-1), this radar complex will detect at a distance of about 32 km. The S220M additional radar detector will track the Storm at a similar distance. Therefore, PAAMS operators will have about 1850 seconds to prepare the Sylver A80 launcher for firing, during which time the X-50 anti-ship missile will approach the attacked KUG at a distance of 32 km, from which Aster anti-aircraft missiles can fire. -100 "various modifications.
Despite the fact that the Eurosam consortium indicates the official interception height for Aster-30 in just 25 km, the architecture and type of controls, as well as the maximum flight speed of the combat (second) stage in 4,7M, clearly indicate that the rocket will feel great and at an altitude of 35-40 km (similar to our 9М96ДМ). For this, the compact combat stage has a small mid-section, extended bearing wings of a large area and an impressive charge of low-smoke fuel. This is far from the poorly manoeuvrable SM-6, equipped only with aerodynamic rudders. In the arsenal of the Aster-30 control system there is an important trump card - a cross-shaped gasdynamic belt made of 4-x slotted transverse-drive control engines built into the wing design.
This “belt” is located in the center of mass of the rocket (like 9М96ДМ), which allows you to make energetic “throws” of “Aster-30” in space when you reach the maneuvering target, even at an altitude of 35-40 km. Literally in 4 -5 hundredths of a second, overloading to 15 - 20 units can be realized, which means that clearly X-32 will not be hard to hit. The developer called this method of lightning gas-dynamic control "PIF-PAF". It is precisely known that in many cases it allows you to hit the target with a direct hit “to-kill”. One does not even have to hope that the massive X-32 with its large radar visibility can “get away” from Aster. At low altitudes in 5-7 km the picture is exacerbated: high atmospheric pressure allows the Aster-30 combat stage to maneuver to the target with an overload in 55 - 60 units. The list of advantages is completed by an active radar homing head operating in a higher and more accurate J-band (from 10 to 20 GHz).
It is not difficult to sum up the above described: if the chance to send to the bottom of the American reinforced carrier-carrier (one aircraft carrier of the Gerald Ford class, 1 cruiser Ticonderoga and 2 — 3 destroyer Arley Burk) using 30 — 36 X-32 0,6 anti-ship missiles X-XNXX-30 1 anti-ship missile X-XNUMX. large (around XNUMX), then destroying the British AUG as part of Queen Elizabeth and four Daring-class air defense destroyers is unlikely to succeed because of the highest flight-technical parameters of the Aster-XNUMX SAM. By the way, this anti-missile in the coming years will be brought to a completely different level in the version of "Block XNUMXNT": its distinctive feature will be even more advanced ARGSN mm-Ka-band to work on ultra-small ballistic elements of high-precision weapons. For the opening of such an antimissile echelon, it is necessary to hope only on “Zircons” and “Daggers”.