What details of the hypersonic rocket project for the Su-57 did not mention an anonymous source?

News on the introduction of a project for the development of a promising hypersonic aeroballistic missile to equip the 5th generation Su-57 multifunctional fighter in the State Arms Program for 2018-2027, provoked a wave of serious controversy in the comments of several news and military-analytical resources of the Russian Internet, including VO. The first and, in our opinion, the main thing on which the readers ironic about the event rightly focused their attention is the negligible number of promising aviation Su-57 complexes, which are planned to be transferred to combat units of the Russian Aerospace Forces in the period from 2019 to 2021 (a batch of 12 vehicles for experimental combat operation). The first two stealth fighters will go to the 4th center for combat use and retraining of flight personnel of the Aerospace Forces (Lipetsk) next year.

It is logical to assume that even if every Su-57 will carry 2 airball ballistic missiles on reinforced suspension nodes in the two central weapons bays (it was TASS with the “internal” deployment of promising missiles, referring to an anonymous source in the aviation industry) that the total the number of units in 24 is unlikely to be able to meet the requirements of the Russian Aerospace Forces against the background of the list of air defense weapons and strategic enemy facilities currently present in regional theaters of operations. Only four links of promising subtle multifunctional fighters for the state, which positions itself as a superpower, is simply unacceptable. Moreover, such a state of affairs calls into question the combat effectiveness of the Aerospace Forces as a whole, both in operations to suppress enemy air defenses and in operations to gain air supremacy. But how can we convey this to a high-ranking supervisor for the legal support of the development of defense organizations Vladimir Gutenev, who tried to convince the public of the “counterproductiveness of Su-57 supplies to the combat units of the video conferencing system and the expediency of promoting these machines for export”?

Some readers have expressed doubt that the PAK FA, as the carrier of the promising aeroballistic missile under development, has any advantages over such transitional generation platforms as Su-30СМ and Su-35С. And here, forgive me, it smacks of complete ignorance of both the technical part of the issue and the tactical one. Multi-purpose 5 generation fighters of the Su-57 generation possess almost all the necessary qualities for the realization of operational surprise when using hypersonic air attack means from the central internal weapons bays. For example, if the effective dispersion surface of our low-profile fighter jets is of the order of 0,2 — 0,3 sq. m, then the link has the opportunity to approach to the zone of operating an ETHOXN AWXS AWACS aircraft, equipped with AN / APY-3 radar, at a distance of about 2 — 290 km without opening its own location. The output of a link or a pair of Su-320 units with 57 or 8 promising tactical hypersonic missiles at these lines will be more than enough to strike at the previously obtained coordinates of the enemy's surface objects. Let us now for a moment imagine that the Su-16CM link is involved in striking new enemy air ballistic missiles at remote targets of the enemy.

Given the fact that these "drying" have an effective reflective surface of the order of 15 — 20 sq. m (according to the table "paralay_tab" and other sources), radar AN / APY-2 aircraft RLDN E-3C will be able to detect them on the instrumental detection range, component 650 km! A link from four F-22A “Raptor” equipped with ultra-long-range AIM-120D (160 — 180 km) air combat missiles will be immediately sent to intercept, which will most likely break the Su-30CM launch on the lines necessary for launching the hypersonic missiles, pulling them in long-range air combat with a minimal chance of success, since the most long-range air-to-air missile in our thirties ammunition remains the RVV-SD with an operating radius of 110 km. It is not by chance that we add sharpness to the issue of the launching boundary for a new hypersonic aeroballistic missile in 300 — 350 km. The length of each central compartment of the Su-57 fighter’s arms is 4700 mm, the width is of the order of 1200 mm, the depth is 550 — 600 mm.

Consequently, the weight and size characteristics of promising hypersonic missiles can only slightly exceed the parameters of the R-37M long-range missiles, which also integrate into the PAK FA ammunition. But it is necessary to take into account the fact that in order to effectively defeat highly protected ground-based strongholds of the enemy, this rocket must be equipped with a massive high-explosive fragmentation warhead (at least 20 — 25% of the total mass), and therefore the range will drastically decrease. In any case, there is no question of any similar range characteristics (2000 or 1000 km) with Dagger: the internal volumes of X-47М2 Dagger for solid propellant solid propellant charge are several times higher than those of a rocket developed for Su-Xnumx. However, the relatively short range of these missiles will be fully compensated for by excellent speed characteristics (57 — 5М), the ability to attack targets at high angles with anti-missile maneuvers, a small radar signature (due to the use of radio absorbing materials in the hull design), and a quasi-ballistic trajectory flying at altitudes 7 — 40 km, where neither SM-50 and THAAD anti-ballistic missiles, nor advertised by Raythe on »SM-3 long-range anti-aircraft missiles.

Information sources:
https://www.popmech.ru/weapon/news-452992-su-57-poluchit-novuyu-giperzvukovuyu-raketu/
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-106.html
https://warisboring.com/the-u-s-air-forces-updated-e-3g-radar-planes-are-vulnerable-to-hacking/
https://diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/2978098.html
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/2758617

Comments

[kjhg]

Regarding the scanty amount of purchased S-57s, this is a fact, and most likely they will all go to train and train pilots, rather than stand on alert with a hypersonic missile, as the author writes. But regarding the characteristics of the range and speed of the future rocket, it is too early to judge. And in general, until at least 1 Su-57 regiment, fully equipped with pilots, enters into combat duty, the combat value of this over-advertised machine for the country's defense is negligible.
PS: now, of course, the respected Nexus appears and explains that Su-30 with Su35 is enough for us to heroically die in battles with the Raptors and Penguins, the number of which already exceeds even our generation 4+ fighters at times.

[Hypersound]

I read that Migi-31s will begin to be removed from service around 20-21, and besides this aircraft, only the Su-57 can be the carrier of the Dagger. So the first Packs will probably be launched as a platform for Daggers in a couple of years. For me, this is a very blasphemous decision to launch such chic airplanes as just high-speed platforms

[Hypersound]

Penguins what kind of aircraft? I think that Su 30 and 35 we have several times more than the F-22. Well, the F-35 as a fighter is rubbish. In fact, it is a light bomber. If he has fighter abilities, then at the plane level 3 generations maximum)

Well and then, our concept of defense against the Stealth is based primarily on Air Defense (s-400 and s-500; in particular, the s-400 sees the F-22 at a distance of about 260 km with an average flight height of the Raptor, and for accurate guidance it’s enough homing), and only secondarily on fighter jets

[Machito]

Su-57 will go into series when the car is brought to mind. Why does Russia need hundreds of testing machines?
Let us now lag behind the Americans in the number of fifth-generation aircraft, but our aircraft will be qualitatively superior to the F-35.

[Grigory_78]

Why can not put a minus article?

[Stas157]

Quote: Gregory_78

Why can not put a minus article?

But you have the opportunity to write objections in the comments. Use at least this. And it will be more obvious than a simple minus.
As for me, I absolutely see no reason to minus the article.

[Yura]

Quote: Gregory_78

Why can not put a minus article?

Because this button is not a plus or minus, it means expressing your opinion about whether this news is important or not, that is, it is for expressing your opinion on the significance of the news. Hover the cursor over it and "important" appears.

[mark1]

Probably the X-15 has been finalized, just in size (well, maybe a little reduced length) is suitable for internal compartments.

[g1washntwn]

It would be great to have aeroballistic air-to-air and anti-radar for attacks of all kinds of AWACS and tankers. The range and invisibility of "stealth" in a link without AWACS tends to zero. But this already requires a range of 600 km and a combined "top-down" guidance type against the background of the earth.

[Hypersound]

The top missile for the S-500 will be capable of striking at a distance of up to just 600 km (so far they have only tested a kilometer of 480-500 :() It would be more likely to have the complexes in series

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

Rather, live complexes in a series

The S-500 will never replace fighter aircraft. The situation is such that effective BB missiles have a ramjet engine, i.e. an anti-aircraft missile can have such an engine only if it is multi-print. And still lose with the reaction time to the plane. The same situation with the detection, the radar, raised to a great height, sees much more.
Question with ammunition. There will NEVER be long-range anti-aircraft missiles in sufficient quantities to repel a 1st strike. 1 induced aircraft replaces the entire S-300 battery with the best results in defeat. Replenishment of the S-300 BC in the field is a big pain. It’s much easier to equip an airplane for a second departure.
Cost - aviation costs a trite cheaper, despite the training of pilots and ground personnel. It is demographically and economically more profitable to call on few pilots than many air defense officers.
Well, the iron argument with mobility of the territory of our country can never be defended by air defense systems. Only selected destinations. And now there is not even a common radar field.
But the same air defense is needed - where it is more efficient than airplanes.

[Hypersound]

In the attack, of course, will not notice. But in the RF Armed Forces, the concept is completely different - compact and defensive, and therefore the rate on air defense / missile defense turned out to be correct - do not keep up with us on airplanes

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

But in the RF Armed Forces, the concept is completely different - compact and defensive, and therefore the rate on air defense / missile defense turned out to be correct - do not keep up with us on airplanes

Have you read the concept? According to this concept, we have eliminated a single radar field and the number of combat-ready air defense systems from hundreds decreased to tens.
How would you explain, if you had traveled enough beyond the Urals, you would have understood that poor-quality air defense systems based on S-300/400/500 systems in the eastern regions of the country will not pull the Russian economy, now is not 1991. The only way out now is to significantly increase the role of aviation with the presence of air defense systems in particularly important areas (cities with a population of over one million, for example).

[Hypersound]

What? We have just hundreds of combat-ready air defense systems right now. The single radar field is being actively restored and today it is almost ready.

At the moment, 61.5% of the Russian army is provided with the latest weapons. By the way, by the end of zero this figure did not exceed 20%. By the end of the second state rearmament program (which started this year) in 2027, the share of the latest weapons in the Russian army will be about 98.5%. In short, the junk is almost gone

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

What? We have just hundreds of combat-ready air defense systems right now.

You will be surprised if you look at the number of S-300 combat-ready air defense systems of all versions (B, P, PM1, PMU), there was a time when there were only 8. Drastically the supply of spare parts did not change, it was planned to raise the availability to at least 25, then to 40.
Until at least one hundred plans were not. S-300 PMU and S-400, for which similar problems of the elemental base have been solved, are still very few. This is actually only one Moscow and single complexes in the districts.

[Hypersound]

Quote: goose

there was a time

Keywords of your statement. At the moment, the combat readiness is about 93% and continues to grow

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

At the moment, the combat readiness is about 93% and continues to grow

Only due to the write-off of air defense systems, their total number is already 4 times less than it was, therefore, the% of combat-ready units increased. They wrote off it, because the elemental base of the first models was produced by Ukraine, and it became increasingly difficult to agree on modernization and the normal price of spare parts.
Maybe it’s right, but now we are without air defense, only patches.

[Hypersound]

What cancellation, the number of air defense systems from year to year is only growing

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

What cancellation, the number of air defense systems from year to year is only growing

I already wrote, the basis was made up of the old S-300V and P complexes, of which several hundred divisions, they were built on the old circuitry, boards for which were produced in Ukraine. Their combat readiness is extremely low. Cannibalism is common. At one time, the proportion of combat readiness did not exceed half (in fact, even worse - about 10%).
The new S-300 (PM **, V3-4) and S-400 are built on a different element base, and the production of spare parts is entirely located on the territory of Russia, they have a high degree of combat readiness of about 90%. But ... the production of 3 to 10 divisions per year does not cover the number of decommissioned. The wonderful share of combat readiness> 90% is entirely due to the old versions of the S-300 that have disappeared from the inventory. So only rely on new and reworked versions of old ones. According to my personal calculations, this figure is very different from the official one and is about 50+ divisions (in fact, 10% of what could have been with more efforts). In addition, forget all the chips with new radars, radars on rods and low-altitude PARs are produced in sufficient quantities only for new systems. Considering that only the defense of Moscow should be about 100 combat-ready divisions, you can estimate the size of the hole in the air.
These estimates do not include the Buk, Tor, A-135, S-125, S-200 divisions.
The second sore subject is the production of ammunition and its maintenance. A very large number of missiles will soon be decommissioned, but the production of new ones is still stalled for various reasons (not only financial and technological), so soon, if the problems are not resolved, there will be some shortage of modern and reliable ammunition.

[JD1979]

Very controversial, depending on the situation.

The situation is such that effective BB missiles have a ramjet engine, i.e. an anti-aircraft missile can have such an engine only if it is multi-print. And still lose with the reaction time to the plane.

If the plane in the air and sees the target, and the distance from it to the target is closer than from the target to the air defense, then the reaction can be faster if you do not pay attention that the S-300-400 missiles have a speed higher than the B-B missiles . But not a single aircraft can compete by canal with an air defense system. In other matters, as well as air defense with an aircraft at the line of interception.

Question with ammunition. There will NEVER be long-range anti-aircraft missiles in sufficient quantities to repel a 1st strike.

So V-V DB missiles are much smaller than the rest, here the only way out is separation and the gradual shooting of targets.

1 induced aircraft replaces the entire S-300 battery with the best results in defeat.

Ummm ... how much is the maximum aircraft BC and S-300 batteries? 12 to 48?

Replenishment of the S-300 BC in the field is a big pain. It’s much easier to equip an airplane for a second departure.

In the field, you can change the TPK immediately after the shooting, and the plane still needs to return, refuel, go through MOT, etc. So it’s not at all easier or faster.

Cost - aviation costs a trite cheaper, despite the training of pilots and ground personnel. It is demographically and economically more profitable to call on few pilots than many air defense officers.

Sht ... 0_o

Well, the iron argument with mobility of the territory of our country can never be defended by air defense systems. Only selected destinations. And now there is not even a common radar field.

Rather, glass ... You can’t protect with airplanes either. Will you be able to build airfields in all directions within XNUMX hours? or is it faster to deploy another air defense division? None of the components alone can provide acceptable protection, only the joint work of the IA VKS, ground defense and electronic warfare. A radar field is slowly being pulled over the entire space, each year another ZGRLS is introduced.

[goose]

Quote: JD1979

You can’t protect with airplanes either. Can you build airfields in XNUMX hours in all directions? or is it faster to deploy another air defense division? None of the components alone can provide acceptable protection, only the joint work of the IA VKS, ground defense and electronic warfare. A radar field is slowly being pulled over the entire space, each year another ZGRLS is introduced.

If you were to tell about economic and technical details, you would change your point of view, but this takes at least 2 years, judging by your argument.

[rocket757]

If you build the tactics of using Su 57, on the same principle as a penguin, you need an extensive and very expensive infrastructure ..... which will be difficult and expensive to build.
It seems that all this is postponed for later. Use advanced technology, at the level and on the principles of the previous generation .... not ice. The gain is very small, and the costs are much larger.
Boom to see.

[Senior manager]

A ghost roams around Europe, a ghost of a weapon on other physical principles. And only a small group of specialists knows about this. And the debate on VO is about the last century, at least. From the point of view of the development of military equipment, as well as the strategy and tactics of WWII, the argument is wow, interesting. Give a MILITARY HISTORICAL REVIEW.

[rocket757]

The debate and reasoning are DIFFERENT.

[doctor.75]

__ / Only four links of promising subtle multi-functional fighters for the state, positioning itself as a superpower __ / ...! ???? ... positioning itself as a superpower! ??? : Wow! Cool. And lope people do not know!

[Hypersound]

As a military-political superpower. What is wrong? It's like that. And over time, we only strengthen in this rank. We are also an energy power, still a space power (however, there are problems), and in some other sectors too. What we are not a superpower, but simply a strong regional power (but nothing more) - this is in the economy. There is no arguing. But this does not cancel the status of a military-political superpower. In this, we are almost on par with the states, and by the mid-20s we will overtake, together with China

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

In this, we are almost on par with the states, and by the mid-20s we will surpass, along with China

China has never had allies, just read their strategy.
And the second: no economy - no money - no rockets, only prototypes.
China has a certain economy, there are not the best missiles in commercial quantities, we have practically none against China and the USA.

[Hypersound]

China has no allies, partners. In the normal sense of the word, and not those "partners" of the United States, Britain and others, which in reality are enemies.
We are the main military-political partner of China.
The economy, of course, is modest relative to China and the United States, though if you look at the real rate (PPP) and look at the structure of the economy (the United States is dominated by services, industry is only 20% of GDP, we have 40% of industry), then not so bad anymore. In fact, we are not inferior to the United States in the military industry per unit of population, we fly only in terms of population and, accordingly, in the size of the army. But the United States has a huge headache in view of the monstrous spending on its 600 occupation bases around the world (half of their military budget - $ 350 billion a year - goes stupidly for the maintenance of these bases) and this gives us an advantage

[Hypersound]

Not so bad

[gunnerminer]

-USA, Britain -

The main trading partners of the PRC. Profiting for it, opening their markets.

-We are the main military-political partner of China .-

You are his rival, to whom the CPC Central Committee has very serious territorial claims. Yours is the Eastern Military District, and the KTOF is bending.

[Altona]

The author may exaggerate in places, but on the whole, I think he is right. Therefore, I write with irony about Borisov, who "knows better what the military needs." Still, any machine with such a development time was very thoroughly discussed, weighed and calculated both as a mechanism and as a military means, not so that then someone choh, guided by pure accounting, decided to cease its existence.

[rocket757]

The right question is -

Quote: Altona

Guided by pure accounting, I decided to cease to exist.

here and the answer is no longer needed.

[L10n77]

Damanians, as always, everything is better with the Americans, and glad, and missiles. But where did he get the 120 km range from the AIM-160, it’s not clear even if usaf representatives claimed that these missiles were inferior to the Soviet R-27 in range?

[rocket757]

If you read and count sho they write in different publications, then stripworms are now aware of space technology and, from their bounty, are ready to share with faithful allies, for very specific denyushki, of course.
However, they really are not in a hurry to check the striped space in real life. Why?

[g1washntwn]

Increase the range of the AIM-120D by 50% - "Wishlist". In the silence on the air so far they are, otherwise some would have shaken the technical reports of tests at all angles that they are the main chief executives))) I am inclined that the increase in the range so far turns out to be a maximum of 20-30%, in the same dimensions squeeze the characteristics of the AIM-54 no nano -Technologies for a turbojet engine are not enough, and the transition to a ramjet is a completely different rocket.

[goose]

Quote: g1washntwn

the same dimensions squeeze the characteristics of AIM-54 no nano-technologies for turbojet engines are enough

They don't even try, they just put in a multi-mode engine to reduce losses on high speed flight. Nothing else has changed. For a radical increase in characteristics, you need a PUVRD + a kinetic light warhead + another homing system + a reactive guidance method on the final trajectory. Each of these elements already gives a new rocket. And such experiments are already flying with "them".

[Hypersound]

At Su30SM EPR is not 15-20m2) somewhere around 3-5. And the Su-57 is not 0.2-0.3, but about 0.5 (0.3 for the F-35). But I completely agree that Paky needs to be riveted as much as possible, ideally you need to have at least a hundred in service, and preferably several hundred. 12 pieces in the next few years is certainly better than zero, but it's frankly small

[Waldemar]

How I would like the Russian government to rob not the people of Russia, but some other country ....

[Hypersound]

Yes and no. How are we then morally different from the same Americans?

[Hypersound]

Quote: goose

The same situation with the detection, the radar, raised to a great height, sees much more

The aircraft radar is much smaller and weaker than that of the same S-400. Not to mention the fact that additional radars of other ranges can be attached to the complex

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

The aircraft radar is much smaller and weaker than that of the same S-400. Not to mention the fact that additional radars of other ranges can be attached to the complex

It is not for me to advise you which technical literature to read, but I will disappoint you. The S-300/400 radar does not see the AGM-109 Tomahawk type cruise missile at a distance of 40 km, and it sees the primitive and weak radar of the flying MiG-29. And you can increase power by 10 times - you won’t see. This is the physics of the process. If we take modern AFAR (at least the one that stands on the MiG-31BM, Su-35 or A-50), then its ability to distinguish targets from the ground is much higher. Therefore, if cruise missiles, then only planes are effective in detecting. SAM will help with external target designation.
In addition to aircraft, target designation can be taken from a special drone, airship or satellite. No more options. Such a drone is still being tested, there are no more satellites, and the airships are highly dependent on the weather, and they are not there either. In some cases, it is possible to raise the radar above the terrain, increasing the radio horizon for cruise missiles by 20-30 km, but this will not fundamentally solve the problem.

[Hypersound]

In fact, there are additional stations for detecting low-flying objects. I don’t know about the S-300, but the S-400 are definitely equipped with them. Read

By the way, there are no AFARs on the Su-35. Also read

[goose]

Quote: Hypersound

In fact, there are additional stations for detecting low-flying objects. I don’t know about the S-300, but the S-400 are definitely equipped with them. Read
By the way, there are no AFARs on the Su-35. Also read

Station 1RL123 showed a maximum of 70 km and this is probably the best. Even the Fregat ship stations guarantee no more than 50 km. There are many such stations on the 600 km perimeter, which you said, cannot be installed.
So far, the Su-35 does not have a PFAR from a good life, it was planned to be AFAR right away, but it didn’t have time, it’s already planned to receive it after modernization, and AFAR already has something to put, but production can make them only 3 pcs a year. Even the Su-57 is not enough for now. By the way, I can refer to the characteristics of the current PFAR Irbis (E), it is good enough in detecting targets on the background of the earth.