Media: Russia tested the missile unlimited range SSC-X-9 Skyfall

240
The Russian Ministry of Defense conducted the next, thirteenth test of a cruise missile of unlimited range with a small-sized super-powerful nuclear power plant, Burevestnik, reports The Diplomat with reference to sources in the US government.

Media: Russia tested the missile unlimited range SSC-X-9 Skyfall




According to data published by the publication, the last tests of a Russian cruise missile with a super-power nuclear power plant were held on 29 this January at the Kapustin Yar test site in the Astrakhan region and were considered "partially successful." The term "partially successful" was applied to the tests due to the continuation of work on the rocket, and not in connection with some kind of failure in the tests. The publication does not have any details of the tests, however, the continuation of tests may indicate that the rocket will be accepted into service no earlier than 2020 of the year.

The publication reports that the rocket, which received the NATO designation SSC-X-9 Skyfall ("Falling from the Sky", the Russian interpretation - "Filled Heaven"), had previously been tested in February 2018 of the year and even earlier in November 2017.

Kyle Mizokami, an observer of the American magazine Popular Mechanics, wrote about the testing of the Russian rocket. In his article, he warned that if this missile was put into service, Russia would gain an undeniable advantage over the United States, since Burevestnik would be able to bypass the US missile defense system and strike at strategic targets.

Mizoki is confident that a nuclear-powered missile, unlike conventional intercontinental ballistic missiles, can use any path beyond conventional missiles when moving toward a target, and this in turn will force the US to spend huge amounts of money on creating expensive missile defense systems.

On the creation of a "low-flying unobtrusive cruise missile carrying a nuclear warhead, with an almost unlimited range, unpredictable flight trajectory and the ability to bypass interception lines that are invulnerable to all existing and future anti-missile defense systems and air defense," said Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2018 of the year.
240 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +59
    7 February 2019 14: 09
    In his article, he warned that if the missile is adopted, Russia will gain an undeniable advantage over the United States, since the Burevestnik will be able to freely bypass the US missile defense system and strike at strategic targets.

    In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.
    And in this regard, I recall the words from the film "The meeting place cannot be changed", a character named Brick- "You have no methods, against Kostya Soprykin!"
    1. +17
      7 February 2019 14: 11
      A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good
      1. SSR
        +17
        7 February 2019 14: 16
        Quote: Nasr
        A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good

        Interestingly, if ours have created a small-sized nuclear power plant, then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear power plants will appear?
        1. t-4
          +9
          7 February 2019 14: 26
          Everything would be great, but the b / h campaign is only nuclear. You can’t start the barmaley. Otherwise, radioactive contamination from the engine is provided.
          1. +44
            7 February 2019 14: 47
            This rocket is not for barmaley. Its essence is that no one knows which side it is suitable for, and therefore it is necessary to create a circular defense of the object from air defense systems. And that, oh, how expensive.
            1. +1
              7 February 2019 15: 23
              Not only circular defense, nor located throughout the depths of the territory. For it can fall on one’s head from near space, breaking the defense line at an altitude inaccessible to ordinary anti-ballistic missiles.
              1. +25
                7 February 2019 17: 55
                Cruise missiles do not fly in space. They need winged air, and not only for the wings, but also for the engine.
                1. +19
                  7 February 2019 18: 52
                  Yes, yes, minus, air is the "working fluid" of the engine.
                  1. -4
                    7 February 2019 20: 19
                    nuclear? A LIKE NUCLEAR SUBMARines?
                    1. -4
                      7 February 2019 21: 47
                      But interestingly, does the concept of conditionally winged exist? After all, Mig-31 flies into space and its wings do not interfere. By the way, I do not put either a minus or a plus VSrostagro - everyone has the right to a personal opinion.
                      1. mvg
                        +14
                        7 February 2019 22: 12
                        After all, the MiG-31 flies into space and its wings do not interfere

                        Where does it fly? And to what orbit? And he also displays satellites? ... Wow .. The MiG has a practical ceiling of about 18 km. To space, as if on foot to China .. And its dynamic ceiling is a one-time news of a special record aircraft .. They kicked so that it climbed 38 km ... Look at how many kilometers the "near" space begins, what is the Karman line .. . and it's time to do the lessons ..
                      2. +10
                        7 February 2019 23: 05
                        The practical ceiling of the MiG-31 is 20 m. The MiG-000 has up to 25 m. This is its echelon when flying on supersonic, as a rule the speed is 21 km / h.
                    2. +4
                      7 February 2019 23: 11
                      A LIKE NUCLEAR SUBMARines?

                      If you're talking about Poseidon, then
                      The working fluid may be water.
                    3. +2
                      8 February 2019 06: 13
                      Cooling. There, the reactor is cooled by water, and here also + air.
                    4. 0
                      9 February 2019 10: 32
                      There is a different principle. A submarine rotates a propeller pushing water, and a rocket propeller rotates a jet engine that heats and pushes heated air with great force.
                2. 0
                  7 February 2019 21: 41
                  I agree that this engine needs air. I have not developed such a thing and I do not know how much it needs. Will it be enough at an altitude of 30 km, 50 km, 70 km. But for all that, air is needed at the inlet at a very decent speed, perhaps already in hypersound.
                  No one bothers to use the combined power scheme - in the atmosphere - atmospheric air, and in the near Cosmos - from the tank taken with you at the start.
                  1. +1
                    7 February 2019 23: 06
                    It will be very cumbersome.
                    1. +6
                      7 February 2019 23: 44
                      I don’t think so. A nuclear dvigun of megaWatt power will still not go into your pocket. Taking into account the path traversed in the atmosphere, the transported fuel - hydrogen (?), It will be necessary to take half of that taken by the strategist for a full flight on his own. Tesla valves provide a mode of pumping "fuel" - air without a single moving part. The hydrogen does not become radioactive, therefore it does not leave a track along which the piece of iron can be found. And it is the ideal cooler for the working area of ​​the reactor. Well tested in power reactors. I fully trust the theoretical possibility of forging such a sledgehammer at our current level of technology.
                    2. SSR
                      +3
                      8 February 2019 05: 27
                      Quote: VSrostagro
                      It will be very cumbersome.

                      Comrad, how many types of reactors do you know?
                      If you know, list, explain the difference and if it will be easier for you, then tell us why ours cannot come up with the New?
                      You vkurse that the diameter of the rocket itself breaks stereotypes about nuclear installations?
                      1. -1
                        8 February 2019 11: 13
                        I just mean that for the sake of the abstract "let it fly higher", you should not significantly complicate and increase the cost of the product design, as well as reduce its reliability.
                        You can come up with a lot, our designers can do this, but they can set priorities, otherwise they would not have achieved such high results.
                      2. 0
                        8 February 2019 13: 48
                        I do not know more than one type. What is drawn in entertaining pictures for children is not a fairly accurate description of these products. Draw your own view, and explain the falsity of the statement that it has already been tested in practice.
                        Punish the Americans for the fact that they, such scoundrels, are deceiving everyone by speaking about an "incomplete" test. The deception of the Russians is understandable. In the name of what, one wonders, should our overseas friends follow this? Not for pumping out the taxpayer's dough and creating something like that?
                        But if the dimensions are decisive forever, will their deception of theirs ever come true?

                        ps.
                        I had something to do with nuclear technology. Very distant and far from high science. But the touch gave knowledge that these things are buried in the structure of the Ministry of Environment. are so classified, surpassing all known to me in their level, that this taught me to believe that anything is possible. If megatons are mounted in kilograms, then megawatts can be placed per meter. Moreover, these things are classified by OS indices.
                        Those. are not serviced and are disposable. The life and resource of which are measured in minutes.
                  2. 0
                    8 February 2019 00: 53
                    Quote: Vkd dvk
                    and in the near Cosmos - from a tank taken with him at the start.

                    Yeah! Instead of warhead! good
                    1. +1
                      8 February 2019 01: 41
                      If the goal is not to put a slap in the face, but to distribute proclamations to the population, calling for the overthrow of their own government, then the warhead is not needed.
                      You noticed this in a timely manner.
                  3. -1
                    8 February 2019 10: 43
                    I have not developed such a thing and I do not know how much it needs. Will it be enough at an altitude of 30 km, 50 km, 70 km.
                    It all depends on the speed. There meteorites have enough air to brake and burn even at very high altitudes. All spacecraft and warheads also have enough air in anticipation of space to create some lift used for maneuver. But this requires high speeds.
                3. +2
                  7 February 2019 23: 27
                  Do jet rudders count? Engine modifications can be different and it all depends on the fuel (air is needed or not). Call them whatever you want, "just don't push them into the oven."
                4. +1
                  8 February 2019 02: 28
                  Cruise missiles have no wings; they are aerodynamic rudders. In space, you can use gas-dynamic rudders following the example of anti-aircraft missiles, which, after being ejected by a powder start from a cell, make a turn to the target using jets of compressed gas. Or like the ISS ... But I'm not sure that this is necessary. If this missile has an unlimited range, it is safer to fly below the radar.
                5. 0
                  8 February 2019 11: 12
                  And why do strike rockets using "on the surface of the earth" FLY in space ???
                  The main thing is to throw it there, and from there it will "fall down" itself, just manage to direct it!
          2. 0
            7 February 2019 15: 20
            Even without nuclear b / h, it can give radioactive contamination at the site of the fall due to its nuclear installation.
            1. +1
              7 February 2019 21: 44
              Moreover, the damage from such infection is much greater. After all, a certain amount of material is spent on the explosion, it burns out and does not fonit, and the water of the engine material does not burn out for a long time, in half-life, and for plutonium it is hundreds of thousands of years.
          3. +10
            7 February 2019 15: 22
            Quote: t-4
            You can’t start the barmaley.

            Why all in a row try on weapons for barmaley? Besides them, we have no other enemies, or what?
            1. +5
              7 February 2019 16: 02
              Quote: Piramidon
              Besides them, we have no other enemies, or what?

              one stands behind a puddle of hundreds of barmalei
              1. +6
                7 February 2019 21: 48
                And this is the main barmaley.
                1. +4
                  7 February 2019 21: 51
                  Quote: alexneg
                  And this is the main barmaley.

                  fse the rest of his miscarriages
          4. +3
            7 February 2019 15: 44
            Quote: t-4
            By barmaley

            Even the UR-100 was not planned. Although, bam, there is no one in the gorge.
          5. +10
            7 February 2019 16: 00
            When moving in the atmosphere there will be induced radiation only from radionuclides of nitrogen and oxygen. But they are ultrashort-lived (half-life 2 - 10 min). Therefore, infection will not occur.
            1. 0
              7 February 2019 18: 08
              And when it arrives "at the address" during the destruction of the rocket, there will also be no infection?
              1. +11
                7 February 2019 20: 34
                And when it arrives "at the address" during the destruction of the rocket, there will also be no infection?

                Reset the warhead, and she back for the next
              2. +4
                8 February 2019 10: 45
                And when it arrives "at the address" during the destruction of the rocket, there will also be no infection?
                And when she arrives at the address, it will be all the same to everyone whether her engine fonits or not at destruction.
          6. 0
            7 February 2019 16: 00
            Quote: t-4
            You can’t start the barmaley.

            against the barmaley "Caliber" is enough
          7. -2
            7 February 2019 20: 53
            Quote: t-4
            engine contamination provided

            The Americans bombed Serbia with depleted uranium specifically for infection. And nothing.
          8. +1
            8 February 2019 02: 32
            Well, I think this missile, and without a nuclear warhead, is worth a lot to use against barmaley. Even ordinary anti-ship missiles are not used on barmaley solely for reasons of economy. For barmaley and a ton bomb uncontrollable enough ....
          9. 0
            8 February 2019 13: 57
            This class of missiles is intended for special, most important and significant purposes, and for the barmaley we have enough "Caliber", and with a large margin.
        2. +14
          7 February 2019 14: 28
          Quote from S.S.R.
          then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear reactors will appear?

          And if the transporter from YU to the housing estate falls?
          Acceleration is an important factor
          But the reactor could not stand it.
          And now our peaceful atom
          All of Europe is obscene!


          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. +10
            7 February 2019 15: 08
            Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
            And if the transporter from YU to the housing estate falls?

            If this housing estate is on Maryland Avenue Northeast Avenue, I will not be offended, and you can score on a European mat.
            1. -5
              7 February 2019 23: 26
              Quote: Den717
              Maryland Avenue Northeast

              Pennsylvania Avenue - Washington Street, connecting the White House and the Capitol, is often called America’s Main Street.
              analogue of Red Square

              innocent Washingtonians do not mind you ..
              1. +9
                8 February 2019 05: 56
                Quote: Antares
                innocent Washingtonians do not mind you ..

                They are all potential enemy army. Why should I spare them? On occasion, they will not spare me or you. I am not a humanist, I have a military education. If I felt sorry for them, I would choose a different profession. I worry about those who are on my side of the state border.
                1. +1
                  8 February 2019 14: 57
                  colleague lyuto plus!
                  1. 0
                    8 February 2019 17: 55
                    Quote: besik
                    colleague lyuto plus!

                    So, we are not alone if there are like-minded people. So it’s close to the party ... laughing
                    1. 0
                      10 February 2019 04: 19
                      of the Sword Without Plowing Party? wink
          3. +2
            7 February 2019 15: 20
            And nothing bad, in terms of radioactive contamination, will not happen. Particularly reinforced design, on current missiles with warhead nuclear weapons, if not activated, can be dropped from high altitude, while the filling unit is not destroyed. And by that time, the reactor for the transporter will finalize both the protection system and the shutdown in the reactor machine. Although the question is still the case, it’s also not about protection against falling.
            1. 0
              8 February 2019 00: 05
              Lysova (Vladimir) - And what about the Fukushima-1 NPP
          4. +2
            7 February 2019 15: 23
            Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
            Quote from S.S.R.
            then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear reactors will appear?

            And if the transporter from YU to the housing estate falls?
            Acceleration is an important factor
            But the reactor could not stand it.
            And now our peaceful atom
            All of Europe is obscene!

            And who was going to drive them over housing estates? No need to consider yourself the smartest, so to speak. But I’m sorry, not one of those who think that in parades they drive tractors with nuclear blocks inside? One way or another, but in the future such transporters may appear, and measures will be taken into account in case of even accidents.
            1. +1
              7 February 2019 23: 28
              Here, it’s more likely not even transporters, but refuelers who could have been barraging
            2. +1
              8 February 2019 05: 39
              Do you know anything about induced activity? Even if the working fluid, i.e. air pumped through the reactor core and there is no direct contact with nuclear fuel, the ionizing radiation will still do its job. And the density of the neutron flux in the air heating zone, given the fantastic specific power of the reactor, will be prohibitively high. The exhaust will be a bunch of unstable nuclei after their bombardment by fast neutrons. And a dirty, very dirty, radioactive trail. This is a doomsday weapon, and there can be no talk of using such engines on flying objects with people. And the need for multi-ton biological protection in this case buries your idea in the bud. It’s one thing to transport nuclear power plants at sea, it’s another to lift it all into the air, even with outstanding specific parameters. Unreal.
              1. KCA
                0
                11 February 2019 04: 58
                Already wrote here and on other sources, the air consists of about 70% nitrogen and 28% oxygen, the short-lived isotopes of nitrogen and oxygen formed as a result of irradiation, they simply do not have time to descend from the height of the flight of the Kyrgyz Republic to the ground, they will decay
            3. 0
              8 February 2019 10: 48
              But I’m sorry, not one of those who think that in parades they drive tractors with nuclear blocks inside?
              Perhaps your opponent thinks that during the parade, if an order is received, the units will be shot straight from Red Square at the adversary. So, right in the ceremonial building they will stop, outriggers will lower, they will lift the container and shoot.
          5. +12
            7 February 2019 15: 32
            Comparing the power, and therefore the amount of radioactive material, of a Chernobyl nuclear reactor and a nuclear propulsion system, is like comparing the power of KAMAZ and a moped.
            1. 0
              7 February 2019 15: 52
              Quote: mikh-korsakov
              Comparing the power, and therefore the amount of radioactive material, of a Chernobyl nuclear reactor and a nuclear propulsion system, is like comparing the power of KAMAZ and a moped.

              What are you talking about here, judging by your posts, you have no idea how this unit works. This is a direct-flow engine, in it the active zone is not fenced off from the environment, and during the flight it wilderly fonit and throws a bunch of nuclear feces into the atmosphere, in case of a nuclear war everyone will already be environmental friendly, therefore its use is justified. But only full can apply this technology on everyday equipment. And this is not to mention that all the advantages of nuclear weapons will be nullified by the lead protection of the crew and the pollution of the territory in the process of even accident-free operation
              1. +6
                7 February 2019 16: 27
                Yes, your knowledge at the level of the 60s is amazing.
                1. +3
                  7 February 2019 17: 19
                  I have nothing to do with the discussion on the use of nuclear weapons as a vehicle for transportation in the atmosphere of the earth, because I do not believe in the promise of the idea.
                2. -2
                  7 February 2019 21: 33
                  Quote: K-612-O
                  Yes, your knowledge at the level of the 60s is amazing.

                  Share the knowledge of the 2010s, or is it inconvenient to write from the couch with one hand?
                  1. +3
                    8 February 2019 06: 09
                    I am competent in the matter, since I work in the nuclear industry, and not on the couch. And even then even the old (first) thorium reactors provide only the ionization of only the working fluid, i.e. air.
                    Or do you think that in this engine is VVR and RBN? It’s funny to load rods into a rocket.
                    The level of our industry is much higher in nuclear energy, we all have 10-15 years before us.
                    1. 0
                      8 February 2019 12: 05
                      Quote: K-612-O
                      Or do you think that in this engine is VVR and RBN? It’s funny to load rods into a rocket.

                      We read from open sources: "In solid-phase NRMs (TfNRDs), fissile matter, as in conventional nuclear reactors, is placed in assemblies-rods (fuel rods) of a complex shape with a developed surface, which makes it possible to effectively heat a gaseous working fluid (usually hydrogen, less often ammonia), which is at the same time a coolant, cooling structural elements and the assemblies themselves. "
                      The American pluto heated the air. Oh, the rods have loaded ...
              2. +3
                7 February 2019 16: 30
                NU when moving in the atmosphere "phonit" with protons and neutrons, the half-life of a neutron is 30 minutes. There is also induced radiation by reactions with nitrogen and oxygen, but they are UKL.
                1. -2
                  7 February 2019 18: 40
                  This is if you launch from the air, and if from the ground, then high-energy neutrons will direct radiation to surrounding objects. In addition, when launched from air, radiation will also be induced on the carrier.
                2. 0
                  7 February 2019 21: 32
                  Quote: mikh-korsakov
                  NU when moving in the atmosphere "phonit" with protons and neutrons, the half-life of a neutron is 30 minutes. There is also induced radiation by reactions with nitrogen and oxygen, but they are UKL.

                  Indeed, and why would it be radioactive water in the inner loop of reactors, there are only neutrons and protons
                  1. +2
                    8 February 2019 06: 12
                    What kind of water? What is the inner contour?
                    Wait for 5-10 years, you will learn, find out what and how, maybe.
                    1. 0
                      8 February 2019 12: 07
                      Quote: K-612-O
                      What kind of water? What is the inner contour?
                      Wait for 5-10 years, you will learn, find out what and how, maybe.

                      1.Read the device of the rector
                      2. We argue
                      Do not confuse places
                    2. 0
                      8 February 2019 12: 13
                      Quote: K-612-O
                      What kind of water? What is the inner contour?
                      Wait for 5-10 years, you will learn, find out what and how, maybe.

                      It's amazing that you start arguing without knowing the fundamental things. Reactor water, e.g. VVER
                3. +2
                  8 February 2019 05: 42
                  What game are you talking about? Finish school to get started. The half-life of a neutron. Scribe...
              3. +1
                7 February 2019 21: 20
                Quote: Vol4ara
                apply this technology on everyday technology can only complete. AND

                But what about the tests of this "wunderwafe", do not tell me? belay
                Quote: Vol4ara
                All the advantages of Yao will be reduced to nothing by the lead protection of the crew and the pollution of the territory in the process of even trouble-free operation.
                What kind of "crew" (?) And its "lead protection" are you, dear, on the WINGED ROCKET (!) Broadcasting !? What are you talking about, sir ??? This is a strategic cruise missile - essentially a DRON, unmanned. Or do you not know about it? Well, tady - OH! lol
                1. +2
                  7 February 2019 21: 26
                  Quote: BoA KAA
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  apply this technology on everyday technology can only complete. AND

                  But what about the tests of this "wunderwafe", do not tell me? belay
                  Quote: Vol4ara
                  All the advantages of Yao will be reduced to nothing by the lead protection of the crew and the pollution of the territory in the process of even trouble-free operation.
                  What kind of "crew" (?) And its "lead protection" are you, dear, on the WINGED ROCKET (!) Broadcasting !? What are you talking about, sir ??? This is a strategic cruise missile - essentially a DRON, unmanned. Or do you not know about it? Well, tady - OH! lol

                  Sorry, but take the trouble to read what it is about.

                  Ps speech about the atomic transporter of the future
            2. +3
              7 February 2019 19: 44
              No. In this case, it is more correct to compare the engine from KAMAZ with a vibrating alert in a mobile phone.
            3. 0
              8 February 2019 10: 52
              it's like comparing the power of KAMAZ and a moped.
              The power spread will be even more: how to compare a ship's engine with an aircraft model.
          6. 0
            7 February 2019 15: 39
            Disposable nuclear transport after delivery of cargo into orbit how to dispose of? what
            1. SSR
              -1
              7 February 2019 15: 47
              Quote: Black Sniper
              Disposable nuclear transport after delivery of cargo into orbit how to dispose of? what

              Why disposable? The goods are placed in a capsule, flies in, unhooks the capsule, fastens a new one, where new staff is already, everything is clean and cleaned. YaU is not jammed, in case of emergency, the capsule is thrown off, the carrier is removed as far as possible ...
              The very concept of the capsule type has been around for a long time, there was no suitable carrier.
              Something like this .... damn it does not put a picture, google modular, capsule, aircraft. You can even see the concept itself.


        3. -4
          7 February 2019 14: 34
          In 20 years, a thermonuclear power unit will appear.
          1. 0
            7 February 2019 15: 46
            Quote: Vadim237
            In 20 years, a thermonuclear power unit will appear.

            stop Right?
            1. -3
              7 February 2019 18: 00
              Ceiling.
              1. 0
                8 February 2019 10: 54
                That would be amazing. But wait and see.
        4. +3
          7 February 2019 14: 47
          Quote from S.S.R.
          Quote: Nasr
          A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good

          Interestingly, if ours have created a small-sized nuclear power plant, then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear power plants will appear?

          waiting
        5. +1
          7 February 2019 15: 00
          Quote from S.S.R.
          then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear reactors will appear?

          Already tried, abandoned this venture in connection with the possibility of infection of large areas in an accident.
        6. +2
          7 February 2019 15: 13
          Quote from S.S.R.
          in 10-20 years, will there be "transport workers" with nuclear reactors?

          In it, the weight of the crew protection from radiation will reset the entire payload.
        7. -2
          7 February 2019 18: 01
          if ours have created a small-sized nuclear power plant, then in 10-20 years, will there be "transport workers" with nuclear power plants?

          This YaU is incompatible with people (radioactive) and its validity period is not years, but months.
          This is a huge achievement, but not a child prodigy.
        8. +1
          7 February 2019 23: 55
          Offline
          SSR (Roman) - That you all say the same thing, that it’s like a cartoon. When, as you say, these cartoons fly in Russia for at least 20 years. And for all these 20 years, Americans have been talking shit about it.
        9. 0
          8 February 2019 00: 00
          SSR (Roman) - That you all say the same thing, that it’s like a cartoon. When, as you say, these cartoons fly with us in Russia for at least 20 years. And for all these 20 years, Americans have been going on this issue.
        10. +2
          8 February 2019 01: 15
          Quote from S.S.R.
          if ours have created a small-sized nuclear power plant, then in 10-20 years, will there be "transport workers" with nuclear power plants?

          Well, about the "transport" question is problematic ... for some reason. But I "immediately said" that the appearance of "petrels" opens up the possibility of the appearance of "long-playing" air platforms for various purposes: AWACS, repeaters, BS of a "local" radio navigation system, a tracking system for submarines equipped with anti-submarine weapons, "mobile" missile defense systems ... what is there! Dream so dream! A system for tracking poaching deforestation in Siberia with the addition of air-taiga missiles to platforms! fellow
          PS Although, you can think of an unmanned special transport vehicle, (like the "Chinese" ...) "special" purpose ... what
      2. -9
        7 February 2019 14: 39
        Quote: Nasr
        A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good

        ===========
        And you have "Evlampy" "Spiridonovich" (in "quotes" - because you, my dear, are such a "Evlampy", like "Spiridonovich" !!), there is WHAT TO OBJECT ???
        Well, if there is (data) - I PLEASE "TO THE STUDIO" !!!
        Well, if - NOT-THERE - well then "pliiz" - "mouth - lock"and a request -"do not shine"!!!! And then such"very smart"here already - Oo-oo-oo-oo-oo!
      3. +1
        7 February 2019 19: 12
        Quote: Nasr
        A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good

        Yes, it looks like a fairy tale, the size of this winged fairy tale is probably like that of "Yars" ..... smile
    2. +5
      7 February 2019 14: 15
      It is certainly just wonderful if such a rocket is available .. But with such an engine, you can make civilian and spacecraft aircraft, as well as drones that will hang all year round ..
      Honestly, I don’t believe in the vanguard, I believe Poseidon .. but the Petrel .. it would be cool of course.
      1. +7
        7 February 2019 14: 22
        But I'm wondering, at one time, back in the 60s, everyone in the "nuclear" countries "caught fire" with the creation of missiles and aircraft with a nuclear reactor, they even created experimental installations, but .... quickly "cooled down" for the reason: 1- radioactive contamination of the environment during the operation of such an engine, 2 - due to the impossibility of conducting tests, it will suddenly fall and then a nuclear accident cannot be avoided with pollution ... It's so cool with a rocket - it falls anyway, how can you test it with a nuclear installation without destruction and pollution by nuclear waste? Those who are in the "topic" do not clarify how all this can be avoided? Personally, I don't understand ...
        1. AUL
          +9
          7 February 2019 15: 10
          Quote: Snail N9
          But I'm wondering, at one time, back in the 60s, everyone in the "nuclear" countries "caught fire" with the creation of missiles and aircraft with a nuclear reactor, they even created experimental installations, but .... quickly "cooled down" for the reason: 1- radioactive contamination of the environment during the operation of such an engine, 2 - due to the impossibility of conducting tests, it will suddenly fall and then a nuclear accident cannot be avoided with pollution ...

          A logical question arises in this situation: how and where then did these 13 tests take place?
        2. +4
          7 February 2019 15: 18
          "It falls anyway, how can you test it with a nuclear installation without destruction and pollution with nuclear waste?"
          It may be possible to "turn off" the engine and launch the rocket on the parachute system after testing. winked
          1. +1
            8 February 2019 10: 59
            It may be possible to "turn off" the engine and launch the rocket on the parachute system after testing.
            The most likely way. In addition, such an engine should have simply outstanding performance in gaining power. It starts clearly on the powder accelerator. But from the off or standby mode, the poison must gain marching power very quickly. After all, the accelerator will not be enough for a long time.
        3. +9
          7 February 2019 15: 37
          Quote: Snail N9
          But I'm wondering, at one time, back in the 60s, everyone in the "nuclear" countries "caught fire" with the creation of missiles and aircraft with a nuclear reactor, they even created experimental installations, but .... quickly "cooled down" for the reason: 1- radioactive contamination of the environment during the operation of such an engine, 2 - due to the impossibility of conducting tests, it will suddenly fall and then a nuclear accident cannot be avoided with pollution ... It's so cool with a rocket - it falls anyway, how can you test it with a nuclear installation without destruction and pollution by nuclear waste? Those who are in the "topic" do not clarify how all this can be avoided? Personally, I don't understand ...

          Only one definite conclusion can be made - a nuclear jet engine with a closed core is created - otherwise 13 radioactive clouds would be detected by 13 tests.

          Perhaps one of these tests was not successful. Remember the nuclear cloud from behind the Urals? - after all, there were no accidents at nuclear facilities ... perhaps the rocket did fall, the depressurization of the core ... and in Europe they detected radiation leaks with unusual radioisotopes.

          Yes, and the level of secrecy - because then they learned about it already from Europe, and our words.

          So most likely there is still a Petrel. And even flies. And "who in the subject" will not answer you in any way - they will be quickly found and imprisoned for this.
          1. +3
            7 February 2019 17: 58
            It was a fake spread ura.rui familiar. T.N. ruthenium in reactors is not formed.
            Before assuming a look at the types of possible reactors.
            And on tests, the engine can be easily separated and lowered to the ground on a parachute, for example, by shutting down the reactor
          2. Sky
            0
            7 February 2019 19: 13
            Quote: 11 black
            Remember the nuclear cloud because of the Urals? - after all, there were no accidents at nuclear facilities ...
            what do you mean "was not"? On TV, at first they were silent like partisans, then, when ruthenium was spread by air masses throughout Europe, they admitted - yes, it was, but quite a bit, and so that people would not worry, they lowered the recorded concentration by 2 orders of magnitude (just compare the IAEA data with our data with taking into account the direction of the winds along Roshydromet, an attempt to hide a major emergency is quite obvious there). Of course, they forgot to tell about the accident at Mayak on the line of vitrification of nuclear waste, when ruthenium passed the filters.
            1. +2
              7 February 2019 20: 27
              Quote: K-612-O
              It was a fake spread ura.rui familiar. T.N. ruthenium in reactors is not formed.
              Before assuming a look at the types of possible reactors.
              And on tests, the engine can be easily separated and lowered to the ground on a parachute, for example, by shutting down the reactor

              Quote: Skye
              what do you mean "was not"? On TV, at first they were silent like partisans, then, when ruthenium was spread by air masses throughout Europe, they admitted - yes, it was, but quite a bit, and so that people would not worry, they lowered the recorded concentration by 2 orders of magnitude (just compare the IAEA data with our data with taking into account the direction of the winds along Roshydromet, an attempt to hide a major emergency is quite obvious there). Of course, they forgot to tell about the accident at Mayak on the line of vitrification of nuclear waste, when ruthenium passed the filters.

              All things are possible.
              I only remember that our week was silent as a partisan during the interrogation, saying that there were no accidents - all the information came from Europe (Shame).

              As far as I know from open sources, alloys with Platinum and Ruthenium are used in satellites' nuclear fuel cells.
              Moreover, Ruthenium is one of the most refractory metals - it may not matter, but still.

              I wrote that the only fact is that if the rocket really flew 13 once, then the active zone is precisely closed, that is, the exhaust of the rocket of chickens in the yard will not heal. lol
              1. +4
                7 February 2019 21: 19
                Tantalum, osmium, ruthenium are also the most resistant to high-speed gas erosion. All were used for TVZ in early space planes.
          3. +1
            7 February 2019 19: 28
            The operation of a nuclear engine with an open core, that is, in a pulsed version, as far as I know, is described only in science fiction novels so far.
        4. +3
          7 February 2019 16: 18
          Quote: Snail N9
          But I'm wondering, at one time, back in the 60s, everyone in the "nuclear" countries "caught fire" with the creation of missiles and aircraft with a nuclear reactor, they even created experimental installations, but .... they quickly "cooled down" for the reason: 1- radioactive contamination of the environment during the operation of such an engine, 2 - due to the impossibility of conducting tests, it will suddenly fall and then a nuclear accident cannot be avoided with pollution ...

          There was another third reason - the required radiation safety measures during the maintenance of aircraft with nuclear power plants made this most practically impossible.
          ... it turned out that after stopping the open cycle engine, not a single person will be able to approach him for another 2-3 months. So, there is a need for remote ground handling of the aircraft and engine.

          Closed-loop dual-circuit engines were safer in terms of the operational level of radiation, but were so heavy that the aircraft could only lift them and the reactor.
        5. +1
          7 February 2019 21: 08
          Nonsense, well, you at least read in Google or on prof. sites. Explosive tests of reactor acceleration were performed by NASA, also under the NERVA / KIWI program. The TNT equivalent from the explosive acceleration of the KIWI B reactor is equal to the same as that of the Devy Crocket grenade launcher - about 10-15 tons of ordinary RDX. YaSU itself is the size of a reactor with a barrel of gasoline or oil. Of course, I understand that in everything it’s impossible to be a specialist, but also to peck with narrow specialists is also a bad form. There are completely different problems. It was found that nuclear weapons are difficult to scale from a flight prototype to a military nuclear weapon (recall the explosions of the F1 liquid propellant rocket engine) and the nuclear weapons are very far from Kennedy and Nixon, and our Khrushch and Dear Leonid Brezhnev. In addition, the management of nuclear weapons was very cumbersome. In addition to this, the first material in the core moderator was commonplace graphite. And erosion of channels with the removal of Carbon 40 into the atmosphere! In general, the sheepskin, according to Buran.ru, was not worth the effort and there was not enough thrust for the first stage on hydrogen. But this does not mean that YaSU can not fly in space. Yes, and on hybrids YaSU + plasma barter, you can fly on methane and hydrogen.
      2. +4
        7 February 2019 14: 23
        Quote: Svarog
        can do civil planes

        Such an engine will turn the entire world market. As an example. Airliner, of any size, with cheap fuel for many years of operation ???
        Indeed, it looks like science fiction.
        1. 0
          7 February 2019 16: 56
          When applied to humans, the radiation protection of nuclear weapons is unacceptably high. To obtain the optimal ratio of power and volume of nuclear weapons, reactors with fast neutrons are most likely to be used, which will require powerful protection from neutrons.
      3. +4
        7 February 2019 15: 03
        Quote: Svarog
        Honestly, I don’t believe in the vanguard, I believe Poseidon .. but the Petrel .. it would be cool of course.
        Reply

        Well, if you recall how many discussions there were at VO, the cartoons about our weapons after they were demonstrated during the President’s address is not surprising! What is accepted into service is already cool!
    3. +5
      7 February 2019 14: 20
      Quote: NEXUS
      In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

      And how does this statement of yours fit in with your usual ones, such as "this is not enough", "that is not enough", "but that is only in the project and it will not be known at all"?
      Really believe in the prospect? Is it from Saul to Paul?
      hi
      1. +6
        7 February 2019 14: 23
        Quote: Vasyan1971
        And how does this statement of yours fit in with your usual ones, such as "this is not enough", "that is not enough", "but that is only in the project and it will not be known at all"?

        Dear, you decided to convict me of changing shoes? I talked about the fleet and projects for the VKS. What side is Petrel and Vanguard to all this? Or do you think it is necessary to spit on the development of new warships, fighters, tanks and rivet only Petrels and Vanguards?
        1. +2
          7 February 2019 15: 00
          Wow. It came to "Dear"!
          Iuppiter iratus ergo nefas
          For example. From 22.01.19/20/29. XNUMX:XNUMX
          . Yeah ... you, in order to write such nonsense, would ask, for example, how many those Caliber were purchased last year ... you will be very surprised. As for the Daggers and Poseidons, ... more than a year will pass before these systems work as they think, in particular for moving naval targets for example.


          And then suddenly:
          Quote: NEXUS
          In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

          And you are not interested in how much is purchased and how many years will pass in order for these systems to work as intended.
          1. +4
            7 February 2019 15: 07
            Quote: Vasyan1971
            As for the Daggers and Poseidons, ... more than one year will pass before these systems work as intended.In particular, for moving naval targets, for example.

            wassat wassat Hmm, a bad case. How sideways are my words that the Dagger and Poseidon are not yet able to work on moving targets, to my post ...
            Quote: Vasyan1971
            In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

            Nothing that these are different systems, from a word at all, with DIFFERENT tasks?
            Quote: Vasyan1971
            And you are not interested in how much is purchased and how many years will pass in order for these systems to work as intended.

            Well, if you just wanted to get to the bottom of something, it turned out to be bad for you. Vanguard and Petrel, is a system still at the testing stage. And where does their purchase now? They will be adopted, will go into production, and then we will talk about purchases and quantities.
            So what did you want to say, dear?
            1. +4
              7 February 2019 15: 25
              Quote: NEXUS
              How sideways are my words that the Dagger and Poseidon are not yet able to work on moving goals, to my post ...

              You said that moving goals are particular.
              Vanguard, Petrel, Dagger, Poseidon are weapons of the near future. But about some you say: “it will not be one year before these systems work the way they are supposed to.”, While others are already sending AmeroPRO to the trash heap.
              The approach does not fit.
              I am far from thinking that you farm stupidly "pluses", so I want to figure it out. Because, as I respect your opinion, although I do not always share it. hi
              You go to specifics. I'm talking about the general picture of your posts: the constant "crying of Yaroslavna":
              Quote: Vasyan1971
              like "this is not enough", "that is not enough", "but that is only in the project and it is not known whether it will be at all"?

              Quote: NEXUS
              Vanguard and Petrel, - these are systems only at the testing stage.

              And the Dagger and Poseidon?
              1. 0
                7 February 2019 15: 47
                Quote: Vasyan1971
                You said that moving goals are particular.
                Vanguard, Petrel, Dagger, Poseidon are weapons of the near future. But about some you say: “it will not be one year before these systems work the way they are supposed to.”, While others are already sending AmeroPRO to the trash heap.
                The approach does not fit

                Everything fits together if you carefully read my post that Poseidon and the Dagger did not teach how to work on moving sea targets, which does not mean that these systems are not able to work on stationary ones. That’s why I’m talking about the fact that more than one year will pass before Poseidon and the Dagger learn to work on moving goals.
                And the Dagger and Poseidon are thinking, basically, to destroy moving sea targets.
                Petrel and Vanguard is a completely different topic. And the tasks of these systems are different.
                Quote: Vasyan1971
                And the Dagger and Poseidon?

                The dagger and Poseidon are still capable, judging by the statements of the Ministry of Defense, to work on stationary targets. Therefore, I said that these systems are not yet ready for the tasks that were originally invested in them. Did I clearly explain my idea?
                1. 0
                  7 February 2019 16: 13
                  Panyatna.
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Poseidon and the Dagger did not teach yet how to work on moving sea targets

                  The key word is bye. So ameroPRO stands, does not budge. It's early in his trash.
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  Petrel and Vanguard is a completely different topic. And the tasks of these systems are different.

                  It's also nice. And they also have a lot of bye. Have I already mentioned ameroPRO?
                  It’s just that you say a lot in a minor tone about, say, Armata, Leader, Spiral and other things.
                  Do you have a firm conviction that the projects of Petrel and Vanguard will not be suspended or delayed, as with the above, in order to write about the "trash heap"?
                  I want to understand for myself where you draw the line between "bye" and "already".
                  hi
                  1. +4
                    7 February 2019 16: 23
                    Quote: Vasyan1971
                    So ameroPro stands, does not move. Sooner to him in the trash.

                    I’ll tell you one secret, only you don’t be offended; initially, ANY missile defense system, except for the Moscow missile defense system (and very conditionally) can be thrown into the trash. Will explain,...
                    One target is required from 2's to 50 missile defense. And the interception rate is far from guaranteed. That is, even outdated Poplars, in a certain amount in a salvo, will find their target with one hundred percent probability.
                    The designers in the USSR took a slightly different path ... when developing the A-135 Amur, they laid down the concept of using this anti-missile with a nuclear charge. That is, we are talking about the destruction of not one target, but a large number. But here, too, there are pitfalls in the treaty on the amount of these interceptors between us and the United States. That is, even such a missile defense system can be "overloaded" with the number of missiles fired against it. A good example is the destruction of the Shell by the Jews. He was stupidly overloaded and he, having shot the entire BC, remained defenseless.
                    Below, Berkut24 quite clearly explains what and how ... read the contents of his post. Perhaps then, much will become more clear to you.
                    1. 0
                      7 February 2019 16: 48
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      I’ll tell you one secret, only do not be offended

                      Yes, I'm not touchy, especially in anonymous communication. laughing
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      Will explain,...

                      Thank you, but I'm literate enough.
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      Below, Berkut24 quite clearly explains what and how ... read

                      Was, saw, plus.
                      I don’t understand then why you wrote what you wrote ...
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

                      Before THIS was the same story, it turns out?
                      And I am still far from thinking about collecting "plus signs" by you ...
                      1. +6
                        7 February 2019 16: 54
                        Quote: Vasyan1971
                        Before THIS was the same story, it turns out?

                        Not really. This is not about the specialists who knew all this from the beginning, but about the man in the street, in this case, about the man in the United States. Who firmly believed, from the statements of his chief executives, that their missile defense and EURO missile defense are not broken. Moreover, if the interception of the "old" missiles was possible in principle, with Petrel and Vanguard, such an interception is equal to ZERO. And the European and Mattress layman was now informed that no missile defense umbrella, for which they pay big money both in Europe and in the United States, is not capable of protecting them, ordinary people.
                      2. -2
                        7 February 2019 17: 09
                        Quote: NEXUS
                        And now they informed the European and mattress inhabitants that no missile defense umbrella for which they pay big money both in Europe and in the USA is not capable of protecting them, the inhabitants,.

                        Yeah. In the sense of "Uh-huh".
                        However, Andrea Thompson just let slip that "does not consider the Russian nuclear drone (in this case, Poseidon, but also Avangard with the Dagger, I think it was implied) a serious threat to the United States, because" Donald Trump announced the creation of the necessary systems "In addition, the United States has the most powerful army in the world," she said, adding that she trusts the US military and does not believe in Russian propaganda. " So the overseas man in the street will sleep peacefully further.
                2. +4
                  7 February 2019 22: 37
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  The dagger and Poseidon are still capable, according to the statements of the MoD, to work on stationary targets.

                  Andrew, I namYakival, then wrote, but you, with perseverance, worthy of a better use, continue to disbelieve in the genius of our Kulibins and Keldysh!
                  Poor Vicki, tore from the Central Organ of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (newspaper "KZ" dated 12.03.2018/12/2018) an article by Yuri Avdeev (In the clip - "Sarmat", "Dagger", "Avangard" .... The latest developments of the military-industrial complex increase the external security of Russia Red Star (XNUMX March XNUMX), where it is written in "Russian and white":
                  X-47М2 “Dagger” is a Russian hypersonic aviation missile system. Hypersonic missiles of the complex are capable of striking both stationary objects and [b] surface ships: aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and frigates

                  "How?" - "inpatients" may ask. And everything is "simple". It's all about the optical seeker ...
                  Best regards, drinks
                  Moreover, it is a class of high-precision weapons, which has a multifunctional warhead that allows you to work on both stationary and moving targets. In particular, aircraft carriers and ships of cruiser class, destroyer, frigate are potential targets for these weapons.
                  Deputy Minister of Defense Yury BORISOV
                  1. +2
                    7 February 2019 23: 54
                    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                    Andrew, I namYakival, then wrote, but you, with perseverance, worthy of a better use, continue to disbelieve in the genius of our Kulibins and Keldysh!

                    Sasha, I read what you just posted about the Dagger, but ... I recall an anecdote - Don’t blink me, you show me a finger.
                    At the same time, if the Dagger is capable of hitting moving sea targets at a distance of 800-1000 km, then I am for it. But at the moment, I very much doubt that the Dagger is capable of this. Sorry, friend.
                    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                    Moreover, it is a class of high-precision weapons, which has a multifunctional warhead that allows you to work on both stationary and moving targets. In particular, aircraft carriers and ships of cruiser class, destroyer, frigate are potential targets for these weapons.

                    So I’ll say all the way that the main tasks of the Dagger and Poseidon are sea targets, not the coast. Another question is, how will Makar aim the same dagger at the sea target, at a distance of say 800 km? How will the rocket flight adjust in real time?
                    1. +2
                      8 February 2019 19: 30
                      Quote: NEXUS
                      How will the rocket flight be adjusted in real time?

                      Andrew, I, with your permission, drinks in lichku draw. Gut?
    4. -2
      7 February 2019 14: 31
      Why throw it away? Against all countries that do not have super new missiles, it will continue to work wonderfully. And it will be impossible to get, for example, ICBMs with chemical weapons in return from Iran thanks to missile defense
    5. 0
      7 February 2019 14: 51
      I am interested in the question, and in what time does the Vanguard block reach its target with its 20-28 speed max? Ie how much faster are these classic ICBMs like Voivode, who, if my memory serves me, in theory fly to the states in 20-40 minutes?
      1. 0
        7 February 2019 16: 55
        Quote: Voyager
        I am interested in the question, and in what time does the Vanguard block reach its target with its 20-28 speed max?

        Something like that in the press was, like "as a current, so we will immediately cover it with a veil," well, or something like that.
        Something about time zones and "they are from there, and we will immediately bullet to America and theirs will not have time to reach us, and America - kirdyk!" There was a lot of bukof, but also on your question. hi
      2. +1
        7 February 2019 18: 32
        how long does the Vanguard block reach the goal

        Vanguard is not in itself, it is a warhead of a ballistic missile.
        Only this warhead is very manoeuvrable.
        Those. the time is about the same.
        1. 0
          7 February 2019 18: 51
          I know that, Valentine. But does the head part and individual guidance units of the Governor, and in the future Sarmatian, not fly on hypersound and maneuver?
          1. +1
            7 February 2019 18: 57
            And they fly and maneuver.
            Vanguard does this on a flatter trajectory and with large amplitudes and overloads, which reduces the likelihood of intercepting missile defense.
            1. 0
              7 February 2019 23: 23
              Thank you for your response hi now the issue is resolved
      3. +3
        7 February 2019 18: 48
        Quote: Voyager
        I am interested in the question, and for how long does the Vanguard block reach the target with its 20-28 max speed? Ie how much faster is a classic ICBM like Voivode

        Not at all. "Vanguard" is delivered to the target by an ordinary ballistic missile (now "weave" are adapted for this) and later differs from a conventional warhead only in the ability to maneuver.
        That is, it is truly unmatched for modern missile defense systems, but there is no gain in time
        1. 0
          7 February 2019 23: 24
          And thank you, Andrey!
    6. +11
      7 February 2019 14: 59
      In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

      This applies to my military specialty. I can say that the effectiveness of the American missile defense system has never been so high as to say that the United States will not receive "unacceptable losses" in return. It could be thrown into the trash heap at any time, like our missile defense system, which, with the help of nuclear warheads, covered only Moscow. The difference is that we had the task of gaining minutes for making a strategic decision, while in the USA they made the missile defense an information symbol of impunity and exclusivity of the nation. Therefore, with the recognition of the uselessness of the American missile defense system, nothing changes, but "American exclusivity" takes on a somewhat dented look, which, of course, is treated by transferring a huge number of newly borrowed from other countries to American corporations. And I believe that this money will be quite enough, if not for the real results of the new missile defense system, then at least for a new advertising campaign about the restoration of "US exclusivity."
    7. +2
      7 February 2019 15: 02
      For complete happiness, Poseidon was also forgotten to mention :: and these unfortunate Americans divide one big head into several 1-kilotons - and how are they going to fight back from Russia ?? lol
      1. 0
        7 February 2019 15: 42
        Recently, some Amer woman - a bump in cases of arms proliferation - said that she did not believe in the power of Posedoin and completely trusted her American troops and their capabilities)))
    8. +5
      7 February 2019 15: 06
      Quote: NEXUS
      And in this regard, I recall the words from the film "The meeting place cannot be changed", a character named Brick- "You have no methods, against Kostya Soprykin!"

      Unfortunately there are, and more than once successfully (1991-93) or partially successfully used (1917)! This method of the collapse of the country from the inside with the help of a corrupt elite and the use of a small part of the disaffected duped masses as a ram. negative
    9. +1
      7 February 2019 15: 35
      Quote: NEXUS
      In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.


      Any anti-missile defense system will not hinder a country that has set up a half of the world against itself.
    10. 0
      7 February 2019 16: 23
      And in the end it will be .... "And now Humpbacked, I said Humpbacked!" (Gleb Zheglov)
      1. +4
        7 February 2019 16: 29
        Quote: Alexey-74
        And in the end it will be .... "And now Humpbacked, I said Humpbacked!" (Gleb Zheglov)

        This is when Mechenny (Brokeback) decide in court for treason to send home ...
        1. +2
          7 February 2019 16: 30
          Also as an option laughing
    11. 0
      7 February 2019 17: 25
      Quote: NEXUS
      ... all US missile defense can be safely thrown in the trash.

      Hanging bastard start over?
      In case of installing the same US missile defense system in Poland, the flight time to Leningrad will be 2 minutes, to Moscow 7-9 minutes.
      In this case, the main thing is who will start first, while our doctrine of defensive and preventive attacks by strategic nuclear weapons, as far as I know, is not spelled out there. Otherwise, it will be according to Putin: we are already in paradise, and they will all die, but then, when "Stormy" arrives to them. wink
    12. 0
      7 February 2019 18: 45
      Quote: NEXUS
      In other words, with the advent of Vanguard and Petrel, as well as Sarmatia, all US missile defense systems can be safely thrown into the trash.

      Taking into account the fact that it did not guarantee the interception of even one "Satan" before - to go crazy, what an achievement laughing
      1. +2
        7 February 2019 19: 02
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Taking into account the fact that it did not guarantee the interception of even one "Satan" before - to go crazy, what an achievement

        Andrey, where are you going? It is clear to you and me that the same BG Voivode was practically not intercepted ... but after all, the same Bill or John was told differently behind the puddle. And they believed and regularly paid taxes, justified for themselves all these defense spending, 800 bases and so on.
        Now, even with the help of the same Internet, it began to reach the townsfolk, both European and mattress, that no umbrella would help them.
  2. +5
    7 February 2019 14: 09
    INF Treaty-speak-Heh (Comrade Sukhov).
  3. -3
    7 February 2019 14: 12
    All the same, even if you believe in a technical miracle ... the possibility of this power plant, then I do not understand the concept of using a rocket ...!
    1. 0
      7 February 2019 14: 16
      We’ll figure it out without you, follow the observance of the Shabbat ...
    2. +12
      7 February 2019 14: 19
      Quote: Zaurbek
      the possibility of this power plant, I do not understand the concept of using a rocket ...!

      And what is the concept of use for ICBMs? Petrel, Vanguard, and Sarmat postpones the start date of World War III by decades. This is a deterrent weapon. And it is precisely it that can seat the Anglo-Saxons at the negotiating table.
      As GDP said, you didn’t listen to us! Hear now!
      1. -1
        7 February 2019 17: 58
        For ICBMs, the concept is as follows. I pressed the button - 20min and flew in ... when to launch this CD? And why, if it’s easier to do this with YRS and it’s cheaper and there is no hemorrhoid to contain nuclear power plants when the rocket is in stock.
        1. +2
          7 February 2019 18: 00
          Quote: Zaurbek
          The ICBM has this concept. I pressed the button - 20min and flew in ... when to launch this CD?

          And can you tell what speed the Petrel will have? At the same time, we are limited by the START-3 agreement. But the Petrel does not fall under this agreement.
          1. 0
            7 February 2019 18: 05
            For some reason, it seems to me that long-range and low-flying vehicles are subsonic .... And in terms of destroying everything on earth that is part of START-3, enough for the eyes ...! Moreover, this treaty after the INF Treaty is covered with a copper basin. The US Senate has already vetoed its extension.
    3. +3
      7 February 2019 14: 20
      Quote: Zaurbek
      All the same, even if you believe in a technical miracle ... the possibility of this power plant, then I do not understand the concept of using a rocket ...!

      Run and let yourself fly
      1. +6
        7 February 2019 14: 32
        Quote: atalef
        Run and let yourself fly

        The main thing is that there is something to start and the hand does not flinch on the remote control when the time comes. And the goals will be indicated what are necessary. Jews do not coward Israel to protect. And the Russians never need to be cowardly. Correctly? If a man lives in fear for a long time, then the hormones necessary for the continuation of the genus in the right quantities cease to be produced.
        1. 0
          7 February 2019 16: 51
          So yes, everything is cool. But, to be honest, I don’t really want the case to come to the combat use of this type of weapon.
          1. -2
            7 February 2019 17: 49
            Quote: Polymer
            So yes, everything is cool. But, to be honest, I don’t really want the case to come to the combat use of this type of weapon.

            I'm definitely not so kind. I would crash first to see how it works on live targets. I am like a Jew in this regard. Jews have already taught life to defend themselves.
      2. +3
        7 February 2019 14: 54
        Quote: atalef
        Quote: Zaurbek
        All the same, even if you believe in a technical miracle ... the possibility of this power plant, then I do not understand the concept of using a rocket ...!

        Run and let yourself fly

        it is for now, and then it flies, takes a seat, those are essentially a nuclear drone, but the sensations, I think, are pleasant while in the air
    4. +3
      7 February 2019 14: 39
      All missiles in service with all countries of the world, regardless of design features, have one concept: To hit the target precisely.
    5. +4
      7 February 2019 23: 11
      Quote: Zaurbek
      I do not understand the concept of a rocket ...!

      The concept is the same: CBDB!
      But there is one significant difference - unlimited range, huge energy saturation. This also allows, in addition to the SBCh, to carry the onboard EW complex and other necessary things ...
      AHA.
  4. +4
    7 February 2019 14: 13
    Great news! Now it’s faster to adopt ...
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. +1
    7 February 2019 14: 14
    All arms race can be canceled? smile
    1. -1
      7 February 2019 14: 44
      Nope, now we are waiting for the appearance of satellites capable of tracking and intercepting
    2. +4
      7 February 2019 14: 48
      We don’t, but Americans don’t — let them spend billions of dollars in development until they go bankrupt !!! Yes bully soldier
  7. +5
    7 February 2019 14: 18
    Sleep well, Kyle Mizokami - "Burevestnik" / SSC-X-9 Skyfall MKR is designed to engage targets outside the range of Russian ICBMs, SLBMs and RSDs - in South America, Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica bully
    1. +4
      7 February 2019 14: 24
      Quote: Operator
      Sleep well, Kyle Mizokami - "Burevestnik" / SSC-X-9 Skyfall MKR is designed to engage targets outside the range of Russian ICBMs, SLBMs and RSDs - in South America, Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica bully

      Antarctica belay
      Poor Penguins
      1. +3
        7 February 2019 14: 26
        Antarctica is a perfectly suitable continent for placement of atomic shelters for those selected at the time of TMV.
        1. +4
          7 February 2019 14: 57
          Quote: Operator
          Antarctica is a perfectly suitable continent for placement of atomic shelters for those selected at the time of TMV.

          to get all this militaristic scum you need wherever you hide!
  8. 0
    7 February 2019 14: 20
    Interestingly, the reactor worked during the tests? Or have you experienced a layout with wings?
  9. -17
    7 February 2019 14: 25
    Soyuzmultfilme said that in connection with the tragedy in Cape Verde, the release of the latest Russian missile is delayed
    1. +4
      7 February 2019 14: 45
      What keeps you on this site? smile
      1. -21
        7 February 2019 15: 07
        To open our eyes from brainwashing, we still cannot make a normal car, we purchase 30% airplane parts for our planes abroad, we can’t do a normal drone, GDP is lower than Plintus, 138th in corruption, BUT WE BELIEVE THIS WRONG
        1. +4
          7 February 2019 15: 31
          Quote: rotem15
          Open eyes

          And do you want to open exactly? Telling us about:
          Quote: rotem15
          himselfаflight

          details? wassat
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +2
          7 February 2019 18: 21
          Quote: rotem15
          To open our eyes from brainwashing, we still cannot make a normal car, we purchase 30% airplane parts for our planes abroad, we can’t do a normal drone, GDP is lower than Plintus, 138th in corruption, BUT WE BELIEVE THIS WRONG

          First thing, first thing PLANES-s-s ...
          And after that, are you interested in GDP? Start with yourself, the house is there ... a tree, son.
        3. +1
          7 February 2019 19: 11
          Than 6 in the world PPP GDP is bad, why is it lower than the baseboard?
          1. 0
            9 February 2019 11: 13
            I would like the first place. There is some potential for this.
      2. +9
        7 February 2019 15: 10
        Quote: Dym71
        What keeps you on this site? smile

        Call of Duty and Salary! wassat tongue laughing
    2. +2
      7 February 2019 15: 27
      Well, as it were, the Crimean bridge is also removed at Mosfilm.
      1. 0
        7 February 2019 15: 29
        The Crimean bridge is rightfully ours, and these are not cartoons
        1. +5
          7 February 2019 16: 10
          So I'm talking about the same thing, we have any achievement of Russia, it is considered attempts Mosfilm, or animation. And then it turns out that the bridge is standing, and the rockets are flying.
    3. +1
      7 February 2019 15: 36
      Are you able to provide a video of the flight of such a missile along the entire path, from launch to hitting the target?
  10. 0
    7 February 2019 14: 31
    Nevertheless, trolls continue to whisper about the cartoons. winked
    The only thing that saddens is that because of the "peaceful initiatives" of various common people, this kind of thing goes back to the defense industry, so that they finally get their own tomahawk around the Pentagon! This is Alles, complete in mind, a little to bring to mind - and current airliners are scrapped
  11. +2
    7 February 2019 14: 59
    Science and technology are moving forward. Of course, it’s time for a long time to look for other, cheaper, economical and more efficient energy sources. After all, at the service you can put both magnetic and other fields, the same gravity.
    If homo sapiens does not destroy the earth, then science and technology will certainly solve this problem.
    At this stage, YaU is even very good.
  12. +1
    7 February 2019 15: 14
    "Russian interpretation -" Heavens Opened ""
    Good name suitable for such a rocket. good Bulk-compressive name for our "partners". laughing
    1. +1
      7 February 2019 15: 24
      We are waiting for the appearance of Russian missiles in the press:
      Quantum of salt
      live and let die
      Goldfinger
      Spectre
      golden eye
      etc.
      1. -2
        7 February 2019 23: 33
        Quote: Ural-4320
        We are waiting for the appearance of Russian missiles in the press:
        Quantum of salt
        live and let die
        Goldfinger
        Spectre
        golden eye
        etc.

        rocket offers Shake but do not stir:?
        Big names are designed for the consumer. Especially many watched the Bond.
  13. BAI
    0
    7 February 2019 15: 28
    One problem is that if they are assembled with the quality of civilian missiles, then the fall of a nuclear power plant in an unplanned place will not end in good.
    1. +1
      7 February 2019 15: 39
      Not high-quality ,, Lada ,, we still somehow survive ..
      But the rocket? .... You won’t run to the service anymore. :-)
      1. +1
        7 February 2019 15: 46
        So the services are just there - overseas. laughing We have more Uncle Vasya in garages at a premium.
        Here in the service and fly under its own power ...
    2. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 56
      Instead of England will fall in Poland - it does not matter! Folk wisdom says that if you are completely surrounded, it means you can shoot in any direction.
  14. -5
    7 February 2019 15: 35
    Sorry, but it seems to me that this "small-sized nuclear installation" is more sticky than SDI. Even I have not seen "atomic mopeds", well, a penis with mopeds, well, at least BelAZs on vigorous traction. Yes, one could fly to the moon and back in a day.
    1. -2
      7 February 2019 16: 54
      This is a no brainer, but now everyone will be lazy about this topic ... And such a rocket and engine certainly exist, as well as a base on Rogozin’s moon ...
    2. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 54
      Because small-sized nuclear power plants are exclusively the last argument of the last war of mankind. And not to carry sand from quarries.
      1. 0
        9 February 2019 14: 44
        I wrote to the fact that the active zone at a nuclear power plant is the size of a small gymnasium, and "mobile" reactors fit only on aircraft carriers, icebreakers and submarines with a five-story building in diameter, not because of the love of ancestors for gigantomania. The laws of physics require a certain amount of fuel, in a certain concentration (cash only in bonbs), dispersed over a certain volume, an even larger heap of moderator (graphite there, or a lot of water), + a multi-ton (to embrace all this stuff) reflector. we need fairy tales that the whole universe has its own physics, and we have our own - tight, highly spiritual, consecrated by priests.
        1. 0
          9 February 2019 15: 34
          It is known that in the 60s in the USSR a real flying prototype of an aircraft with a nuclear power plant was created. It is logical to assume that since then science has not sat in place.
          1. 0
            9 February 2019 15: 45
            Well, yes, only it was a Tu-95 type bomber, the entire payload and internal volume were occupied by the reactor, with an "open" circuit (for miniaturization) and radio protection (well, let's say it is not needed in a rocket without a crew). We are shown a "figovina" ten meters long and a meter across. In my humble opinion, the laws of physics have not changed.
  15. +7
    7 February 2019 15: 36
    In general, many may underestimate the fact that such a miniature nuclear power plant has appeared. In Russia, they turn up their noses, like "think about opening," and beyond the hillock, those who have brains tear their hair out in hysterics.
  16. 0
    7 February 2019 15: 37
    Here you live, you wait .. You go back and forth ..
    And here it’s on your head such ,, happiness ,, falls .. :-)
    Not the most pleasant prospect ...................... :-) :-) :-)
  17. +4
    7 February 2019 15: 51
    Well, now you can create a reconnaissance UAV with a nuclear engine and hang around the Amer’s coast for months, than drive the Tu160 for several hours.
  18. 0
    7 February 2019 15: 55
    The Russian Defense Ministry has conducted another, thirteenth test of an unlimited-range cruise missile with a small-sized super-powerful nuclear power plant Burevestnik, The Diplomat reports, citing sources in the US government.

    does that mean she flew "unlimited distance"? and how did she then land?
    or does it mean ground testing? then it’s far from a real rocket.
    1. 0
      7 February 2019 16: 40
      It’s just that the place of landing was classified from the curious.
      1. +1
        7 February 2019 16: 51
        or he was not there.
  19. +3
    7 February 2019 16: 03
    You might think that striped dogs are now able to repel at least a third of what Russia can send them. This Skyfall is like a cherry on a cake in addition to what is already available.
  20. -1
    7 February 2019 16: 18
    I’m wondering, after completing the tests, she fell somewhere, right? Consequently, the reactor crashed, did a radioactive infection occur? And during a flight in the air she could infect the atmosphere
    1. +2
      7 February 2019 16: 53
      did she fly actually? Testing is a loose concept ....
    2. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 52
      No, everything is thought out.
  21. +2
    7 February 2019 16: 21
    Well, if there is a real club, then you need to untie the dollar from oil. How about creating a global oil exchange in Russia?
    1. +3
      7 February 2019 16: 25
      Gas is already being created. In the process, so to speak.
    2. 0
      7 February 2019 16: 56
      From day to day, OPEC will meet with a possible reformatting of this organization into a new one, chaired by the Russian Federation
  22. +3
    7 February 2019 16: 35
    US media: Russia has successfully tested the Burevestnik cruise missile
  23. -1
    7 February 2019 16: 39
    So soon we will fly to Mars.
    1. +1
      9 February 2019 10: 53
      Putin said to paradise, not Mars.
  24. -2
    7 February 2019 17: 01
    Quote from S.S.R.
    Quote: Nasr
    A wonderful "cartoon" turned out ..... good

    Interestingly, if ours have created a small-sized nuclear power plant, then in 10-20 years, "transport workers" with nuclear power plants will appear?



    Before. It will be possible to launch rockets into space or from nuclear submarines. The weight of the engine is about 50 kg ... You twist the ribbon, and it flies to itself and flies .. Exceeds the thrust of the solid propellant rocket engine or rocket engine by 20 times, well, and other buns ...
  25. 0
    7 February 2019 17: 02
    Quote: Kharkov
    I’m wondering, after completing the tests, she fell somewhere, right? Consequently, the reactor crashed, did a radioactive infection occur? And during a flight in the air she could infect the atmosphere



    Type findpatent.ru and go ....
  26. +4
    7 February 2019 17: 05
    Quote: military retiree
    Interestingly, the reactor worked during the tests? Or have you experienced a layout with wings?


    E-ka-le-me-ne, zadolbali already with this question ... http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/222/2225948.html
  27. 0
    7 February 2019 17: 57
    The publication does not have any details of the tests ...

    But it’s interesting what , did the tested products gently sit down in any way, or hard bang, let them go on the territory of the landfills? And then there should be fissile materials, as it were ....
  28. 0
    7 February 2019 18: 07
    The product is intended for ONE-TIME use in low atmospheric layers - as one of the arguments * OF THE DAY DAY * And this is enough And for space, there the principle of operation is somewhat different
  29. 0
    7 February 2019 18: 15
    Even 2 years ago, Russia created a system of planetary caps REB-PRO VKS of the Russian Federation, which could really stop life on any part of the planet ... So what !? Stop it !? They cut down the main terrorist!? ... No, but why decrypt it yourself !?
  30. 0
    7 February 2019 18: 22
    a missile with a nuclear power plant, unlike conventional intercontinental ballistic missiles, can use any paths inaccessible to conventional missiles when moving towards a target, and this in turn will force the United States to spend huge amounts of money on creating expensive missile defense systems.

    Welcome! We live in it every day. Now you build air defense around the perimeter of your country, and we will have some tea.
  31. 0
    7 February 2019 18: 44
    "low-flying unobtrusive cruise missilecarrying a nuclear warhead with an almost unlimited range, an unpredictable flight path and the ability to bypass intercept lines,
    which is invulnerable to all existing and promising systems of both missile defense and air defense
    ", said Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2018.
    Something in this wording is wrong .. For the Kyrgyz Republic, in general, in general, there’s nothing new in the last 30 years .. Well, except for the range.
  32. +2
    7 February 2019 19: 25
    The range is not limited? - neither by the laws of physics, nor by common sense laughing And how to understand “can use any paths inaccessible to conventional missiles when moving to the target?” - crawls underground? or swims under water? laughing
  33. +1
    7 February 2019 19: 56
    The Americans know how to give original names to our weapons, the Petrel named Skyfall, and why not Game over?
  34. 0
    7 February 2019 20: 00
    A rocket with a nuclear power plant is certainly good.
    But I would like small-sized nuclear power plants to serve primarily people in the form of an engine for a car or a generator for a village, or for a private house, etc.
    1. +1
      7 February 2019 21: 18
      "Each house has a nuclear reactor" - sounds laughing
    2. +1
      7 February 2019 21: 38
      We handle household gas in such a way that it blows whole houses, and you want reactors. Peaceful atom in every home!
    3. 0
      7 February 2019 21: 57
      served primarily to people in the form of an engine for a car

      Do you want to drive a car with a nuclear reactor under the hood? How do you imagine that?
      1. 0
        9 February 2019 10: 49
        Just like now, only without refueling during the entire life of the car ...
        1. 0
          10 February 2019 22: 32
          Quote: Roma-1977
          Just like now, only without refueling during the entire life of the car ...

          Just don’t forget to wear panties from lead.
  35. +1
    7 February 2019 20: 25
    I understand that - the longer the attack weapon is on the way to the target - the more chances it has to be detected and shot down. But in what way - these are the details. So the advantage is dubious.
    1. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 48
      No. The North American air defense and missile defense system is not yet global and diverse. A cruise missile, which allows hitting the territory of the United States from any direction, requires an increase in the cost of air defense / missile defense exponentially (but even after that, even close talk cannot be made about one hundred percent security, but only about one or another specific defense efficiency).
  36. +1
    7 February 2019 21: 34
    Quote: BlackMokona
    Why throw it away? Against all countries that do not have super new missiles, it will continue to work wonderfully. And it will be impossible to get, for example, ICBMs with chemical weapons in return from Iran thanks to missile defense

    Well, have they remarkably intercepted the DPRK DPRK? And Iran has about 950 missiles with a warhead in what was found ....
    That is, this is EURO ABM ran with PACE even before 2007, to conclude agreements with India and Pakistan on mutual non-attack. Probably because they can intercept their missiles. I would like to see them "hitt-to-kill" on conventional warheads with SPBE, this is at the final section. No shooting down of overlying ballistic missiles using SM-3 & PAC-3, TAAD. And the real interception of a conventional CBC with several MRBMs. And the complete fall of SPBE with a breakthrough. That would have been a shock for Yiddish, for the High Elves, and for Euro Valinor (I beg your pardon, I did not leave the country of the Tolkienists). :)
  37. +1
    7 February 2019 21: 52
    cruise missile with heavy duty nuclear power plant

    Curious how powerful? Figures in the studio, please.
    And such loud epithets as "super-powerful", it is better to save for the audience, for example, from a kindergarten.
  38. 0
    8 February 2019 06: 53
    As an option - the principle of operation of the "Petrel" - a super-powerful nuclear battery and an electric motor with a fan (a fan from a dual-circuit engine).
  39. 0
    8 February 2019 09: 31
    Best American and European children ...
  40. -1
    8 February 2019 10: 28
    Probably get a good rocket with a nuclear engine. The main thing is to have time to launch it when the enemy wants to attack. The United States has secret aerospace vehicles that are invisible to radars, hypersonic, acceleration from 5 km per second per square meter. It can carry several thermonuclear charges at an altitude of 5-10 km at a speed of 10 km per second or more, a range of 20 thousand km. This is a TR-3B type apparatus and its many modifications. TR-3B will catch up with an ICBM, or another missile, and destroy any aircraft. It can attack from space, from a height of 300-500 km vertically down, launches thermonuclear missiles at a speed of 30 km per second. What will we shoot down?
    1. +1
      8 February 2019 17: 55
      The United States has secret aerospace vehicles,

      Yes, and it is called the "Millennium Falcon", in the Marine Corps, mostly light elves, the MTR they have solid Jedi may the force be with them. fool
    2. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 42
      No need to shoot down. It is necessary to guarantee a retaliatory strike, and to convey its ability to carry out such a strike to the enemy. So that the desire to check did not arise.
  41. The comment was deleted.
  42. 0
    8 February 2019 13: 06
    Americans post such news so that congressional allocations are knocked out. Well, our essno actively plays along. Cartoons for the whole country shows. Even if there is a certain sample or samples, how can it be ensured that it is invisible and unbreakable given that it is most likely a subsonic missile and that the Americans control the world's oceans thanks to the most powerful Navy. What does the ABM have to do with it, if this missile can be shot down by conventional air defense systems?
    1. 0
      8 February 2019 17: 58
      Cartoons across the country are showing

      I wonder how pots slow down perception.
      Cartoons are last year's theme, the overseas owners have passed all stages from rejection to humility. Even the training manuals in the State Department were changed, but here "last year's snow" .......
      For what kind of faith "control the world's oceans" right to the drop.
    2. 0
      9 February 2019 10: 41
      A modern combat aircraft can be shot down from a hunting shotgun. But too many factors must coincide for this. Therefore, they come up with other, more expensive ways.
  43. 0
    8 February 2019 17: 10
    I read the comments and am amazed. Laughter quiz. Nobody knows anything, but everyone thinks. Gentlemen! Let's just praise our designers, engineers, and just workers for creating a masterpiece. And there is simply nothing to argue and discuss. We do not know anything about this rocket, except for a very public one, so why should anybody push their tail?
  44. +2
    9 February 2019 02: 37
    I wish I retired at 55 wink
    1. +1
      9 February 2019 10: 39
      I know people after meeting with whom people are retired at 55 and earlier ...
  45. 0
    9 February 2019 11: 20
    In Pentogon they smoke nervously and at night become covered in cold sweat from nightmares.
  46. 0
    9 February 2019 11: 42
    Good news, if true.
    Let them now engage in missile defense / air defense
  47. +2
    9 February 2019 16: 09
    Quote: VladVlad
    Probably get a good rocket with a nuclear engine. The main thing is to have time to launch it when the enemy wants to attack. The United States has secret aerospace vehicles that are invisible to radars, hypersonic, acceleration from 5 km per second per square meter. It can carry several thermonuclear charges at an altitude of 5-10 km at a speed of 10 km per second or more, a range of 20 thousand km. This is a TR-3B type apparatus and its many modifications. TR-3B will catch up with an ICBM, or another missile, and destroy any aircraft. It can attack from space, from a height of 300-500 km vertically down, launches thermonuclear missiles at a speed of 30 km per second. What will we shoot down?

    Science fiction is in another section. Better yet, go to an alternative history site. And about the secret apparatus - strong. If they are already capable of flying at a speed of 10 km / s at an altitude of 5-10 km without turning into ash and with an acceleration of half a thousand "SAME", and their rockets fly at a speed twice as high as 3 space, what do they have problems with hypersonic cruise missiles ???? laughing
  48. 0
    19 February 2019 03: 04
    Comrades, disputants) and if we consider the issue not from the side of "how far will it fly", but from the side of a guaranteed unpredictable track? If we have a ° dimensionless "tank of the working fluid and the same power-to-weight ratio, we can easily maneuver as we want, within the limits of structural strength, of course, and what to do to intercept? Yes, nothing at all - we need a rocket with parameters x2 and they need a little more than Do our "partners" have such? No) so they lay bricks and order "underwater drones", you must at least show the taxpayer something and convince him of the safety of his fifth point)