Complex "Avangard". Benefits and Counteraction

65
According to news In the past few months, this year, the first Avangard missile systems, which included hypersonic cruise planning units, will take up combat duty. Due to the special combat load, the new complexes are capable of showing high technical and combat characteristics. Thanks to this, the Avangard system becomes a convenient and effective tool for solving military and political tasks, and also turns out to be a very difficult challenge for a potential adversary. What is dangerous new Russian weaponand what should the enemy do to fight it?

Benefits and Threats



According to known data, the Avangard missile system includes several basic elements. The first is an intercontinental ballistic missile, which is responsible for accelerating and bringing the combat unit to the calculated trajectory. At the first stage in this role, the UR-100N UTTH missiles will be used, and in the future the complex will be built on the basis of the promising ICBM RS-28 Sarmat. The second element is a hypersonic planning combat unit. After acceleration and discharge from the rocket, he must fly to the target and destroy it with the help of the built-in warhead.



A planning winged warhead is more than seriously different from traditional warheads for ICBMs, both in terms of technology and in terms of operating principles. Unlike "normal" warheads, the winged product is capable of making a gliding flight, and not just "fall" on the target. In addition, the ICBM in the active area gives it a high speed. All this gives the block a number of characteristic advantages.

The first advantage of the Avant-garde combat unit is high speed. At the end of December, according to the results of the next test run, it was reported that the speed M = 27 was reached. At this speed, the combat unit is able to reach the target area in the shortest possible time, and thus drastically reduce the permissible response time of the enemy’s air and missile defense systems. Since the planning combat unit does not have its own power plant, its speed on the trajectory should gradually decrease due to the loss of energy to overcome the resistance of the environment. However, in this case, the speed of the product in the final part of the trajectory remains extremely high.

The second positive feature is the presence of control systems that provide for maneuvering during flight. Trajectory change can be used to reach the goal on the optimal route or as an anti-zenith maneuver. It has been repeatedly noted that maneuvering makes the trajectory of the warhead unpredictable for the enemy. As a consequence, Avangard becomes an extremely difficult target for intercepting existing missile defense systems designed to combat ballistic missiles.

Maneuvering also improves the accuracy of hitting the target. Traditional combat units are guided immediately after the end of the active part of the flight, after which their trajectory does not change. The Avant-garde combat unit is able to adjust its trajectory until the target is hit. This gives an obvious increase in combat effectiveness, regardless of the type of warhead used.

A planning combat unit can use its capabilities to fly both in the atmosphere and beyond. Due to this, it is possible to use higher trajectories that reduce energy consumption and increase the flight range. In addition, it is possible to fly in the atmosphere, making it difficult to detect using ground-based missile warning systems using modern warning systems. Also eliminates the effective work of the existing interceptor missile interceptor missiles.

Thus, the Avangard missile system most seriously differs from the existing ICBMs and has a number of major advantages over them. This is the possibility of flying to targets in an increased range of distances, increased accuracy of destruction, etc. For the means of defense of the likely adversary, the Avant-garde combat unit turns out to be an extremely difficult goal, combining the basic qualities of weapons of other classes. It is difficult to detect and accompany, and an effective attack with the help of modern missile defense or air defense systems is almost completely excluded.

This year, the missile troops of strategic purpose will receive the first production models of the Avangard complex. At first, only a few promising products will be put on duty, but in the future their number will constantly grow. The command does not specify its plans for the medium and long-term, but there is reason to believe that during this period the Avangard will become an important part of the weapons of the Strategic Missile Forces, and dozens of such systems will be on duty.

Given the high technical characteristics and unique combat potential, it is easy to imagine how the new Avangard products will affect the capabilities of the rocket forces and strategic nuclear forces in general. From the point of view of a potential enemy, the latest Russian missile systems look like a very serious threat.

Responding to threats

Obviously, the likely adversary understands all the risks associated with the latest Russian weapons, and is already looking for ways to respond to it. Creating new types of weapons and equipment that can withstand Avangard may take a lot of time, but the basic methods and ways to reduce the threat are already clear. Indeed, Avangard is not without flaws or ambiguous features that can be used against it.



First of all, it should be noted that the launch of the UR-100N UTTH or PC-28 missile with the Avangard on board will not go unnoticed. The likely enemy has satellite reconnaissance and a missile attack warning radar capable of tracking ICBM launches. This means that the enemy command will know in time about the launch, and he will have some time to react.

Depending on the chosen flight trajectory, the planning combat unit may be noticeable beyond the horizon of the enemy’s radar or be outside their range. In flight, the hypersonic Avangard should form around itself a cloud of plasma fixed by infrared reconnaissance satellites. If a spacecraft of this kind is capable of not only fixing warm-contrast targets, but also providing real-time target designation, the enemy’s chances of responding to the threat increase slightly.

Successful interception of a hypersonic airframe on the main part of the trajectory using existing air defense systems is simply impossible. The solution of such a task eliminates the combination of height, speed and maneuverability that is unprofitable for air defense.

Missile defense systems have greater potential, but even in their case, success is not guaranteed for a number of reasons. For example, the main US anti-missiles use a kinetic method of interception, which requires the highest precision targeting. The ballistic target moves along a predictable path, and it is relatively easy to direct a missile at it. The avant-garde bloc can literally dodge such an attack.

To increase the potential of anti-missile systems in the context of interception of hypersonic planning combat units, rather old but proven ideas can be used. Due to the high speed of the flight, any objects represent a danger to the Avangard block. A collision even with a small damaging element can lead to structural damage and destruction of the aircraft due to high loads of various kinds. Thus, it makes sense to carry out interception using a missile carrying a fragmentation warhead.

You can also recall more bold decisions. In the past, interceptor missiles with a neutron warhead were built and put into service. It was assumed that such a large-capacity ammunition would reduce the requirements for the accuracy of the anti-missile, but would provide it with high efficiency. The stream of fast neutrons, formed when the neutron charge is detonated, should hit the nuclear warhead of the target and provoke its destruction. Such equipment has already been used in missile defense complexes, but has long been decommissioned.

In theory, existing anti-missiles are still capable of intercepting hypersonic units. A small part of the final leg of the flight, which implies a fall on the target, the combat unit can pass along a ballistic trajectory. However, its speed should be significantly less than the maximum. In such conditions, serial interceptors designed to combat the ballistic targets of limited speed get some chances to cope with Avangard.

At the level of a curious, but not the most convenient and simple proposal, it is worth considering fundamentally new types of weapons. For example, a satellite with so-called could be a good means of interception. neutron gun or x-ray emitter. Such a product can be considered a good alternative to an anti-missile with a neutron warhead. Missiles with fragmentation charges can be replaced by a laser orbital-based system. She will have to damage the body of the combat unit, weakening it and causing further damage. All alternatives look interesting and promising, but such ideas are far from practical implementation and implementation in the armed forces.

Weapon and fight with him

From the available data, it follows that the Russian Strategic Missile Forces are armed with a unique strike complex with a number of critical capabilities. The missile complex with the Avangard hypersonic planning combat unit is capable of solving the same tasks as intercontinental ballistic missiles with conventional warheads, but has a number of advantages. The latter are directly related to overcoming the enemy’s missile defense.



Avangard is capable of attacking strategic targets faster, more accurately, and less likely to intercept than traditional ICBMs, but still not without flaws. So, according to some information, one rocket cannot carry several warheads, and the latter are difficult to manufacture and are distinguished by high cost. In addition, in projects of warheads for ICBMs, long-known and proven solutions are used, while the creation of the Avant-garde took a long research period.

Despite the advantages, the Avangard complex, at least at the level of theory, is not invulnerable. Its blocks cannot be considered fundamentally protected from interception, and one hundred percent breakthrough of missile defense is not guaranteed. Even at the level of the general concept, the hypersonic planning unit has specific features that can become weaknesses or help the enemy in intercepting.

However, modern and prospective air and missile defense systems cannot yet cope with the threat in the form of Avangard. They are able to fix the launch and even track the flight of the combat unit, but its interception is not guaranteed. You can try to intercept the ICBM with the planning unit in the active part of the trajectory or attack the "falling" airframe in the terminal part of the trajectory. However, the solution of such problems is also associated with a number of serious problems.

Modern air defense and missile defense systems that are in the arsenal of a potential adversary cannot cope with the threat in the form of Avangard. Nevertheless, there are ways of their development that can lead missile defense and air defense to the desired state and desired results. This requires the development of fundamentally new interceptor missiles and the creation of other defense algorithms. Obviously, this requires a lot of time and money. For this reason, for some time the likely adversary will remain defenseless.

The Avangard missile system, with all its advantages, cannot forever remain invulnerable. In the distant future, foreign countries may have new air and missile defense systems capable of coping with such a threat. Their development will become a separate problem, but the results of such projects will be of great importance. Russia should take into account such a scenario and improve the latest weapons. With the advent of the serial Avangard, our Strategic Missile Forces gain an advantage over foreign protection systems, and it must be preserved in the future.

On the materials of the sites:
http://mil.ru/
https://tass.ru/
https://ria.ru/
https://zvezdaweekly.ru/
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/
https://freebeacon.com/
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/
https://fas.org/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

65 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    14 February 2019 06: 19
    Well, the Yankees do not want to catch these BB missiles with multiple, flying along the trajectory and hypersonic gliders flying from space, they want to shoot them over the territory of Russia, at the initial stage of dispersal, deploying their missile defense in Poland and Romania.
    1. -6
      14 February 2019 07: 50
      Quote: Pessimist22
      ABM in Poland and Romania.

      Well, we were "taken out" from the contract. now these missile defense systems are guaranteed to be targeted by promising missile systems
      1. +7
        14 February 2019 10: 03
        it seems to me that they were always at gunpoint no matter what contracts existed there
        1. -5
          14 February 2019 10: 20
          Quote: 501Legion
          it seems to me that they were always at gunpoint no matter what contracts existed there

          that is yes. but now the sight will be more perfect with warranty delivery
    2. -1
      14 February 2019 12: 57
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Well, the Yankees do not want to catch these BB missiles with multiple, flying along the trajectory and hypersonic gliders flying from space, they want to shoot them over the territory of Russia, at the initial stage of dispersal, deploying their missile defense in Poland and Romania.

      ==========
      Well, my friend! You are REALLY a "Pessimist" !!! laughing
      The thing is that, due to their technical capabilities, deployed in Poland and Romania are capable of intercepting "on an ascending trajectory" exclusively ICBMs launched from the European part of Russia heading west (i.e., to Geyropu or toward the US East Coast). Just like the South Korean missile defense system, it intercepts Russian missiles aimed at Japan and (partially) on the South-West coast of the United States ....
      BUT, the MAIN MASS of ICBMs from Russia (in the event of a conflict), "will fly in the US not in the" west "or" southeast direction and through the Arctic!!! This is the shortest way !!! Don't believe me? Check out "Google Earth Map" !!! There may be ONLY Canada on the way! At the same time, even if we place "interceptor missile" bases in Canada (which, by the way, Canada has been staunchly opposing for a long time! That is, it places radars, and THAAD bases - figurines!). They perfectly understand that it will be necessary to shoot down Russian ICBMs already on a "descending" trajectory and WHERE EXACTLY, radioactive debris will "fall" (and they will fall on the most populated and industrialized regions of Canada (and they are concentrated along a narrow 500 - 1000 km strip along the border with the US !! Do they need it ???
  2. -5
    14 February 2019 06: 43
    The revival of the Sakharov project ... will forever remove the US desire for war with Russia ... by the way, the Yankees of the Podmoskovye nuclear submarine are in awe of it. This topic is well covered by nuclear professor I, Ostretsov
    1. 0
      6 July 2019 09: 25
      So they revived the Sakharov project, and embodied it in titanium.
      "Poseidon"!
  3. 3vs
    +1
    14 February 2019 07: 11
    Yes, go intercept the meteorite ...
    Perhaps the Supreme Commander correctly formulated "... and they will simply die, because they will not even have time to repent."
  4. +3
    14 February 2019 07: 52
    Sorry, you, me, but: butter ...
  5. +2
    14 February 2019 08: 13
    The likely adversary has satellite intelligence and missile warning radars that can track ICBM launches. This means that the enemy command in time finds out about the launch, and he will have some time for reaction
    In the case of a large kneading, most satellites will be disabled, as well as warning radars near our borders. Vanguard can be detected on the site M = 27, that is, when the unit itself is activated, and today it is difficult to bring down its Pts. We'll have to revive the Nike Hercules program.
    1. +4
      14 February 2019 12: 14
      in case of a big batch everyone will lose !!! such a scenario was before the vanguard, this will be after ...
      I think one chance for a conditional victory on one side, if the one who presses the button does not press it ...
      and this is possible through softpower ... for example, if your child / grandson is where the rocket should fly
      1. +3
        14 February 2019 13: 06
        It’s not even the point here - your grandson is there or your son. You will press the button because you were cast down from the leader of a superpower to the nominal head of a destroyed country. In response, in any case, you will turn the enemy into the king of the republic, which is at the Central African level of development.
        And Tryndets and without Vanguard is provided, that's for sure. The trick is who the second side will be after the attack - the likeness of Algeria or Gabon.
  6. +2
    14 February 2019 08: 30
    The best way to counter the "Vanguard" is to make a cartoon how the "Vanguard" is opposed.
  7. +3
    14 February 2019 09: 12
    I do not like such pseudo-analytical articles, they will collect all journalistic pearls in the media in them and will not even criticize them.
    Unlike “conventional” warheads, a winged product is capable of planning flights,

    Rather, it’s not planning, but, as the developers themselves note, flying like a stone on water. And at each reflection from the atmosphere, it changes the ballistic flight path.
    The planning combat unit can use its capabilities for flying both in the atmosphere and beyond

    If in the upper atmosphere then yes, the planner. If beyond, then you must immediately talk about the ballistic trajectory, and carefully select the words so as not to distort the true meaning.
    Well and so on for almost every paragraph.
    1. 0
      14 February 2019 14: 08
      Quote: Jurkovs
      I do not like such pseudo-analytical articles, they will collect all journalistic pearls in the media in them and will not even criticize them.

      ==============
      Sergei! Well, you don't need to be so "tough" !!! Kirill Ryabov wrote a generally not so bad "review article". The AVAILABLE information is clearly systematized. Everything is "laid out on the shelves." For SPECIALISTS - "nothing new". But after all, we are not all or physics or rocket men!!
      There are many VO participants who may find a detailed "layout" interesting! For which the author and "+" (although for myself, I did not learn anything new !!).
      There is ANOTHER PROBLEM here: Kirill Ryabova is sometimes strong "puts"!!! One phrase:" ... with the so-called neutron gun or x-ray emitter.... "Ooh-oo-oo-oo! This phrase alone can COMPLETELY devalue ALL analytics !!!! Well, it is asked in FIG to climb from an area in which, well, you don’t understand any FIG ??? Well WHAT FOR??? (This is PERSONAL to K. Ryabov!). request
  8. +2
    14 February 2019 09: 23
    The combat unit "Vanguard" is able to adjust its trajectory until the defeat of the target.

    Does the author know something about the guidance system? :))
    In theory, existing anti-missiles are still capable of intercepting hypersonic blocks. A small part of the final section of the flight, implying a fall on the target, the combat unit can pass along a ballistic trajectory. Moreover, its speed should be significantly less than the maximum.

    A set of words that do not make sense is speculation. The atmosphere in is taken into account at the border of 50-55 km, of course, it is possible to assume the minimum rebound height, but without knowing the aerodynamic quality of the BB, with a high degree of variability.

    Successful interception of a hypersonic airframe on the main part of the trajectory using existing air defense systems is simply impossible. The solution of such a task eliminates the combination of height, speed and maneuverability that is unprofitable for air defense.
    Dear author, do you know how to intercept the BB except on the final section of the trajectory? Well, besides a completely exotic type of air-based laser.
    The author has knowledge of the principles by which the device is controlled? The author is sure that the apparatus is controlled beyond the atmosphere or not ...? Or is it controlled only in the atmospheric area due to aerodynamic surfaces? Hardly knows.

    An article is not even a fortune-telling on coffee grounds - speculation built on speculation.

    It is not known with what overload the planning BB can maneuver - accordingly, it makes no sense to give predictions about vulnerability from missile defense systems, or about the opposite. It is not known in what areas it can be controlled, how anti-ballistic maneuver algorithms are built.

    The only known thing is that the forecast of the trajectory of such a controllable block is multivariate, which reduces the likelihood of a missile defense defeat with modern pointing algorithms at a calculated point — not effective.

    In general, it is correct that articles on the "avant-garde" topic can be described in two lines:
    "I don't know anything about this", but it's very cool :)
  9. -2
    14 February 2019 09: 44
    The planning warhead Avangard is a re-incarnation of the eponymous Soviet development of the late 1980s, presented in the press in 1991 as an apparatus for the rapid delivery of emergency equipment to the crash site anywhere in the world.

    The Avangard, which was developed back in the USSR, is nothing more than a cheap addition to other types of domestic strategic nuclear forces with the aim of using the enemy money to develop and deploy a new missile defense system capable of intercepting high-speed weapons flying above the upper reach of existing atmospheric anti-aircraft missiles and below the lower limit reach of transatmospheric interceptors.

    And yes, the neutron gun and the nuclear-pumped X-ray emitter are absent in nature, while the second wunderwaffe is inoperative due to the fact that it is impossible to focus the x-ray, as the developers admitted in the framework of the SDI program that had died in Bose laughing
  10. 0
    14 February 2019 09: 54
    In general, the author could very successfully reflect on the topic that now an outfit of several ICBMs with ballistic units is not required to break through well-defended missile defense facilities to guarantee their destruction.
    This is both a large cost savings (a smaller order for guaranteed destruction of protected objects) and a significantly increased threat to the enemy's military infrastructure, even a protected missile defense system, which knocks the "stool" out of the feet of the creators of the theory of "limited nuclear war" - a one-time launch, not a reason .. ...

    I would certainly not say that the "avant-garde" radically changes the balance of power. But it allows you to reduce the ICBM on duty, and thus the efficiency will increase.
    And indeed, one cannot suppress a country with advanced military developments from a position of strength.

    It is a pity only in the economy, everything is exactly the opposite ...
    1. 0
      14 February 2019 10: 19
      not so simple. if one Vanguard is placed instead of 6 blocks of autonomous guidance, as they wrote, then it is extremely controversial.
      1. +2
        14 February 2019 11: 41
        Quote: Avior
        not so simple. if one Vanguard is placed instead of 6 blocks of autonomous guidance, as they wrote, then the gain is extremely controversial.


        We’ll take a look at the outfit for hitting the command post, a protected anti-missile outfit with a defeat coefficient of 0.7
        Roughly - 2/3 of the attacking blocks will be intercepted. And when massaging missile interceptors 2 to 1 - it is possible to achieve a high probability of defeating all attacking BBs.
        That is, you need to increase the order 3-4 times for a guaranteed hit on the target.

        When using a high-speed attacking unit with an unpredictable trajectory of approach to the target, the probability of an object being hit is close to absolute. That is, at least the missile defense system can be hit, or the object itself, if it represents one target.
        If there are several targets in the same area, then the defeat of the missile defense system increases the likelihood of passing the next outfit with conventional ballistic blocks.
        Those. this means precisely the destruction of protected objects or the neutralization of detection / control / missile defense warrants of a protected area.

        As a tandem cumulative ammunition - one removes protection - the other passes it.
        1. -2
          14 February 2019 12: 26
          The solution to the problem of the unpredictability of the trajectory of the approach to the target is completely handled not by the planning Avangard, but by the standard BB equipped with built-in aerodynamic control surfaces for anti-aircraft maneuver.
          Moreover, the number of BBs on one ICBM will not change.
          1. +1
            14 February 2019 12: 53
            The more there will be interceptors on the missile defense and the more maneuverable they will be, the more likely it will be to defeat the guided blocks.
            1. -1
              14 February 2019 14: 01
              Interceptors operate only in space, starting from an altitude of 130 km and below, heating their IR sensors against the atmosphere does not make it possible to determine the target’s location, and up to this altitude each BB is reliably covered by several dozen false targets (inflatable cones made of metallized plastic).

              And if we recall that ground-based radar-guided missile defense systems will be disabled by EMI from high-altitude explosions leading in a massive BB strike, then the enemy’s missile defense will be tormented by swallowing radioactive dust bully
              1. -3
                15 February 2019 00: 13
                interceptors work from 50 km altitude
          2. 0
            15 February 2019 11: 43
            Quote: Operator
            standard warhead equipped with integrated aerodynamic control surfaces for anti-aircraft maneuver.


            What is a "standard" BB with aerodynamic surfaces? :)
            Standard block - implies not having a control system and flying along a ballistic trajectory.
            Managed BB is several times heavier and the dimensions do not allow them to be placed in the same quantity on ICBMs.
            1. 0
              15 February 2019 12: 01
              Quote: DimerVladimer
              What is a "standard" BB with aerodynamic surfaces?

              BB CTM
              1. 0
                15 February 2019 12: 21
                Already not standard, adjustable.
                Standard yet without a control system.
              2. 0
                15 February 2019 12: 32


                With a great deal of confidence, we can assume that the Vanguard is in about the same weight category and purpose as the development of DARPA - Falcon HTV-2


                That is, with correction both in the atmospheric and in the atmospheric section.
                1. 0
                  15 February 2019 12: 55
                  I'm not talking about planning Vanguard and HTV-2, but about controlled (on the descent in the atmosphere) STM
                  https://encyclopedia.mil.ru/encyclopedia/dictionary/details.htm?id=14053@morfDictionary
                  1. 0
                    15 February 2019 13: 20
                    Quote: Operator
                    I'm not talking about planning Vanguard and HTV-2, but about an analogue of the controlled (on the descent in the atmosphere) STM


                    Do you know much accepted UBB?
                    Why would you call them "standard"?

                    Just the vast majority are unmanageable .-
                    The first time I heard the term "standard" in relation to BB.
                    Hypothetically, "standard" can be called conventional BBs, bred along the trajectories of the "delivery stage".

                    Even UBB R&D can be counted on the fingers of one hand (all from open sources):
                    15P170 Albatross NPO Engineering http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-844.html
                    15YU70 / product 102 NPO engineering http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-870.html
                    Guided combat unit of the Makeev State Military Center http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-882.html
                    Vanguard / 4202, product 15Y71, complex 15P771 http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-807.html

        2. -1
          15 February 2019 01: 57
          you did not take lessons from Damantsev? very much like that.
          a set of numbers and characteristics from the ceiling.
          It is much more profitable to attack with six different BB from different BR - reliability is much higher
    2. -1
      15 February 2019 08: 24
      The author not only failed to identify the most important thing in that stream of "journalistic" information. He managed to overlook her most valuable source. I mean Ivanov's pre-New Year interview, where he bluntly said that there is currently not enough computing power to calculate and maintain even a single unit of the Vanguard. And he directly called the flight of the Vanguard not so much planning as jumping like naked on the water. And nowhere is a word said about the ability to maneuver at the final stage of the flight. The fact that the device can withstand the loads when the flight path changes on the border of the atmosphere and space is quite enough.
  11. -1
    14 February 2019 10: 18
    to discuss possible opposition to the vanguard is a thankless task, since its characteristics are unknown.
    the fact that 27 M is not talking about anything, even if true. Nothing special for a ballistic missile warhead. And there is time to prepare, from the moment it is launched it is tens of minutes.
    the question is in what area is this speed, planning opportunities, and so on. There is nothing to discuss without this.
    In general, it is quite possible to wait for the appearance of the SM-6 version with gas-dynamic control - its altitude will be blocked by a section in the region of 30-60 km altitude, the missile will be highly maneuverable, which will automatically allow it to be used in missile defense against ballistic and aeroballistic missiles - Dagger, Iskander and others , as well as against planning maneuvering blocks. The Americans may well cover the lower boundary of the missile defense with their ESSM with active GOS.
  12. +1
    14 February 2019 10: 24
    The logical conclusion has already been made or will be .... the most reliable missile defense is their tanks, here at the launch sites !!! Unreal? so the options for possible opposition are also different, but which ones? know or not ... better not to know, not to try.
    However, this "protection" is not forever, it is not worth marking time, we move on, we move forward!
  13. +6
    14 February 2019 11: 42
    Quote: Pessimist22
    they want to bring them down over the territory of Russia, at the initial stage of dispersal, deploying their missile defense in Poland and Romania.

    The value of the missile defense system in Romania and Poland as a means of intercepting Russian ICBMs at the initial stage of dispersal is about the same as that of a 16-18 caliber shotgun as a means of destroying tanks or armored personnel carriers. That is, not even zero, but negative

    Quote: widower
    that is yes. but now the sight will be more perfect with warranty delivery

    How is the situation "now" different from the situation "before the withdrawal from the agreement. As these objects were on the list of priority targets, they remain ...

    Quote: plotnikov561956
    The revival of the Sakharov project ... will forever remove the US desire for war with Russia ... by the way, the Yankees of the Podmoskovye nuclear submarine are in awe of it. This topic is well covered by nuclear professor I, Ostretsov

    Rather, we ourselves, our electorate "encourage" such statements and speeches. Sakharov's project was a senseless proposal, calculated for some unknown reason. There was no torpedo in the messenger. The 100 megaton charge has not been tested. Solid "naked" theory. No weapon will give a total advantage if it is not massive. Neither Vanguard nor Poseidon. And no one superweapon in the world has had a monopoly for a long time. This applies to everything. And nuclear weapons, and missiles, and MIRVs ... The other side is closing its gap much faster than if it itself was the initiator of the creation of this or that weapon. For she no longer needs to be distracted by dead-end branches that are inevitable when you do it first. And given the scientific, technical and financial potential of the enemy, it is simply stupid to hope that he will create the same thing in 10-15 years. Now, for example, the same USA is working on the Orca project. Moreover, the products are already in the metal. They do not have such super-outstanding performance characteristics as our "Poseidon". And the speed is an order of magnitude lower, and the range is limited, but in one of the variants (by Boeing) this device has a submersion depth of 3 km against our 1 km at Poseidon and carries a compartment with 10 torpedoes. So think about where it can be at hour X, especially given its insignificant speed and noiselessness during this movement ... So it is not awe in the United States that causes it, but euphoria in us. When even housewives begin to discuss issues related to the performance characteristics of these systems

    Quote: Krasnodar
    The likely adversary has satellite intelligence and missile warning radars that can track ICBM launches. This means that the enemy command in time finds out about the launch, and he will have some time for reaction
    In the case of a large kneading, most satellites will be disabled, as well as warning radars near our borders. Vanguard can be detected on the site M = 27, that is, when the unit itself is activated, and today it is difficult to bring down its Pts. We'll have to revive the Nike Hercules program.

    Now, honestly, there is no time to parse certain provisions of Cyril’s article, with which I do not agree, but I will answer your question.
    Big batch - then most of the satellites will really be disabled. But the SPRN satellites are located either at a VEO or at a geostationary station. At the same time, they will suffer the least. And their main task is to detect launches before mushrooms rise over the territories of countries. Radar warning near our borders is extremely small. In fact, only one station on the island of Shamia and one in Taiwan can be attributed to stations located near our borders, although there the distances are in the hundreds, if not thousands of kilometers. Everything else is located far from our borders. Stations in Britain, Greenland, on the continental United States.
    In addition, you should not blindly believe the statements in the media of any officials. The speed at 27M (although what the hell speed in Mach numbers can be in space) is the speed obtained by the warhead (block) at the end of the active section of the trajectory. Then they fly by inertia. Given the fact that the detection range at stations of the SPRN system is about 4-6 thousand kilometers, then these blocks will be detected immediately after separating them from the carrier over the territory of Russia. Therefore, they will have just as much time to make a decision as now with unmanaged blocks. And further - further a separate song, which also does not fit in with everything that is being broadcast to us

    Quote: Jurkovs
    Rather, it’s not planning, but, as the developers themselves note, flying like a stone on water. And at each reflection from the atmosphere, it changes the ballistic flight path.

    Zenger's trajectory can most likely be used only to increase the flight range. For each reflection is a loss of energy, a decrease in the apogee and speed of the "projectile" ...

    Quote: Jurkovs
    If in the upper atmosphere then yes, the planner. If beyond, then you must immediately talk about the ballistic trajectory, and carefully select the words so as not to distort the true meaning.
    Well and so on for almost every paragraph.

    Then this weapon will not belong to the category of "no analogues". It turns out to be the usual ballistic trajectory. And maneuvers in the atmosphere are not "Pugachev's cobra", but quite predictable evolutions with radii of hundreds of kilometers ...

    Quote: Operator
    The planning warhead "Avangard" is a re-incarnation of the eponymous Soviet development of the late 1980s

    The development of the same name was not. Was ALBATROSS
  14. 0
    14 February 2019 12: 17
    The second positive feature is the presence of control systems that provide maneuvering in flight. Changing the trajectory can be used to reach the target along the optimal route or as an anti-aircraft maneuver.
    Imagine that our intelligence obtained information about a preventive nuclear strike against us by a B-52 squadron with 20 nuclear weapons each. Our intelligence detects them in flight before reaching the launch line of the AGM-86 ALCM with a range of up to 1 kilometers. It is reasonable to meet these links of bombers to launch the Vanguard with a 200Mt warhead in order to destroy at once the entire link or squadron with 2 - 80 nuclear warheads. Exchange on warheads will be in our favor. A Vanguard can appear in the form of missiles of global range.
    1. 0
      14 February 2019 12: 46
      And we can get board number 1 ........
      1. 0
        15 February 2019 13: 27
        "And we can get board # 1 ........"
        And what's the point?
  15. +1
    14 February 2019 12: 25
    Such a glider is not compact; it occupies several times more space in the head part of ICBMs than traditional strict cones. Instead of 6 conventional warheads - one Vanguard. Accuracy due to maneuvering is obviously less than that of a traditional inertial.
    The only advantage is that the Vanguard is more difficult to intercept with a GBI system on a high path.
    For THAAD running low there won't be much difference.
    1. -1
      14 February 2019 12: 57
      This is how THAAD - at least during exercises, will intercept the Trident warheads, then it will already be possible to talk about their possible interception of the Vanguard.
    2. 0
      15 February 2019 11: 13
      You have passed the first stage of denial, there is still a lot of work ahead :)
    3. +1
      15 February 2019 12: 16
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For THAAD running low there won't be much difference.


      THAAD is capable of knocking out obsolete "scads" - at the calculated point of the trajectory.
      Nobody has tried yet to shoot down a maneuvering target in the upper atmosphere, since even such simulators of a target are not in principle.

      Quote: voyaka uh
      Accuracy due to maneuvering is obviously less than that of a traditional inertial.

      Perhaps an insufficient idea of ​​the usual (as it was called here "standard" BB) - if it is an ICBM BB - it does not have a control system at all and flies along a trajectory set by the "dilution" stage.

      If you take BB type Pershing II - then, in addition to the inertial guidance system, it has the ability to correct, for this it is forced to slow down in the atmosphere.
      As for the Vanguard, it is strange to speak of less accuracy, until it has reliable data.

      My opinion is that the Vanguard is more accurate, since it is correctable in the atmospheric section of the trajectory and possibly in the transatmospheric - only guesses ...
      1. 0
        15 February 2019 13: 14
        THAAD - a tool against warhead ICBMs. How successful is hard to say. But
        it was not developed against Scuds and the like.
        Against them - Patriot 2 and our Hetz.
        Now under development is THAAD-ER.
        1. +2
          15 February 2019 13: 33
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Now under development is THAAD-ER.


          You understand, if there is no target rocket, then the statements are not verified by practical shooting, this is advertising and theory.
          When THAAD-ER successfully intercepts the actively maneuvering Falcon HTV-2, this will be an argument.

          A bit of history:
          NGO Engineering in the USSR was engaged in the preliminary design of UBB
          The combat equipment of the complex is maneuvering gliding (winged) hypersonic warheads of the first generation (source), capable of maneuvering up to 1000 km in azimuth when entering the atmosphere at an altitude of the "Karman line" with speeds of about 5.8 - 7.5 km / s (17-22 M). The Albatross project was based on proposals for a controlled warhead capable of evading an anti-missile missile - UBB was supposed to fix the start of the anti-missile and perform a programmed dodge maneuver. The development of the UBB project with such capabilities was carried out in 1979-1980. - the design of the automation system of such a missile defense was carried out

          The chief designer is Herbert Efremov. In 1991, it was planned to begin testing the complex, and in 1993 it was supposed to begin mass production of ICBMs.
          In 1990-1992 flight tests of prototypes of the UBB complex "Albatross" were conducted. Launches were made from the Kapustin Yar firing range using the K65M-R launch vehicle.

          http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-844.html
          1. 0
            15 February 2019 13: 53
            "if there is no target missile, then the statements are not verified by practical
            shooting, this is advertising and theory "////
            ----
            Not certainly in that way. A common target is a missile launched from a Boeing.
            She gives a candle and then falls on the target (like the Russian Dagger-Iskander), but
            a higher candle - a little for the atmosphere.
            TNAAD intercepts her at the beginning of the descent. This is not exactly the warhead of ICBMs - but close
            according to parameters (warhead ICBMs are slowed down in the atmosphere - that is, its speed and targets
            getting closer).
            Now about the main thing. Today, military electronics allows
            monitoring of flight and all missile defense systems all
            100% flight.
            Until hit (or self-destruct in case of
            miss). That is, engineers have a life-Lafa - no need to guess anything intuitively
            with changes in hardware, electronics or software. Each test gives 100 times
            more information than at the end of the 20th century.
            Therefore, missile defense is developing so fast.
            You have no doubt that the nuclear weapon will explode, although nuclear weapons tests have long been banned?
            So much with missile defense ... Although, of course, the interception of a real warhead ICBM would be
            more compelling.
            1. +1
              15 February 2019 14: 08
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Now about the main thing. Today, military electronics allow you to monitor flight and all missile defense systems the entire flight is 100%.


              Do you know the difference between trials and TESTS?

              First, THAAD is tested in greenhouse conditions, not overloaded with combat conditions and an attack order of dozens of targets and false targets - that is, selection from a minimum in the absence of quasi-heavy false targets ..

              The second - the target does not maneuver and the anti-missile goes to the calculated point of the meeting.

              Third, the complex is not affected by interference generators, as provided by anti-missile defense systems (for example, in the same R-36M, GRAU index - 15P014, under the START treaty - RS-20A, according to NATO classification - SS-18 Mod.1,2,3, XNUMX Satan)

              Based on the THAAD test legend in the current version - it can intercept medium-range missiles with monoblock warheads that do not maneuver, provided there is no active jamming - i.e. in this configuration, the interception of a block with a maneuver at a course of 1000 km seems to be very problematic.
              1. 0
                15 February 2019 17: 12
                "First, THAAD is tested in greenhouse conditions" ////
                -----
                Right. But in the same greenhouse conditions, the Moscow missile defense system is also being tested,
                and complexes S-400/500 ... 700
                Any air defense / missile defense breaks through a massive sophisticated attack.
                Therefore, Americans honestly admit that missile defense works with approximately
                50% efficiency against single launches of BR. Efficiency try
                boost with each new generation. But the enemy does not sleep ...
                1. 0
                  18 February 2019 09: 03
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  in the same greenhouse conditions, the Moscow missile defense system is also tested,
                  and complexes S-400/500 ... 700


                  The C-300 C-400 complexes are tested in conditions of active interference - what technique is hidden under this phrase - I do not know. There are a lot of options for jamming. But in each country they are different (despite some general principles and borrowings).
                  What can I say - even such an extremely expensive radio complex as AWACS can be suppressed by ground-based electronic warfare systems - especially since the S-400 can be overloaded with interference if necessary.
                  It is impossible to accommodate a high power generator in a compact BB, but it is possible to complicate the life of the guidance of interceptor missiles.
    4. 0
      15 February 2019 13: 36
      "For THAAD running low, there won't be much difference."
      THAAD interceptors operate on the same principle - transatmospheric interception. Therefore, the efficiency will be the same as that of GBI, i.e. in the case of Vanguard none. laughing
      1. 0
        15 February 2019 13: 56
        GBI intercepts in the middle section - at altitudes up to 300-400 km.
        And THAD - at heights of up to 150 km on the descent.
        1. 0
          15 February 2019 14: 15
          "GBI intercepts in the middle section - at altitudes up to 300-400 km.
          And THAD - at altitudes up to 150 km on the descent. "
          Again. THAAD missiles are an atmospheric kinetic interceptor. How will he bring down the Vanguard if he walks in the upper atmosphere? And then what is its fundamental difference with GBI?
  16. 0
    14 February 2019 13: 03
    Zenger's trajectory can most likely be used only to increase the flight range. For each reflection is a loss of energy, a decrease in the apogee and speed of the "projectile" ...

    If the projectile has its own engine, it can increase energy and speed after being reflected. Such trajectories were also considered by Zenger for his "antipode" bomber.
  17. -1
    14 February 2019 13: 41
    Yesterday I found this information. If I am not mistaken, this is exactly how Vanguard flies, only with different speeds.
    Chertok Boris Evseevich
    Rockets and People (Book 1)
    Chapter 2. After the victory
    What is Peenemuende.
    On his first visit to Peenemuende in May 1945, Alexei Isaev and a group of employees piled up garbage, trying to find any remnants of missile documentation.
    ... one of the employees ... returned with a thin booklet - a report. There was a red stripe along the diagonal of the cover and the terrible inscription “Streng Geheim” - “Top Secret”.
    Isaev told me about this rare find in Berlin:
    “A bullet in the forehead! What is invented there! ... This plane is thrown by this damned engine to a terrible height - 300 or 400 kilometers! It pours down at a supersonic sound, BUT DOES NOT KNOW IN THE ATMOSPHERE, BUT HITS HER. AS A FLAT DIGITAL WE THROW AT A MINIMAL ANGLE TO THE SURFACE OF WATER. HITS, TIPS AND FLIES ON! And so two or three times! Ricochet! Remember how we competed in the Serdolikovy Bay of Koktebel: who will have more sliding touches of water. So, these figures thus glide around the atmosphere and dive down only after flying over the ocean to get into New York! Strong idea! ... "
  18. +1
    14 February 2019 13: 57
    Quote: 3vs
    Perhaps the Supreme has correctly formulated "... and they will simply die,

    Perhaps with such a supreme faster we die. Prices, tariffs, salaries, retirement age, eat palm oil, cut down forests, as seen from space, villages are dying. We collect rubles for sick children around the world.
  19. 0
    14 February 2019 16: 15
    1 Mach is the speed in the stratosphere. There, the speed of sound is much less, so do not flatter yourself
    2. How is maneuvering at such speeds in the atmosphere? Any steering wheel will melt, to put it mildly.
  20. -1
    14 February 2019 18: 19
    The best way to stop the Vanguards is to achieve their destruction with our own hands. You will see that soon a song will be drawn up by the choir about the limitation and destruction of hypersonic weapons.
  21. +2
    14 February 2019 19: 14
    What kind of nonsense the author wrote (it’s clear that he didn’t invent it, but retells) —the planning non-motor warhead will have the same speed as the warhead of conventional ICBMs — and even lower, due to more developed aerodynamic surfaces.
    1. 0
      15 February 2019 11: 14
      The same thing caught my eye.
  22. -3
    14 February 2019 20: 17
    A good article in general. The weaknesses and strengths of the project are correctly identified. An ideal weapon does not exist anyway. It is gratifying that the country was able to find a simple and cheap answer to the American missile defense. They won themselves another 10 years of a quiet life.

    Although the author clearly overdid the threat assessment wink This is especially true of the space echelon laughing Beam and beam weapons require a power source much more powerful than solar panels. And nuclear reactors cannot be launched into orbit because it is prohibited by the "Treaty on Space". In the 80s, the USSR had a series of active radio intelligence satellites with nuclear reactors. So one such satellite accidentally fell into the territory of Canada. Came out to put it mildly "scandal". laughing
  23. 0
    15 February 2019 00: 47
    Quote: Tektor
    The second positive feature is the presence of control systems that provide maneuvering in flight. Changing the trajectory can be used to reach the target along the optimal route or as an anti-aircraft maneuver.
    Imagine that our intelligence obtained information about a preventive nuclear strike against us by a B-52 squadron with 20 nuclear weapons each. Our intelligence detects them in flight before reaching the launch line of the AGM-86 ALCM with a range of up to 1 kilometers. It is reasonable to meet these links of bombers to launch the Vanguard with a 200Mt warhead in order to destroy at once the entire link or squadron with 2 - 80 nuclear warheads. Exchange on warheads will be in our favor. A Vanguard can appear in the form of missiles of global range.

    Shooting is carried out by ICBMs for stationary targets. And the goals going at a speed of 700-800 km / h are not even from the realm of fantasy, but from the realm of fairy tales. Shooting somewhere is not the best way to use this system. Moreover, I would like to hear how these bombs will be guided. They will not go wing to wing. The distance between squadrons can be hundreds of kilometers ... And what will it be induced on all these aircraft ???

    Quote: Kostadinov
    If the projectile has its own engine, it can increase energy and speed after being reflected. Such trajectories were also considered by Zenger for his "antipode" bomber.

    And how much fuel there should be and what kind of thrust the engines have so that on the "Zenger's trajectory" he could increase his energy to the value that was before the first dive. Zenger's antipodal bomber is not the Vanguard unit. He planned both a power plant and fuel
  24. +1
    15 February 2019 09: 16
    Quote: Avior
    interceptors work from 50 km altitude

    Do not give a link?
  25. 0
    15 February 2019 14: 16
    Quote: DimerVladimer
    Do you know much accepted UBB?

    "You will have a squirrel [PBB], there will also be a whistle [UBB]" (C)
  26. +2
    15 February 2019 21: 49
    Quote: DimerVladimer
    Even UBB R&D can be counted on the fingers of one hand (all from open sources):
    15P170 Albatross NPO Engineering http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-844.html
    15YU70 / product 102 NPO engineering http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-870.html
    Guided combat unit of the Makeev State Military Center http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-882.html
    Vanguard / 4202, product 15Y71, complex 15P771 http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-807.html

    I will supplement you, Dmitry Vladimirovich! Number one on this list should be the guided combat unit 15F178 for the mixed-mode RCF 15F177 of the product 15A18M ...

    Quote: Jurkovs
    The author not only failed to identify the most important thing in that stream of "journalistic" information. He managed to overlook her most valuable source. I mean Ivanov's pre-New Year interview, where he bluntly said that there is currently not enough computing power to calculate and maintain even a single unit of the Vanguard. And he directly called the flight of the Vanguard not so much planning as jumping like naked on the water. And nowhere is a word said about the ability to maneuver at the final stage of the flight. The fact that the device can withstand the loads when the flight path changes on the border of the atmosphere and space is quite enough.

    Honestly, Ivanov froze stupid things. Almost all the time, the block follows a standard ballistic trajectory. Already for this computing power is not enough? And what is enough for? Lay out solitaire on a computer ???. Flying along the so-called Senger trajectory will increase the range, but at the same time such a trajectory is not something out of the ordinary ...
    It is more difficult to calculate the lateral and vertical maneuvers of the Vanguard, but even this is not an insurmountable task. Moreover, such maneuvers are not dynamic, like the maneuvers of modern fighters, but have a great length. The winged vehicle can be re-aimed at another target, but its turning radius will be hundreds of kilometers. Otherwise, accelerating it will simply rupture the apparatus ...
  27. 0
    20 February 2019 15: 51
    Quote: Old26
    And how much fuel there should be and what kind of thrust the engines have so that on the "Zenger's trajectory" he could increase his energy to the value that was before the first dive. Zenger's antipodal bomber is not the Vanguard unit. He planned both a power plant and fuel

    What the Vanguard block represents (how much to weigh, it has an engine, and so on) I don’t know. He can increase energy if he has fuel and an engine.
    At a very high speed, after several nyirka and a large loss of energy, he can never increase the energy to the initial one before the first nyirka. But all the same, he can increase the energy that he has after the last nyirka at some considerable value and this is the main thing.
    In addition, I don’t see any kind of fundamental hindrance to make the (unmanned) Zenger bomber version up-to-date. But the Zenger bomber has the opportunity to attack the target when it flies for several thousand kilometers, reduces speed to about 400 m / s, attacks a point target (for example, the Queen Mary from one division of soldiers on board) with a dive somewhere in Atlatika and then includes LRE and returns to its aerodrome in Germany.
  28. 0
    April 1 2019 19: 54
    It is interesting to read komenty how they paid the West and they already defeated everyone, well, at least theoretically and not a word about how long the answer will arrive and is the Russian air defense capable of somehow protecting against a retaliatory strike? I think it’s unlikely, in the best case, it will somehow soften the blow, but this will not be enough. It is foolish to consider yourself smarter than everyone and underestimate the enemy, especially since the enemy is technically and financially far ahead.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"