Rocket anti-ship complex Vulcan P-1000

46
Rocket anti-ship complex Vulcan P-1000


According to the decree of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union on 17.05.1979, the Scientific and Production Association of Mechanical Engineering begins the development of the SCRC, which is a further development of the P-500 complex. The new complex retained the starting equipment from the previous complex and received a greater range of damage due to the use of an improved starting engine in the rocket, adding fuel to the sustainer stage, reducing body armor and a number of improvements.

The beginning of the tests of the complex began 3.12.1982 of the year in 10.55 Moscow time at the test site near the village of Nenoks, Arkhangelsk region. The first launch of the rocket failed: the launching unit after testing was not separated from the rocket, with the result that the rocket began to fall apart in flight and after 8 seconds after launch, it falls. The next launch, carried out by 9.04.1983 of the year, also turns out to be unsuccessful, the rocket crashes on the 9 second of the flight. In the course of the investigation of unsuccessful launches, it was established that the cause of problems in the rocket lies in the control system. Therefore, by the third launch, which took place in June 1983, the control system is being finalized, and the rocket successfully worked along the entire flight path.



The basic tests of the Vulkan SCRK begin on the 22.12.1983 of the year on board the SSGN of the 675 project upgraded to the 675MKV project. The upgrade was to get the new SCRP P-1000. In total, four SSGNs from the 675 project were upgraded in due course. Joint tests of modernized SSGNs and newly installed P-1000 complexes begin in 1985 year. A volley was made by two missiles that successfully destroyed the established target, and this despite the fact that there was a malfunction in the pressure support system in the instrument equipment compartment and an error during the launch of the operator’s rocket. The next launch under the joint testing program carried out 8.11.1985 of the year - a volley was fired with three missiles, which, in general, was recognized as successful - two missiles successfully destroyed the established target, the third missile had a reticle radar in flight. In general, 18 missile test launches were conducted and 11 of them are considered successful.

By the end of 1985, the management system and the CPA were completed, at the end of which they signed the Joint Testing End Act, which recommends adopting the Vulcan into service with the Navy, taking into account control tests in the 1986 year. For testing, 8 rockets were allocated - salvo launch of 4 rockets and a single launch of the rest within various test programs:
- the launch of the 1 rocket was carried out on the 24.05.1986 of the year, as part of the test program for the control system of the missile complex "Basalt". Start recognized as successful;
- launch of the 2 th missile carried out 18.06.1986 of the year, as part of the noise immunity test. Start recognized as successful;
- launch of the 3 th missile carried out 19.06.1986 of the year, as part of the noise immunity test. Start recognized as successful;
- salvo launch 4-x missiles 4.07.1986 of the year, a salvo recognized as successful. Three of the four missiles were equipped with telemetry, as ground equipment at the site could not accept the data of four missiles. The fourth rocket, without telemetry, for some unknown reason, strayed from the flight path and the target did not hit.



SCRC "Vulkan" adopt 18.12.1987 year. The production of missiles for the complex was engaged in the Orenburg association Strela from 1985 to 1992. The complex could be supplied in three versions - ground (coastal) with PU of type CM-49 (used during the first tests of 1982 of the year), surface with PU of type CM-248 (analogue of the complex “Basalt”), underwater type of SCRC "Basalt".


Anti-ship missile 3М-70
The design of the CRP used titanium alloys, thereby reducing the body armor. The rocket of the complex used an inertial control system with the ability to make corrections from the radar homing head, developed at the Central Research Institute Granit. The designer of the control system is designer A. Chizhov, the onboard PTA designer B. Godlinik. The autopilot was developed by the designer A. Kuchin, the onboard computer by the designer V. Nikoltsev. The selection of targets by a rocket was carried out either automatically, or using telemetry, or with the possibility of combining modes. The autopilot and BTsVM (A21 and B9) are assembled on the latest elemental base at that time, and seriously differed from similar solutions of the Bazalt complex. The designers were able to improve the noise immunity characteristics of the radar homing head, creating an improved on-board computer. The equipment of the automated control system and the CPA were built anew for the Vulkan complex and were very different from the analogous equipment of the Bazalt complex. The SSN 3М-70 can work as a rocket of the Bazalt complex when equipped with a solid-fuel accelerator from 4K-80 (P-500 Basalt).



When pointing a rocket, the algorithm used to select the main target in the group of ships was used. When launching, the rocket received the coordinates of the target and passed the main part of the trajectory with the radar sighting device turned off. At the final part of the trajectory, the rocket was reduced to the target, and the reticle was automatically switched on, with the help of which the coordinates were refined and the target was captured. In this case, the onboard equipment was used to analyze the size of the targets, the position relative to the given coordinates of the target. Such an algorithm provided the missile with the capture of the largest target in the group of ships.

To overcome the enemy’s missile and air defense, the rocket was provided with anti-aircraft maneuvering algorithms at low altitudes. When launching missiles at a salvo, they were spread around the front when threatened and re-assembled in a group on the final segment of the trajectory (before the reticle was switched on). For electronic warfare, a rocket was installed at the 4B-89 “Bumblebee” active jamming station; it was developed by the Granit department of the Institute’s 25 and by the designers R.Tkachev and Yu.Romanov. The instrument compartment is completely sealed, to support the required pressure inside the compartment is equipped with a special system.

At the end of 1987 of the year, according to a decree of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, work begins on the creation of Vulcan LC rockets using a laser high-precision guidance channel. This was supposed to increase the accuracy of missile hits. The on-board equipment for the new rocket was developed under the guidance of the chief designer V.Senkov. The laser channel of guidance was created at the Central Research Institute "Granit", project manager S.Sharov. The laser guidance system could recognize surface ships by geometrical parameters, after which it issued correction commands along the flight path to destroy surface ships in the most vulnerable position. The first tests of the newest system were held in the hero-city of Sevastopol, the system was worked out on passing surface ships and from the flying laboratory of the IL-18 aircraft.



The test launches of missiles with a homing head of a laser channel, as part of the creation of the Vulcan LK missiles, were supposed to take place approximately in the 1989 year. The onboard equipment of the laser guidance channel was located in the air intake channel. The prototype of the rocket successfully passed ground bench tests. Launches were to be held at the same range near the village of Nenoks. It was planned to implement from 5-ti to 9-ti starts. However, the development of a new rocket and a new laser-guided system was discontinued roughly in 1988-89's. The known data of the guidance system - the beam had an approximate diameter of 10 meters; the detection and recognition range was approximately 15 kilometers.



Nuclear missile tests
In the course of work on the creation of rockets for the Vulkan SCRK, a research work called “Radiation” was carried out, whose task was to analyze the impact of the damaging factors of nuclear weapons on the missiles going to the target. For this analysis on Novaya Zemlya, a nuclear charge was detonated in a special chamber. The analysis revealed the defeat of most elements of the onboard equipment by neutron radiation at a distance of 500 meters from the epicenter of the explosion, while some of the details were irreversibly damaged. As a result of the analysis, some parts of the onboard equipment were replaced by more resistant to the damaging factors of nuclear weapons.

Key Features:
- length 11.7 meter;
- diameter - 0.9 meter;
- wing - 2.6 meter;
- weight with / without starting engine - tons 9.3 / 5;
- range of destruction to 700 kilometers;
- flight speed min / max altitude - Mach 2 / 2.5;
- minimum flight altitude - 15 meters;
- The operating time of the solid-fuel accelerator is 12 seconds;
- main engine - TRD KR-17В;
- used combat units: combined warhead (cumulative and high explosive), weighing 500 kilogram, pierces armor up to 400 mm. To destroy a single aircraft carrier, three missile hits are required; nuclear warhead, power 350 kt.

Known carriers:
- four SSGN project 675MKV. 8-mi missiles per SSGN. All submarines for the 1994 year removed from service;



Three RRC project 1164 "Unant". 16 missiles in 8-paired PU for one missile cruiser;
- GRC Varyag (Chervona Ukraine) was put into operation on 16.11.1989, with the Vulkan complex on board;



- GRKR "Moscow" in the course of modernization receives the SCRC "Vulkan" instead of the complex "Basalt";



- RK "Ukraine" (Admiral Lobov) has on board the PU complex "Vulkan". At the moment he is "part of" the Ukrainian Navy. During the existence of the state of Ukraine, it was never completed. The crew of the cruiser was formed and dissolved three times. Located on the pier of the Nikolaev shipbuilding plant. 1 costs Ukraine a million dollars “idle” annually. Recently, talks about a possible sale of the Russian Federation have intensified.



Information sources:
http://www.arms-expo.ru/049055051054124049050052054.html
http://military.tomsk.ru/blog/topic-390.html
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F-1000_%D0%92%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD
http://www.liveinternet.ru/journalshowcomments.php?jpostid=118753049&journalid=1106169&go=next&categ=0
Our news channels

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

46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Svistoplyaskov
    +5
    27 June 2012 07: 54
    Impressive! And as I understand it, "Onyx" has already replaced it?
    1. radikdan79
      +8
      27 June 2012 08: 20
      no. development on "onyx" and "volcano" began at about the same time. The P-800 Onyx (Yakhont) complex from the very beginning was conceived as a universal one: it was supposed to be placed on submarines, surface ships and boats, aircraft and coastal launchers. range of application is 300 km. (which is more than two times less than that of the "volcano")
    2. mkrass2006
      +8
      27 June 2012 08: 25
      I personally was on the ship GKR Moscow. And he walked next to the Volcanoes. The piece is HUGE. Even if just a squirrel gets into any boat - the scribe to him.
      1. kapitan_21
        +4
        27 June 2012 15: 01
        SCRC "Vulkan", like "Basalt" is intended mainly for the destruction of aircraft carrier groups, and they are unlikely to shoot at ordinary ships! To do this, you can use a conventional anti-aircraft missile, as it was during the conflict with Georgia.
    3. Pessimist
      0
      28 June 2012 23: 04
      Quote: Whistling
      as I understand it came "Onyx"?

      "Onyx" is an anti-ship missile of a completely different class, much smaller and lighter. Designed for a range of up to 200 km.
  2. +18
    27 June 2012 07: 55
    A good anti-ship complex ... and Admiral Lobov (Ukraine) would be good to take, of course, otherwise it will perish without seeing the sea, which is so necessary for the Russian ship of the 1st rank.
    1. 755962
      +5
      27 June 2012 13: 48
      Russia will not buy from Ukraine the unfinished missile cruiser of Project 1164 "Ukraine" (formerly "Admiral Lobov"), the newspaper "Argumenty Nedeli" reports, citing a source in the Russian Defense Ministry. Nevertheless, Russia agrees to take the ship if Ukraine gives it away free of charge.
      Read more: http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124050048055055052.html
      1. +4
        27 June 2012 14: 04
        Quote: 755962
        Nevertheless, Russia agrees to pick up the ship if Ukraine gives it free of charge.


        I give 100 hryvnia and let me deliver it to Zaporozhye.
        1. Kaa
          +1
          28 June 2012 12: 29
          kars, fellow countryman. "Ukraine" will not fit on the rates, take the submarine "Zaporozhye", otherwise the city and patronage took, but there is little sense.
      2. +8
        27 June 2012 15: 32
        It would be optimal to buy back the type of purchase Gorshkova Indians.
        Those. give us the cruiser for free, but upgrade it at our expense in Nikolaev. And the Nikolaev shipbuilders will be in action, and we will get the ship at the exit.
        1. Aleksey67
          +4
          27 June 2012 15: 34
          Quote: Sakhalininets
          but modernize it at our expense in Nikolaev. And the Nikolaev shipbuilders will be in action, and we will get the ship at the exit.

          Everything has already collapsed there and hard workers have fled to Russian and foreign shipyards winked Who will upgrade there?
  3. +4
    27 June 2012 08: 34
    Good thing. A weighty argument. I agree that Admiral Lobov should be bought out by Russia with further modernization.
    1. +3
      27 June 2012 10: 41
      But this is debatable.
      1 Cost
      2 Efficiency
      This can be discussed.
      For example, take the frigate 22350 project
      there are 16 Universal Hosh containers under Onyx Hosh under Caliber
      On Murzilka data onyx 300 km but this is clear export modifications.
      and according to Vulcan 600-700
      I think the real ratio is 500-550 for onyx and 600-650 for Vulcan.
      Further Poliment air defense redoubt is clearly preferable to S-300F (old version)
      If they finish the S-400 (the fortress, then there is something to think about)
      In range, yes, the Frigate loses 4000 instead of 6000 miles.

      The ship is certainly interesting, but all the same the question remains open whether we need it because the ship at 2 ranks below has slightly worse armament.
      1. +3
        27 June 2012 10: 56
        I agree that buying Lobov from Ukraine is a dubious thing. The ship is morally outdated, and physically years of inactivity do not have the best effect on the condition. Even if you buy it out cheaply, it will take so much for restoration and completion that it will be possible to build a couple or even three new frigates with this money.
      2. +3
        27 June 2012 20: 07
        I support. Moreover, its modernization potential is somewhat limited in view of the method of placing anti-ship missiles. Unlike the Eagles, there is nowhere to cut the universal vertical launch cells.
        On the other hand, we strained the ships of the ocean zone. Ships of the first rank are very necessary. Based on this, it seems that the current state of the cruiser’s hull is a decisive factor to redeem / not redeem.
      3. Pessimist
        +2
        28 June 2012 23: 12
        Quote: leon-iv
        I think the real ratio is 500-550 for onyx and 600-650 for Vulcan.

        More or less correct data on "murzilki"! "Onyx" is a light supersonic missile, and "Vulkan" is an analogue of "Basalt", a heavy anti-ship missile! You can't put "Basalt" on a frigate; Yes, and the point is to put two or four pieces ... anti-ship missiles should be hit in a volley, otherwise the enemy's air defense cannot be overcome. That is why they put on frigates 8-12 "Onyxes", or even more simply - an analogue of the "harpoon" - our "Uranus".
  4. dema46
    +3
    27 June 2012 11: 38
    you don’t lean on the maximum range of the missiles. external target designation is necessary for them. for example, the cover group of an Amer aircraft carrier in the form of a hockey plus a couple of fighters goes at a distance of about 500-550 km. and our space legend seems to have covered itself. missiles are blind for they don’t let the horizon even if they have an INS (inertial) on board. And the reconnaissance plane, even with the success complex, the Hornets will shoot much sooner than he will see something. So, we must probably rely on a distance of 200 km. And who are ours ships besides submarines are so close stit? asks, why besides Sakashvili scare this cruiser needed? iron .....
    1. +4
      27 June 2012 12: 03
      Quote: dema46
      one wonders, why bother with Sakashvili do we need this cruiser?

      Japov, for example
      1. dema46
        0
        27 June 2012 13: 00
        and this, let me know who they are?
        1. +6
          27 June 2012 13: 38
          Japanese. RRCs are quite capable of being a very significant deterrent against virtually any maritime power, except perhaps the Americans (just our fleet is now too small to project power onto American AUGs)
          1. VAF
            VAF
            +4
            27 June 2012 14: 00
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            it’s just that our fleet is now too few to project force into American AUGs as an old man)


            Anedrey, with the return, dear +!
            How to relax ???

            And then the nautical theme is generally dead, boats are going to be used instead of the ships !!!
            1. +5
              27 June 2012 14: 26
              Thank you, Honorable Veteran! Rest - do not work :))))
              Quote: veteran.air force
              And then the nautical theme is generally dead, boats are going to be used instead of the ships !!!

              Oh yes :))))) I did not have time to predict the C-500 on the newest Russian destroyers - how did the publications go with reference to sources in the MO that C-500 was going to be installed on the newest EM? Chirkov (new commander-in-chief of the Navy) repeated the words of Vysotsky (who was the former commander-in-chief and not the bard) about building an aircraft carrier :)))) And what about the people, about the boats? !!!
          2. 0
            27 June 2012 14: 22
            war with amers can be a current with the use of nuclear weapons, and in this situation, when a single missile can gouge several ships and our fleet is enough
    2. MURANO
      0
      27 June 2012 13: 10
      Quote: dema46
      .and who will let our ships besides the Plarks so close?

      For this, the USSR Navy practiced "combat service" and the ships were already in peacetime from the enemy at weapon ranges, and often in line of sight. And the Legend was supplemented and supplemented by reconnaissance ships and "ships of direct tracking."
      1. Pessimist
        0
        29 June 2012 01: 46
        Quote: MURANO
        And the Legend was supplemented and supplemented by reconnaissance ships

        Legends have long ceased to exist! ... Dear thing in the service, especially for Serdyukov ....
    3. Passing
      +2
      27 June 2012 14: 18
      Quote: dema46
      the cover group of the Amer aircraft carrier in the form of a hockey player plus a couple of fighters goes at a distance of about 500-550 km

      500km is not serious, at such a distance the Hornets of the cover will be able to barrage for no more than an hour, and in days I will remind you 24 hours, and the fuel supply on the aircraft carrier for airplanes is not infinite, and the engine resources must be saved, and the pilots should sleep, so that’s not so. rosy for an aircraft carrier, as the propaganda says. In addition, Hokaev on the aircraft carrier pieces 3-4, regularly fly 1-2 at the same time, so they do not cover 360 degrees. Even if you raise the rest by alarm, they still need to take off, form a system, fly, they will not have time. Those. with a competent approach, with the involvement of distracting forces, with prolonged exhaustion of the enemy with false attacks, the problem of approaching the AB is more than solved.
      1. VAF
        VAF
        +2
        27 June 2012 15: 09
        Quote: Passing by
        500km is not serious, at such a distance the Hornets of the cover will be able to barrage for no more than an hour, and in days I will remind you 24 hours, and the fuel supply on the aircraft carrier for airplanes is not infinite, and the engine resources must be saved, and the pilots should sleep, so that’s not so. rosy for an aircraft carrier,


        Dear, you are mistaken and very much !!!!

        Among other things. what you listed is Aegis! ships are advancing in the direction of possible enemy opposition!

        There are no problems with cover fighters, because depending on the version of the wing, 2 squadrons and exactly the duty unit, etc., are led for these purposes.

        The barrage zone 180-220km, but forgot about the gas station ???

        Hockey also does not leave the aircraft carrier for more than 300 km and so everything "sees" what is needed !!!

        Take off 2 aircraft per minute from one catapult, catapult 4th ???
        What is the problem?


        Quote: Passing by
        Those. with a competent approach, with the involvement of distracting forces, with prolonged exhaustion of the enemy with false attacks, the problem of approaching the AB is more than solved.


        This theory was solved with the greatest difficulty (theoretically !!!) during the years of greatness and massiveness of the USSR Air Force!

        At this stage for us ... it's UTOPIA !!!!
        1. +2
          27 June 2012 15: 52
          Well, as if the AUG omerikanskmy hollow, then on their shores and there will be a massive volley From "rifled loaves" plus predators + Tu-22M3 + NK + Aviation of the Su-24 Su-34 + Most likely Su-30M2. And in the first wave, the SBS will pave the way. And it is not even Aegis with Rockets that is more dangerous, but the interference that amers perfectly put. We have new electronic warfare stations on Tu95 and Tu-22M3 from which even the Zaslon on the MiG-31B becomes blind.
          In general, this spheroconin will not be a solitary ship against AUG.
          1. VAF
            VAF
            -1
            27 June 2012 16: 47
            Quote: leon-iv
            We have new EW stations on the Tu95 and Tu-22M3 from which even the Barrier on the Mig-31B becomes blind.


            Is it any such ?????

            And on the Shaikovsky Tu-22M3 they forgot to put them ????.

            And forget about the Tu-22M3 as a strike aircraft against the AUG, as well as the Su-24 !!! I'm not talking about the Su-30SM at all !!!
            1. Yarbay
              +1
              27 June 2012 16: 52
              Dear Sergey!
              Is it really so deplorable?
            2. 0
              27 June 2012 17: 03
              About them EMNIP comrade Pedestrian from Adventure spoke. If there is interest, look.
              Why should I forget about the Tu-22M3?
              Why should I forget about the Su-24
              By the 15th year, they promised delivery of 30 Su-30M2 contracts. NAPO signed a fully serial plant with a large release should not break the contract
              1. Pessimist
                -1
                29 June 2012 01: 56
                Quote: leon-iv
                By the 15th year, they promised delivery of 30 Su-30M2 contracts signed by NAPO

                The AUG has a standard wing of 72 aircraft, and not in the 15th year .... And what by the 15th year, the Amers will have more ships in operation, the latest ones, do not have to take into account?
            3. Pessimist
              0
              29 June 2012 01: 52
              Quote: veteran.air force
              I'm not talking about the Su-30SM at all !!!

              Especially considering their number ...
        2. Passing
          +4
          27 June 2012 19: 27
          Quote: veteran.air force
          there is Aegis! ships are advancing in the direction of possible enemy opposition!

          Yes, the problem, but on the other hand, what prevents us from sinking the cover ships first? Moreover, if they are advanced far from the aircraft carrier, then they will have very limited air cover.
          Quote: veteran.air force
          The barrage zone 180-220km, but forgot about the gas station ???

          I don’t know something, are there really tanker aircraft on aircraft carriers?
          Quote: veteran.air force
          Hockey also does not leave the aircraft carrier for more than 300 km and so everything "sees" what is needed !!!

          300 km is already more realistic, but in this case it is much easier to approach the launch range of the RCC. The problem with target designation, of course, remains, here all hope is either for tactics or for satellites.
          Quote: veteran.air force
          Take off 2 aircraft per minute from one catapult, catapult 4th ??? What do you see the problem?

          I don’t know something, are the pilots of duty units on deck sitting around the clock in the cockpit, and the engines running on low gas? It seems to me almost unrealistic. Those. in case of alarm, pilots need to run to the cockpit, carry out pre-launch procedures, including wait for the engine to enter the engine mode, it all takes clearly more than one minute, then take off, rebuild into battle formation, then another twenty minutes to the 300km line ... In short, IMHO, the duty units will only have time for the heading analysis.
          And about continuously, 24 hours, 7 days a week, barrage fighter cover I wrote above - this is also almost unrealistic.
          Quote: veteran.air force
          This theory was solved with the greatest difficulty (theoretically !!!) during the years of greatness and massiveness of the USSR Air Force!

          As far as I understand, the task was not just to have a chance to defeat one aircraft carrier, but the task was to guarantee to destroy as many AUGs as needed, and not in the sense of catching at a convenient moment, a couple of months after the start of hostilities, but to destroy exactly "on a call from above" so that AUG does not have time to heap up things during this time.
          Now this is of course impossible, but the simpler task - to disable one aircraft carrier (well, if he is even a little substitute))) is completely solvable.
          1. +1
            28 June 2012 15: 34
            I don’t know something, are there really tanker aircraft on aircraft carriers?

            Alas, Ah, but there is ... Each aircraft carrier carries 4 of these refuellers.


            KA-6D was created by the company "Grumman" in the second half of the 60s by converting the A-6 Intruder, a deck-based attack aircraft, into tanker. Weapons were removed from the latter, and fueling equipment was installed in the rear of the fuselage. 8870 liters of fuel are located in the internal fuel tanks and 5X1510 liters in the overhead tanks, which allows transferring 9500 kg of fuel to refueling aircraft immediately after the KA-6D takes off from the deck of the aircraft carrier.

            The KA-6D is the only U.S. Navy carrier-based tank carrier aircraft. According to the calculations of American experts, three KA-6D aircraft can ensure the fulfillment of a combat mission - refueling (16 kg) of a group of carrier-based aircraft comprising 000 F / A-17, six A-18, two EA-6B and one E- 6C, operating at a radius of 2 km and having 550 units of air-to-ground and air-to-air weapons.
            A total of 6 A-78A aircraft and seven A-6Es were converted into KA-6D.
        3. Pessimist
          0
          29 June 2012 01: 51
          Quote: veteran.air force
          This theory was solved with the greatest difficulty (theoretically !!!) during the years of greatness and massiveness of the USSR Air Force!

          I agree with you, especially since the Amers have more than one AUG, in contrast to the number of our missile cruisers. There are more Arley Beork-class destroyers than all of our Navy ships ...
        4. 0
          12 May 2018 23: 15
          American aircraft carriers do not have refuelers. Aegis does not see low-flying targets. A pair of Hornets 16 missiles can not be neutralized. And how would it happen, very HZ, no one has tested
          1. 0
            12 May 2018 23: 56
            their F-18s can even run each other
    4. PLO
      +1
      27 June 2012 19: 49
      our space legend seems to have covered itself.

      Well, on this occasion, I read conflicting information
      it seems like the spacecraft entering this system periodically launch
  5. Igor
    0
    27 June 2012 12: 25
    I’m interested in Vulcan’s missile range of 700 km, Onyx, Clab and Granite’s range of 300 km. up to 400km., but at what distance can a missile guidance system aim at a ship?
    1. +5
      27 June 2012 13: 40
      Capture (that is, not just detect the ship, namely "grab" it and constantly track the target) - at least 70 km if the missile is moving at an altitude. Well, and the radio horizon, if the anti-ship missile system goes to ultra-small
      1. Igor
        0
        27 June 2012 14: 00
        Thanks, now it’s clear.
      2. Ilyukha
        0
        28 September 2012 15: 39
        The main "highlight" of the guidance system of this missile is a backup, the second (located in the air intake) laser recognition and guidance system. Even if it operates close (15 km), but how much does it increase the efficiency in case of interference from the main seeker-radar!
        In fact, with the current development (in the West) of electronic warfare equipment and suppression, it is possible to withdraw a missile from a radar seeker. Detection of approaching RCC by radar radiation is generally the main method for repelling an attack. Radiation is captured at a distance TWO that exceeds the detection range of the target of RCC itself.
        The use of a second-duplicating channel (on which the radio interference does not act in any way) is an excellent solution.
    2. VAF
      VAF
      0
      27 June 2012 14: 02
      Quote: Igorek
      Onyx, Klaba and Granita flight range from 300km


      You take the data of export modifications, these missiles are able to fly much further, especially the Klabowski ones!
      1. +1
        27 June 2012 20: 27
        Range "Granit" - about 500-550 km., "Klaba" - it all depends on the missile (there is a whole family). For export, there are usually restrictions of 260-280 km, for the domestic Navy there are projects and 2000 km (to work along the coast).
        Here is "Onyx" - most likely it will remain within 300-400 km. The rocket is versatile, and despite its speed, it is quite compact. It will not work to radically increase its range. Yes and no, most likely.
  6. CC-18a
    +3
    28 June 2012 01: 14
    Ukraine's motto "Not to yourself, not to Russia"
  7. omulu
    +1
    28 June 2012 01: 35
    How did it happen that "the launch of the 1st rocket was carried out on May 24.05.2012, XNUMX, as part of the test program for the missile control system of the Basalt complex. The launch was recognized as successful." belay
    1. djerel
      +1
      28 June 2012 03: 15
      typo year 1986 - they all started in one year
  8. mind1954
    0
    28 June 2012 04: 15
    There is a distance from which it doesn’t matter whether you hit it or not,
    whether it collapsed or not!
    She will visit you inevitably !!!
    And you will enjoy the full program,
    no matter in what form it is!
  9. passmel41
    0
    28 June 2012 10: 39
    Today, one third of Russians do not trust the president and the prime minister. And they’re doing it right.
    Just look: ydn. * Ru / q6 (copy the link without *) - a service that was made by the ministry with their support.
    Here is information about each resident of the Russian Federation, anyone can find detailed information about another person.
    And people don’t even suspect about it.
  10. 0
    27 November 2013 18: 38
    So, perhaps the presence of such a complex on the RK "Moscow" (Black Sea Fleet) serves as a good club on the Black Sea. am

"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"