Avangard Complex: production started, infrastructure ready

50
Over the past few months, officials have talked about the imminent start of deliveries of the Avangard serial missile systems and the approaching deadlines for putting such systems on combat duty. According to the latest data, work in this direction has led to the desired results. Strategic missile forces are already receiving new systems.

Latest news


On May 22, Russian media published the latest statements by the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel-General Sergei Karakaev. Once again, he touched on the Avangard complex and announced relevant data on work in this direction.





According to the commander in chief, the construction of the infrastructure for the future operation of Avangard in one of the formations has been completed. The first such operator weapons will be the 13-th Orenburg Red Banner Division rocket (Yasny, Orenburg region), which is part of the 31-rocket army of the Strategic Missile Forces. However, the exact composition of the new objects for the use of Avangard has not yet been named.

Also, the commander recalled plans for the near future. The construction of the infrastructure should be followed by the delivery of finished weapons. The first Avangard complex will take up combat duty until the end of this year. Thus, the previously announced plans for the deployment of advanced weapons remain in force.

Future operators


According to the latest reports, the first Avangard complexes will go into service with the 13 th rocket division, which carries the service near Orenburg. In the future, such weapons may appear in other compounds of the Strategic Missile Forces. However, the Ministry of Defense has not yet published its plans for the further deployment of Avangards. What other compounds, when and in what quantity will receive such weapons - is unknown.

According to 2017, the 13 th rocket division includes four missile regiments with mine launchers and a number of auxiliary units required for the full service of the entire compound. All four regiments are equipped with intercontinental ballistic missiles P-36М2.

As part of the planned re-equipment, the infrastructure of one of the regiments of the division was modernized. Due to this, he will be able to operate the Avangard complexes. Thus, by the end of this year, the division will consist of two fundamentally different samples - the “traditional” ICBMs of the older model and the promising complex with a hypersonic planning unit.

It is curious that when the new complex of the 13 division is put into service, it will be necessary to master not only the Avant-garde unit itself, but also its carrier. According to known data, a new type of hypersonic aircraft is now used with the UR-100N UTTH ICBM. As far as is known, such missiles never stood on duty in the 13-th missile division. However, the compound in the recent past participated in the tests of "Avangard" and has experience in their operation.

Plans of the past


Recent statements on the construction of infrastructure for new missile systems were expected and are in line with recent reports. For the first time, public information about Avangard sounded at the highest level in March last year. Promising development was announced personally by President Vladimir Putin.



In July, 2018-th Ministry of Defense announced the completion of the development stage and the start of mass production of new weapons. Another important news Received in late December. Then one of the regiments of the 13-th missile division completed a successful launch of Avangard on the training target at the Kura test site. The complex confirmed the characteristics and demonstrated its capabilities. It was argued that the planning combat unit in flight had developed a speed of the order of M = 27.

At the same time, the country's leadership announced the imminent adoption of the Avant-garde into service. The first regiment was planned to be put on combat duty in 2019. As the latest official messages show, such works are proceeding in accordance with the schedule and should give the expected results.

Perspective weapon


The main goals and objectives of the Avangard project were repeatedly stated at all levels. Within this program, several organizations of the domestic defense industry were to create a special missile system with an unusual payload.

The basis of the complex in its present form is the ICBM UR-100N UTTH, which serves as the carrier of the planning combat unit. In the future, the carrier of the Avangard product will also be the promising heavy-duty ICBM RS-28 Sarmat. The appearance of such a version of the missile complex will be possible after the completion of the current work on the Sarmat, i.e. not earlier than the beginning of the twenties.

The Avangard product itself is a hypersonic planning winged block — an aircraft of a special design, capable of displaying the highest flight performance and carrying a warhead of the required type. The use of a number of special technical solutions allows the unit to withstand high mechanical and thermal loads.

With the help of an ICBM performing the functions of a carrier, the Avangard takes off and accelerates to hypersonic speed. Then the block independently carries out the planning flight to the target. The highest flight speed and maneuvering course and altitude provide certain advantages over existing types of warheads. It is known about the possibility of obtaining intercontinental flight range. The combat load has not yet been clarified.

Hypersonic flight speed and maneuvering are the main means of breaking through the enemy’s air and missile defense. High speed takes such an aircraft beyond the capabilities of existing and future air defense systems, and maneuvering makes it impossible to effectively use existing antimissiles designed to combat ICBMs.

It is expected that the Avangard missile systems will be an important addition to existing ICBMs with a "classic" combat load. The head units of the ICBMs of the P-36М2, UR-100НТТХ, Sarmat or Topol families are equipped with the necessary means and have a certain potential in the context of overcoming missile defense. The promising Avangard has such capabilities already at the concept level.

Thus, over the next few months, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces will receive fundamentally new weapons with special capabilities and the highest potential. Such rearmament will begin with one regiment, but in the future Avangard can enter other parts. The consequences of the supply and development of such weapons are obvious. Russian strategic nuclear forces will maintain and increase their strike potential, and will also protect themselves from the missile defense system of a potential enemy for a certain period.
Our news channels

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

50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    27 May 2019 06: 00
    Cheap, cheerful and efficient smile .
    I read in the internet the comments for and against ... there are still unbelievers and all-proponents who claim that this is a cartoon and two regiments can not be here.
    Time will tell ... and by the reaction of the Americans we will see ... what they will demand from our country in negotiations with us.
    1. -14
      27 May 2019 07: 04
      How time will tell? Will the second episode of animation be shown? Or some installations with some ammunition and mysteriously whisper that the rest is all very secret? Remember the "daddy of all bombs" story? They showed her, told about her, scared her, but not a single shot with the use at least in tests!
      1. +1
        27 May 2019 07: 06
        The main thing is to frighten the godfather with minimal physical costs ... Putin managed to do it ... and then we'll see who has diarrhea and who has constipation in the rectum.
        1. -16
          27 May 2019 07: 09
          Who did he scare? Victory cheers for realizations only from our side. Western media more often use the word "cartoon" rather than "oh, how scary" ...
          1. +3
            27 May 2019 07: 13
            And who did he scare? Victory cheers only on our part.

            smile
            The head of the US Northern Command, General Terrence O'Shaughnessy, issued a warning that Moscow is deploying for the first time non-nuclear missiles capable of hitting targets deep in the United States.

            https://inosmi.ru/military/20190301/244672004.html
            1. +2
              27 May 2019 17: 42
              And what can non-nuclear missiles do with targets deep in the United States? Ditch and scare civilians? How many tons of explosives need to be delivered there to affect the US defense or economic potential? The Germans successfully fired at the British FAU-1 and FAU-2. What did it give them?
          2. 0
            27 May 2019 16: 37
            Leader of the redskins Do you read Western media daily? For some reason I doubt it very much. negative
          3. 0
            27 May 2019 20: 41
            Naturally, Western media talk about cartoons more often, in the best traditions of Svidomo. But directly the military and officials from the Accounts Chamber just declare the opposite.
      2. +4
        27 May 2019 13: 45
        How time will tell? Will the second episode of animation be shown? Or some installations with some ammunition and mysteriously whisper that the rest is all very secret? Remember the "daddy of all bombs" story? They showed her, told about her, scared her, but not a single shot with the use at least in tests!

        tomorrow the MO will conduct an excursion to Krasmash, with the solemn presentation of all the drawings of the product. After all, they are very depressed by your disbelief in the existence of the "Vanguard". With this attitude, you probably still believe that the Earth is flat and rests on three whales. And the fact that it is round is the intrigues of egg-headed scientists for cutting grants for science.
        1. -3
          27 May 2019 18: 01
          Has anyone thought, “What is Vanguard in general?” This is just an old Chelomey UR-100 rocket, which in Soviet times was considered not very successful, with a new warhead, which (warhead) has equal advantages and disadvantages. acceptance into service - it is necessary to change the "Satan", it was designed by the Yangel Design Bureau, made a plant in Dnepropetrovsk, for political reasons, even to restore combat effectiveness is a problem. , there the mines, most likely, need to be redone. How to justify the waste of millions of people's money? That's right: "Oh ... King of all kings! "Wunderwaffe!" Everybody knows when Wunderwaffe was created in the 3rd Reich and how it ended. In the end, we get a sharp decrease in the number of warheads and the throw weight on ICBMs. The situation becomes similar to the situation with submarines in the Navy: there are two boats per fleet, there is no one to provide SSBN withdrawal.
          1. +1
            27 May 2019 20: 46
            Why are you getting into a topic that you don’t know anything about? To replace the Voivode, which you called Satan in the American manner, Sarmat is being developed. The avant-garde is, first and foremost, the planning block and the technologies hidden in it. A rocket, as a delivery vehicle, no longer matters whether it is old or new. It was never planned as a replacement for the Governor. This is a separate branch, special forces among the Strategic Missile Forces, if you like, which should have come from the Rubezh complex, which in turn is the development of the Yars complex.
            1. -2
              28 May 2019 16: 45
              Let’s not insult others if you yourself don’t know anything. The points:
              1. Development of the "Rubezh" complex was OFFICIALLY stopped back in 2018.
              2. The Sarmat complex is being developed and will be put into service (judging by the real results of development) somewhere simultaneously with the base on the Moon, which Mr. Rogozin has been building for a long time. Do not believe me, look how much the Bulava has been designed and tested.
              3. "Yars" was NEVER considered as the carrier of "Vanguard" (and thank God!).
              4. The only carrier of the "Vanguard" currently can be ONLY the UR-100. However, replacing the MIRV with 6 BBs with one Avangard is at least a controversial decision. Instead of 6 targets, you can now hit one.
              5. In terms of hidden technologies, Avangard is hopelessly outdated in front of Rusnano with Chubais at the head. That's where the hidden technology is!
              1. +1
                28 May 2019 17: 31
                1. I know. Therefore, I wrote that I "had to".
                2. I do not believe and what does the Mace have to do with this? In your opinion, should Sarmat have as much time to develop with such problems as the R-30? No, it should not. Then why these pseudo-forecasts? The missile is already at the final stage of development and it is planned to be adopted by 2020 + -. There is no reason to doubt it.
                3. In fact, I have never argued anywhere that Yars was seen as a carrier of the Vanguard. What did you read at all?
                4. Nothing new to me
                5. Verbiage

                Total complete zilch and mania that supposedly offended you.
                1. 0
                  28 May 2019 18: 44
                  2. Believe it or not, it does not affect the timing. "Bulava" was officially "launched into series" in 2008, and was adopted only in 2018. Why do you think that it will be better with the "Sarmat"? There is at least one weapon complex that was adopted without "shifting the timing to the right," as it has become fashionable to say now? We have "Armata" (and this is not an ICBM, in a simpler way) since 2015 at parades and "almost in series." Are there many of them in the troops?
                  3. Also "Rubezh" was never even thought of as the development of "Yars".
                  4. I did not try to say something new, I ask you to justify the correctness of replacing 6 BB with 1.
                  5. Maybe verbiage, in contrast to the millions of people's money, "drunk" in the "Poseidons", "Vanguards", "Rosnano" and other wunderwaffe and miracles. And for high-tech medical operations for children, money is collected by various funds, the state allocates only 10 billion rubles. in year. One day of war in Syria is more expensive.
                  1. 0
                    29 May 2019 09: 44
                    Believe, do not believe, it does not affect the timing.
                    The same applies to your statements. All that you say about the timing is only your speculation, which does not affect the execution. Moreover, you do not know when and how the development of this complex began, how many times and where it was shifted. In practice, most promises on the topic of strategic weapons, including with Vanguard, go according to plan. And by the way, the distribution of the budget showed very well what the priorities are. This is a word about Armata, which is neither to the village nor to the city.
                    3. You are mistaken. Frontier is a direct continuation and development of Yars from the same developer and manufacturer. It was created on its basis.
                    4. This is not for me, but for the MO. In my subjective opinion, quality dominates quantity.
                    5. Are you not ashamed to roll up the topic to discuss folk money that could go to children and to operations?
                    1. 0
                      29 May 2019 17: 06
                      1. My "conjectures" about the timing are confirmed by real facts. I seem to write in Russian - not a single weapon complex, not a single ship, no matter how big or small (even surface or underwater) WAS NOT ACCEPTED IN THE PROMISED TIME. From there, and this is now the fashionable expression "with a shift of time to the right." If there are SPECIFIC FACTS against - bring.
                      3. "Frontier" DIRECT continuation and development of "Yars" - this is already from a cycle of information received from a "very reliable source" called news. A simple example: even the federal channels reported (journalists were disaccustomed to check information a long time ago, they were "just butts") that lightning hit the "superjet", it lost COMMUNICATION and automatic control, which was reported to the dispatcher of the departure airport. So he lost contact or reported to the dispatcher? Is this about how he is, after all, a grandfather or grandmother? As for the Rubezh complex, it has several times less in common with the Yars than in common between the Tu-22 and Tu-22M. Compare the declared weight data of the launcher with the missile and the firing range. You cannot achieve such results by simply cutting off one stage from Yars. The very idea to create "Rubezh" was correct, 120 tons of "fool" with "Yars" will go in few places, the very meaning of a mobile launcher is lost. But "Vova the Fabulous" was a more profitable scarecrow than a real combat vehicle.
                      4. So I write that I do not see the dominance of quality over quantity. The real 6 BB UR-100 are also practically non-intercepted, like the Avangard, and in relation to the existing units this fact has been confirmed by numerous launches and exercises. We change 6 to one the same, only more expensive and not tested. This is no longer for me, this is for anecdotes about Jews.
                      5. I do not "roll" the topic, I just ask you to understand that money "out of nowhere" does not come. Before allowing the "big guys" to spend them, you need to remember that they (the money) are ours.
                      1. 0
                        29 May 2019 18: 42
                        Guys do not worry, no one is going to put the "Vanguard" on "Yars" or "Rubezh", it simply will not fit there either in size or in weight.
    2. -4
      27 May 2019 07: 28
      So it's time to plow!
    3. -1
      27 May 2019 08: 12
      And these unbelievers as they imagine it that can be, and what can not be? Or do they think that the Vanguard stands like a gopher in the steppe? They will ride nearby and will not see a damn thing. This is not their mind.
      1. 0
        27 May 2019 13: 05
        And you ask them, they are just a little higher in the discussion in chorus pulling their "everything is gone."
    4. +4
      27 May 2019 12: 06
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      there are still unbelievers

      to be honest, I still don't understand how a "gliding apparatus"
      can be controlled on max 27 in the atmosphere or even in the stratosphere
      there it will happen that there is no small reason to suspect, to put it mildly, failures in communication and orientation.
      1. -2
        27 May 2019 13: 04
        ANN has not been canceled by anyone; there are no navigation problems and cannot be there. communication there is only needed if for correction - that is, let's say you need to get into a moving object - an aircraft carrier, for example. According to the target designation of the satellite on the BB when separating from the LV, that is, at the final section of the trajectory, a data packet for course correction comes — that is, target characteristics, speed, motion vector, etc. The calculation of the meeting point is either on board the BB or on the satellite, preferably on board the BB. And all further the BB flies to the meeting point - the big goal as an aircraft carrier will not have time to make any maneuvers - a very limited time is a few minutes at such a dive speed
        1. +2
          27 May 2019 18: 15
          What specific satellite and what control center can send to a ballistic missile at ANY or at ANY point of its trajectory? INS on ICBMs and SLBMs - the main method of targeting + astro correction. Neither one nor the other is suitable for the "maneuvering unit". For the satellite to be able to "send" any missile (even a CD, even an ICBM) to an aircraft carrier, this satellite must "see" the aircraft carrier. Such satellites existed in the USSR, equipped with radar and, as a power unit, a small-sized nuclear reactor. Now even the Americans do not have such satellites. Two physics-dictated factors converge:
          1. ICBMs (and SLBMs), shortly after launch, due to the development of a certain speed, CANNOT accept TS.
          2. At present, there are no satellites that could detect even large MANEUVERING targets and transmit TsU to ground-based weapons.
          1. -2
            27 May 2019 18: 53
            funny you) there are no satellites well well no there isn’t and there will not be another 100 years)))
      2. +3
        27 May 2019 14: 37
        "can be driven at Mach 27 in the atmosphere or even in the stratosphere" ////
        ------
        And he will not be controlled. The speed will slow down to 5-7 MAX, otherwise this glider will inevitably burn. And it is corrected by inertial at several points. With some luck, you can get to a major city.
        1. -2
          27 May 2019 20: 48
          and the GDP stated publicly that the problem of controllability of such devices in such conditions has been resolved. Whom to believe, him or you, despite the fact that you have previously called this complex a bluff at all?
          1. +1
            27 May 2019 21: 25
            When conversations about Vanguard began, it was assumed that
            Planning in the atmosphere apparatus with ramjet engine.
            Then it turned out that Russia and China were just creating
            a new type of nuclear warhead capable of gliding in "near-space": at altitudes
            50-100 km. There, the device does not overheat very much, and, gradually slowing down,
            descends into the atmosphere. In the upper atmosphere he using
            flat triangular belly ("underwing", like Buran or Shuttle), fits
            to the goal is already supersonic. And corrected by inertial, dives
            cool down on target. Any inaccuracy - and it burns out in the atmosphere.
            (Ordinary warheads go stone down almost vertically slowly rotating -
            heating is uniform).
            The project is very doubtful in comparison with traditional conical warheads.
            Success (not burn out) and accuracy (not stray) is much more difficult to achieve.
            1. 0
              28 May 2019 05: 48
              Ordinary warheads go stone down almost vertically slowly rotating -
              heating is uniform


              And what is there heating on only one side?

              Any inaccuracy - and it burns out in the atmosphere.


              Descent vehicles with people do not burn even when they descend along a "ballistic" trajectory and the Vanguard burns down. Oh well.
              1. 0
                28 May 2019 17: 42
                The problem of heating for the "avant-garde" is much more serious than for the descent vehicles, precisely because it is "gliding", accordingly, it heats up more slowly than the descent vehicle (or BB ICBM), but many times longer. It is unlikely that he himself will cease to exist as an aircraft, but the work of the guidance system is in question.
                1. 0
                  28 May 2019 20: 49
                  If it slows down, then the heating is less. If the car brakes sharply, then the pads and discs will heat up much more than if smoothly. By the way, "smoothly" is obviously much longer than "sharp".
                  This option is also not counted. Think further.
                  1. 0
                    29 May 2019 17: 14
                    I explain at the level of high school physics. The main thing is not heating, as such, the main thing is the ability of the aircraft to withstand this heating or the ability of the aircraft cooling system to create normal conditions for the skin and internal complexes (roughly "heat removal"). This is where the question of the duration of exposure arises. There are many supersonic aircraft, but only a few (MiG-25, MiG-31, SR-71) can withstand a LONG flight of 2 m. Comparison with a car is also relevant here, like comparing a car with a scooter: on a scooter you can brake with your heel. By your logic, you can also slow down the car with the heel wrapped in a sneaker. The main thing is to do it smoothly. Think further.
                    1. 0
                      30 May 2019 03: 21
                      The difference in mass between the scooter and the machine is several orders of magnitude. And the descent vehicle and the Vanguard warheads are approximately equal. So go by.
                      The ability to withstand heat is no doubt important. That is why the answer to the question on which side the warhead is heated more and why it remains relevant to rotate.
                      Well, of course, it remains unclear until the end of which fright if you slow down smoothly, the heating is stronger.
  2. +6
    27 May 2019 08: 01
    In the future, such weapons may appear in other compounds from the Strategic Missile Forces.

    It is expected that the Avangard missile systems will be an important addition to existing ICBMs with a "classic" combat load

    In the combat composition of the Strategic Missile Forces, three OS divisions remained. One is more than half armed with "Topols" of various modifications, i.e. carriers carrying the minimum number of warheads.
    OK, a decision has been made to replace the R-36M carrying up to 10 BB with the UR-100N UTTH, carrying 1 Vanguard in one division. "Sarmat", as they say, will be able to carry them up to four - it will be thrust into Uzhur for sure.
    Purely my personal question: is it necessary to reduce the number of BBs on one carrier? Taking into account the Tatishchen "pencils"?
  3. -2
    27 May 2019 09: 44
    The overall and weight characteristics of the Avangard are coordinated only with the UR-100N UTTKh launch vehicle. Therefore, gliding warheads will not be installed on other types of ICBMs, as a result, the number of PBBs will be limited by the number of UR-100N UTTH.

    PBBs are designed to deliver megaton-class thermonuclear charges to any point on the globe, unlike other types of combat equipment of ICBMs and SLBMs, whose range ranges from 10000 to 13000 km with separable warheads of individual guidance with a capacity of several hundred kilotons.
  4. 0
    27 May 2019 10: 46
    Last week, I read the arguments of the week in an interview with Yuri Semyonovich Solomon, the designer of military missiles. He answered the question about Vanguard that he didn’t know anything when he would appear and we’ll talk. I think there will be ordinary warheads instead of Vanguard, how much can this missile carry instead one, but one on paper. That's cheap and cheerful.
    1. mva
      -1
      27 May 2019 15: 07
      The avant-garde is the usual warhead, only the aerodynamic rudders were screwed to it. This was what Von Braun did back in World War II, but he didn’t succeed then, the wheels ruined by a stream of air.
      Quote: alexey1213
      The avant-garde is the usual warhead, only the aerodynamic rudders were screwed to it. This was what Von Braun did back in World War II, but he didn’t succeed then, the wheels ruined by a stream of air.

      The avant-garde is the usual warhead, only the aerodynamic rudders were screwed to it. This was what Von Braun did back in World War II, but he didn’t succeed then, the wheels ruined by a stream of air.
      1. 0
        28 May 2019 22: 16
        About von Braun's "crumpled steering wheels" - great!
  5. +3
    27 May 2019 13: 07
    Quote: Yarhann
    at such a dive speed

    some say - plans, others - dives
    these are completely different things.
  6. 0
    27 May 2019 13: 10
    Quote: Operator
    Separate warheads of individual guidance with a capacity of several hundred kilotons

    you would be a little more accurate, otherwise the guidance "with a capacity of several kilotons" is a little scary
    1. +1
      27 May 2019 13: 52
      and that guidance "with a capacity of several kilotons" is a little scary

      missing comma. Do not be afraid, as intuitively meaningful
  7. +3
    27 May 2019 17: 11
    Frankly speaking, "got" all these "thoughts". about how and what will behave.
    Comrades, let's not repeat the nonsense that is written in our media. Here, in particular, dear Cyril repeats the stupidity that is circulated by our media at all levels.

    With the help of an ICBM, which acts as a carrier, the Vanguard takes off and accelerates to hypersonic speed.

    The speed, very close to the first space speed, can of course be called hypersonic, but whether it will be correct. At the start of an ICBM, incl. and UR-100N UTTKh (15A35), or rather its modification 15A71 at the end of the active section of the trajectory, at the beginning of the retraction of warheads or the separation of the "monoblock", in particular the "Vanguard", the speed of the order of 7,5-7,7 km / s has already been reached, that is, almost the first space. Talking about hypersonic flight speed in space is somehow not comme il faut. Although the media only talk about this, juggling Mach numbers.

    Then the block independently carries out a planning flight to the target. .

    Planning a flight in airless space? Very fresh and original. In fact, he, like ordinary warheads at this stage, makes a classic ballistic flight ....

    The highest flight speed and the ability to maneuver along the course and altitude provide certain advantages over existing types of warheads. .

    There are advantages. But at what stage? At the stage of entering the atmosphere? In the upper atmosphere? The speed is almost cosmic, orientation along the course and altitude is possible with sufficiently powerful engines. Taking into account the dimensional limitations, the engines are maneuverable there, hardly with a very high thrust. But at this speed, even a side push of 5-10 kilograms can change the original trajectory (as for the course). Height? Such changes are unlikely to be significant. "Narok" and then "takeoff" require the expenditure of kinetic energy, which will certainly affect the speed (it will change and by no means upward) and, therefore, at the range. Such maneuvers are very well shown by the trajectory of the so-called. antipode Zenger bomber

    "Dive" has a length of a couple of thousand kilometers, and the maximum of the first and second dives differ by half. That is, no energetic "evolutions" capable of multiplying the enemy's entire missile defense system by zero should be expected. An increase in the consumption of antimissiles - yes, for sure, but not tenfold

    It is known about the possibility of obtaining intercontinental flight range. The combat load has not yet been specified.

    Well, if launched with ICBMs, then this a priori leads to intercontinental range. Moreover, the mass characteristics of the Aangard are certainly less than the total weight of the 6 warheads carried by the 15A35

    Hypersonic flight speed and maneuvering are the main means of breaking through the enemy's air defense and missile defense.

    Rather, the ability to maneuver will give additional chances of breaking through the enemy's missile defense system. All warheads of intercontinental missiles have "hypersonic" flight speed

    High speed takes such an aircraft beyond the capabilities of existing and promising air defense systems

    But this, to be honest, is written on the water with a pitchfork. The speed of the vehicle decreases with its entry into the dense layers of the atmosphere, up to supersonic speeds. Of course, not every missile defense system is capable of intercepting such a "vdagon" target, but such tasks have never been assigned to the missile defense system. If they are standing, then the missile defense system deployment area has been chosen incorrectly. In addition, our foe has missile defense systems with a height reach of 2-2,5 thousand kilometers and an interception range of up to 5000 km. Interception by such systems will be carried out "at distant approaches" to their own territory
    Some of the missile defense systems that are not strategic, but nevertheless have an altitude reach of up to 1500 km and a range of up to 2500 km, are the closest interception line. Nobody claims that a 100% interception of the same Vanguards will be carried out, but some of them will be shot down. There is no "impenetrable missile defense" or "indestructible warheads." Everything will depend on the outfit of both warheads and missile defense systems.

    and maneuvering makes it impossible to effectively use existing anti-ballistic missiles designed to combat ICBMs.

    Do not think that maneuvering will be as vigorous as in aircraft that evade air-to-air missiles by vigorous maneuvering. At high speeds, the block will simply crumble from overloads. How effective modern types of interceptor missiles will be - only life will show ...
  8. +3
    27 May 2019 17: 11
    Quote: yehat
    Quote: The same Lech
    there are still unbelievers

    to be honest, I still don't understand how a "gliding apparatus"
    can be controlled on max 27 in the atmosphere or even in the stratosphere
    there it will happen that there is no small reason to suspect, to put it mildly, failures in communication and orientation.

    And it is not controlled at a speed of 27M in the atmosphere. This "blooper" is regularly replicated. A speed of 27M was achieved, although to be honest, it is somewhat presumptuous to talk about the speed of sound in airless space. At certain altitudes, the speed of sound is different. The tabular value of the speed of sound at an altitude of 86 km is known - it is equal to 274,1 m / s or 7,4 km / s. Let the maximum speed obtained by "Avangard" and replicated as 27M be the speed0 of 7,7 km / s, that is, close to the first space speed. This is in space, at heights of several hundred kilometers. When entering the atmosphere, the body will begin to slow down. And at altitudes of 11-20 km at a speed of 10M, the body surface temperature will be higher than the temperature of the Sun. Therefore, there is no question of any speeds of 27M in the atmosphere. And in dense layers we can talk about speeds of 5M and less ...

    Quote: Yarhann
    ANN has not been canceled by anyone; there are no navigation problems and cannot be there. communication there is only needed if for correction - that is, let's say you need to get into a moving object - an aircraft carrier, for example. According to the target designation of the satellite on the BB when separating from the LV, that is, at the final section of the trajectory, a data packet for course correction comes — that is, target characteristics, speed, motion vector, etc. The calculation of the meeting point is either on board the BB or on the satellite, preferably on board the BB. And all further the BB flies to the meeting point - the big goal as an aircraft carrier will not have time to make any maneuvers - a very limited time is a few minutes at such a dive speed


    Nobody is going to hit a moving aircraft carrier, these are not tasks for the "Vanguard" and the ICBM in general
    In order for the satellite to transmit such accurate target designation, it is necessary that there be a huge number. There will be no calculations on board the satellite, as well as on board the BB. In order for the BB to be adjusted to defeat the same aircraft carrier, it is necessary to have a radar homing head on board. An aircraft carrier traveling at a speed of 30 knots will take at least 30 kilometers for the half hour that the Avangard will fly to it. And the spotter satellite will also leave. So this is fantastic ...

    Quote: Moore
    In the combat composition of the Strategic Missile Forces, three OS divisions remained. One is more than half armed with "Topols" of various modifications, i.e. carriers carrying the minimum number of warheads.
    OK, a decision has been made to replace the R-36M carrying up to 10 BB with the UR-100N UTTH, carrying 1 Vanguard in one division. "Sarmat", as they say, will be able to carry them up to four - it will be thrust into Uzhur for sure.
    Purely my personal question: is it necessary to reduce the number of BBs on one carrier? Taking into account the Tatishchen "pencils"?

    4 divisions with OS. One is almost "completely" rearmed on the Topol-M. The second is re-equipped with Yars, and they are already equipped with MIRVs, and in two - heavy missiles of the Voevoda type
    And we are not talking about replacing the R-36M2 with a "weaving", carrying 1 "Vanguard". "Voevods" will be replaced by "Sarmatians", and the placement of "hundredths" in the positional area of ​​the 13th division IMHO is a temporary measure until the moment when the "Sarmat" will go into series and will be deployed, And since the experimental silos were in the PR of this division probably this was the starting point in making the decision to deploy these two Avangard regiments exactly there
    1. -1
      27 May 2019 18: 14
      you don’t have to have anything on board any radars if you are not going to hit the ship exactly. only the time it takes to receive data on finding the AUG is important and that’s all, it’s enough to get this information at the time of separation of the combat unit. Further, the on-board computer will determine the place of meeting and that’s all - although the AUGs are walking in the Christmas tree - but in this context of a limited time interval, it will go in a straight line. And a small mistake that will give the use of ANN is compensated by the power of the thermonuclear charge.
      Target designation and tracking of AOG is carried out, as in the USSR, by satellites, RTR and PL vessels - there is nothing new. The same complexes like the Dagger, promising zircon and TP use the same reconnaissance equipment for the initial target designation, and already at the final destination of the GOS - but there is a very large flight time - that’s the whole need for the GOS, well, the usual and not the thermonuclear charge. It may of course be fantastic, but the Chinese are armed with similar weapons.
      1. 0
        28 May 2019 20: 21
        Clarification: the Chinese said they possess such weapons. In reality, no one used it. According to tests, there are also a number of questions. In particular, on target designations. Perhaps only on their shores and can apply.
  9. +2
    27 May 2019 19: 15
    Quote: Yarhann
    you don’t have to have anything on board any radars if you are not going to hit the ship exactly. only the time it takes to receive data on finding the AUG is important and that’s all, it’s enough to get this information at the time of separation of the combat unit. Further, the on-board computer will determine the place of meeting and that’s all - although the AUGs are walking in the Christmas tree - but in this context of a limited time interval, it will go in a straight line.

    What are you going to fall into? You said about the aircraft carrier. . You receive this information at the time of separation of the combat unit, that is, approximately 320-360 seconds after the launch of the ICBM (5-6 minutes). Even if you somehow determine the meeting place (suppose such a fantastic version), then the unit until you get into the goal is still to fly for 20-25 minutes. Where will the aircraft carrier go during this time? At a distance of 19-23 km. Where? Right, left, right. And if the speed drops to 15 knots? So hitting a carrier with a strategist is stupid. It’s the same as shooting sparrows from a cannon. Perhaps and hurt the explosion of any of them

    Quote: Yarhann
    And a small mistake that will give the use of ANN is compensated by the power of the thermonuclear charge

    Yeah. We take a nuclear weapon reference book and look. At 2 megatons, the zone of weak destruction during an air explosion is 17,6 kilometers. An open-standing person will receive a mild lesion, characterized by mild concussion, temporary hearing loss, bruises and dislocations. At a distance of 5,5-9,4 km. Here you have a combat unit flopping at a distance of 19 to 23 km from the aircraft carrier. Yes, on it, and the paint does not even burn, not to mention anything else

    Quote: Yarhann
    Target designation and tracking of AOG is carried out, as in the USSR, by satellites, RTR and PL vessels - there is nothing new

    Nothing new, except for the fact that RTR satellites can be counted on the fingers of one or two hands. RTR vessels were either decommissioned a long time ago or if they remained in the amount of several pieces. PL - oh, we don’t have enough of them to accompany the strategists at the exit, and you send them somewhere. I'm afraid that if something happens they will not reach the place of deployment of the aircraft carriers. There are several times more hunters for them than themselves

    Quote: Yarhann
    The same complexes like the Dagger, perspective zircon and TP use the same reconnaissance equipment for the initial target designation, and already at the final destination of the GOS - but there is a very large flight time - that’s the whole need for the GOS

    In order for the Dagger to provide target designation, it is necessary that either an AWACS aircraft or, in extreme cases, some kind of boat hang out in the AUG area. What is real in peacetime, in war - these are the goals that will be hit first. The same is with! Zircon. "In fact, for firing at a distance of more than 400-500 km, we do not have target designation sources for them. And the flight time of the" Zircon ", that of the" Dagger "will be 2 times less than flight time "Vanguard".

    Quote: Yarhann
    It may of course be fantastic, but the Chinese are armed with similar weapons.

    Are you talking about their ballistic anti-ship missile with a range of 2500 km? So the Chinese themselves a couple of years ago disavowed the saying that this missile is capable of hitting a ship on the go. In ports - yes, but not on the go. The Chinese have so far failed to create a radar with a high degree of resolution

    Quote: samaravega
    Has anyone thought, “What is Vanguard in general?” This is just an old Chelomey UR-100 rocket, which in Soviet times was considered not very successful

    This is not an old UR-100 chelomey rocket (aka 8K84, aka 15A20). This is Chelomey's rocket of the 80s 15A30 and 15A35, approximately the same time as the Yangelevskaya R-36M, known as "Satan"

    Quote: samaravega
    with a new warhead, in which (warhead) the advantages and disadvantages are equally divided.

    Sound the same advantages and disadvantages, which are equally divided

    Quote: samaravega
    The only reason for adopting it is that it is necessary to change the "Satan", it was designed by the Yangel Design Bureau, made a plant in Dnepropetrovsk, for political reasons, even restoring combat capability is a problem. ...

    The only reason is not that the manufacturer of Voevoda remained in Ukraine, but that the Sarmat is not yet hot. And the introduction of 2 regiments 15A71 with Avangard is a temporary and mostly forced measure ... Even more, it is a political measure, not a technical one.

    Quote: samaravega
    this is an expensive replacement of heavy ICBMs with medium ones; mines there most likely need to be redone.

    Nobody is going to change heavy to medium ones. It is planned to deploy 2 regiments in the PR of the 13th division in the amount of 12 units. The mines, of course, will have to be redone, but even the replacement of the same R-36M UTTKh with the R-36M2 Voevoda required the reconstruction of the mines. The pleasure is expensive, but the replacement of the "Voevoda" with the "Sarmat" will require reconstruction of the silo

    Quote: samaravega
    The bottom line is a sharp decrease in the number of warheads and cast weight on ICBMs.

    Can you imagine the changes in a sharp decrease in the number of warheads? Abandoned weight in this case is secondary. 12 rockets won't do the weather
    1. 0
      28 May 2019 18: 26
      1. 15A35 and 15A30, in contrast to the R-36M2, is an attempt to "pull up" an obviously unsuccessful missile to meet the requirements of the "customer". But they are, to put it mildly, not new with very limited potential for modernization.
      2. Disadvantages of the "Vanguard": a) it is not clear why it is fundamentally better than conventional ICBMs, respectively, around what all this fuss and million-dollar costs are, b) its accuracy raises very serious doubts. How will it be controlled? INS is not suitable due to its high speed, ARGSN, IKGSN, TVGSN will not be operational at such a speed, c) due to ionization at high speed, it will be easily detected by the enemy's radar, at least for the purpose of warning and retaliatory strike, d) instead of 6 BB, which and so hardly intercepted, 1 "Vanguard" is put, as they said in the cartoon (not from "Vova the Fabulous", from "Soyuzmultfilm") "two bananas are not a bunch of fruits." Personally, I do not see any positive qualities of the "avant-garde" at all, I wrote that I already have experience, no matter what the "patriots" would peck at.
      3. Do not confuse cause and effect. Attempts to create "Sarmat" are just a consequence, and the reason is the departure of "Yuzhmash". Ukraine, even under Yanukovych, COULD NOT help Russia with ICBMs. Among the reasons for the beginning of the current massacre in the Donbass, the topic of "return" of the most important high-tech enterprises of Dnepropetrovsk, Lugansk and Kharkov was far from the last place. I do not know who is going to what, the command of the Strategic Missile Forces probably only reports to you about this, but, given the real time frame for the creation of the Bulava, the Sarmat project is clearly leaving for 2024. So either put the UR-100, making them "supermodern" through "Vanguard", or to close the mines. So a decrease in the number of BB, in my opinion, is simply inevitable.
      4. Regarding the firing of ICBMs at aircraft carriers, I gave you a plus, I fully agree, both in the coverage of the theory of this problem and the "Chinese practice".
      1. 0
        28 May 2019 20: 30
        And for what purpose is it necessary to destroy an aircraft carrier if it is several thousand miles from us? What threat does he pose that he needs to spend on ICBMs? Spending resources on his (aircraft carrier) detection? The goal of ICBMs, as far as I know, is the destruction of enemy infrastructure. Vanguard is necessary exclusively for breaking through a promising missile defense.
  10. +3
    28 May 2019 12: 53
    Quote: malyvalv
    Descent vehicles with people do not burn even when they descend along a "ballistic" trajectory and the Vanguard burns down. Oh well.

    Valery! The shape of the descent vehicle ("headlight") on our alliances is designed in such a way that very intense braking occurs. The bottom of the descent vehicle has a much more powerful thermal protection than its side walls. Here, in connection with Avangard, the aerodynamic shape of the latter is not even a cone, as in conventional warheads. This is essentially a glider, to which there is no such thermal protection as the descent vehicles of manned spacecraft. And if he does not enter along the optimal trajectory, but really starts or dives too steeply, without changing the speed, it will burn out and no thermal protection will help him with this. Its entry corridor is much narrower than that of the SA ships.

    Quote: Voyager
    and the GDP stated publicly that the problem of controllability of such devices in such conditions has been resolved. Whom to believe, him or you, despite the fact that you have previously called this complex a bluff at all?

    Sorry, Andrei, but GDP first of all makes political statements, the main task of which is, roughly speaking, to make the enemy fearful. His statements about the technical side of the matter sometimes lame on both legs. When, for example, he says that the same "Vanguard" will go in the dense layers of the atmosphere at a speed of 20M and no one will intercept it, such statements should be approached very critically. Yes, at a speed of 20M in the lower atmosphere, it is almost impossible to intercept something. This is on the one hand. But on the other hand, even descent at half the speed will cause the device to warm up to temperatures higher than in the sun. Do we have materials that are capable of keeping temperatures above 6000 degrees? Therefore, it is worth "filtering" what he says. More precisely, what they wrote to him.
  11. +2
    28 May 2019 20: 14
    Quote: samaravega
    There is at least one weapon complex that was adopted without "shifting the timing to the right"

    There is. "Topol-MR". With "Sarmat" it will be better, if only due to the fact that, in cooperation with the SRC, work on the complex is being carried out at NPOmash, which has specialized in "land" missiles all its life.

    Quote: samaravega

    3. Likewise, "Rubezh" was never even thought of as the development of "Yars" ..

    Here I absolutely agree with you. This is, let's say, a parallel development and, according to open sources, based on a completely different warhead disengagement system (without a "bus")

    Quote: samaravega

    4. I did not try to say something new, I ask you to justify the correct replacement of 6 BB by 1 ..

    The complex with the 15A35 missile is actually removed, if not already withdrawn from service. At least last year, missiles of this complex in data exchanges were designated as not deployed... Even taking into account the fact that "dry" missiles are used, the service life of this complex received in 2002 from Ukraine is approaching critical. Moreover, the design support of the control system of the complex is not carried out due to the severance of ties with Ukraine. Initially, the complex was used exclusively as a test facility. This also applies to work on project 4202, and on the previously existing project 102.
    Since the "Sarmat" has not yet passed the tests of the Ministry of Defense, most likely it was decided to deploy 2 regiments on 15A35 products. From a technical point of view, this may be wrong, although if we take into account that the UR-100N UTTH is no longer taken into account in the exchange, and, accordingly, its warheads are not counted in total quantities, then I do not see much difference in replacement. ... In this case, the "bird in the hands", that is, the 12 Vanguard blocks, is better than the missing "pie in the sky", that is, the UR-100 N UTTKh missiles removed from the DB with all their warheads

    Quote: samaravega
    1. 15A35 and 15A30, in contrast to the R-36M2, is an attempt to "pull up" an obviously unsuccessful missile to meet the requirements of the "customer". But they are, to put it mildly, not new with very limited potential for modernization.

    The competition for the creation of light and heavy missiles, held at one time, revealed two winners. In heavyweight competition "Yuzhmash" won, bypassing Chelomey's firm, Chelomey won in lightweight competition. True, contrary to this scenario, a strong-willed decision in addition to the UR-100N (15A30), it was decided to build the Yuzhmashev MR-UR-100. The rocket faded very quickly. Being in service for a very short time. It was there that the people's money was wasted, when, in addition to 360 Chelomeevsky, another 300 Yangelevsky were built, which did not correspond to TTT at all. Neither the launch weight nor the cast weight, nor the number of warheads. Yes, initially the 15A30 missiles had "childhood illnesses", which were eventually eliminated and the 15A35 was in service until recently. If you think that this is not a successful rocket - this is your right. Personally, I don't think so. But no one was going to and is not going to pull up the capabilities of the light carrier to the capabilities of the heavy one.
    Her modernization potential was no worse than the rest, given the stricter framework in relation to the cast weight. At least 15A30 went 15A35 with its possible improvements (complex 15A35P).

    Quote: samaravega

    2. Disadvantages of the "Vanguard": a) it is not clear why it is fundamentally better than conventional ICBMs, respectively, around what all this fuss and million-dollar costs are, b) its accuracy raises very serious doubts. How will it be controlled? INS is not suitable due to its high speed, ARGSN, IKGSN, TVGSN will not be operational at such a speed, c) due to ionization at high speed, it will be easily detected by the enemy's radar, at least for the purpose of warning and retaliatory strike, d) instead of 6 BB, which and so hardly intercepted, 1 "Vanguard" is put, as they said in the cartoon (not from "Vova the Fabulous", from "Soyuzmultfilm") "two bananas are not a bunch of fruits." Personally, I do not see any positive qualities of the "avant-garde" at all, I wrote that I already have experience, no matter what the "patriots" would peck at.
    .

    Well, in principle, it differs from conventional BB in that, unlike uncontrolled warheads (conventional), it is controlled. Its development went on for several decades, starting from the Albatross complex, where the winged unit was supposed to be, to the UBB 15F178 for the R-36M2 ICBMs, then to the 102 (15Yu70) product and finally to the project 4202, which received its own name Avangard.

    Like a winged block? So far, we can only talk about theoretical accuracy, because so far the conversation is about nothing. We do not know which homing system can be (and whether it is at all) on the "Vanguard", but purely theoretically, the accuracy should be higher. In particular, the warheads on the Voevoda had a CEP of the order of 200-500 m, but the 15F178 controlled unit was supposed to have a CEP in the 80-meter region. Agree - the accuracy is much higher
    What will be controlled? Not yet known. ANN is probably one of the guidance subsystems. Before entering the atmosphere, the INS will most likely be used, but then - HZ. Discussions of this now are discussions of a "spherical horse in a vacuum". Whether the above subsystems will be there and how efficient they will be in the process of descent and movement in a plasma cocoon is just talk. The homing system will start working only from the moment when the speed drops (to supersonic) and the plasma formation process stops.
    All warheads are detected by missile defense radar, since they all enter the atmosphere with almost the first cosmic velocity and go in the plasma cloud to a certain speed and altitude. Yes, and a notification of a retaliatory strike will take place 20-25 minutes earlier, when the SPRN satellites detect the launch of missiles from the territory of Russia ..
    As for intercepting conventional warheads. They are intercepted, of course, when there will be a mass launch, they will intercept only a part, the rest will break through. Technically, interception is not an insoluble task. The question is always one. How many. How many blocks are there and how many missiles are there.
    The avant-garde, in principle, can somewhat intercept the interception, because it can be controlled. How much more complicated or easier to intercept a winged warhead - the question is still unanswered
  12. 0
    9 August 2019 20: 52
    What is known about the Vanguard? Were taken from storage. Successfully hit the target on trials. The speed is 27 strikes. Designed to overcome missile defense. It is not known at what height it separates from the carrier, the launch trajectory, at what height 27 swings, how many Vanguards on a hundred square meters. It can be assumed that the launch trajectory / direction of the launch vehicle may differ from the usual one - in the direction of the target. The height of the Vanguard's separation from the carrier can be lower than usual. the flight range is longer. Due to the ability to maneuver, it can bypass missile defense areas. Due to the unpredictability of the trajectory, it is not possible. intercepted by the existing missile defense system. It can be assumed that the Vanguard carries several detachable warheads "on the chosen route." It is not the Vanguard that is aimed at the target, but a specific combat unit on the descending segment of the Vanguard's trajectory. The block independently orients itself and hits the target. Something like this.

"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)

“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; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"