Railgun EMRG: a new stage of testing and a great future

The United States is currently working on several promising projects in the field of so-called. rail guns. One of these products, known as EMRG, recently passed the next test. Their results already make it possible to think about the rapid transfer of the weapon to a real carrier ship for the purpose of checking under conditions as close as possible to real ones.

Latest events

The Naval Research Administration of the United States Navy and a number of related enterprises spent the first months of this year preparing for the next test of advanced weapons. At one of the sites of the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), an EMRG prototype was deployed.

The product was transported from another landfill, where its design was previously tested. "Relocation" was associated with the need for a new phase of testing. In the near future it is planned to check the characteristics of the firing range. Due to the large estimated firing range, the prototype EMRG rail gun needs a range of appropriate sizes. As representatives of the Navy recently clarified, installing the unit with a gun on a new site was not an easy task and required considerable effort.

The trials started on May 15. The purpose of the first firing was to check the performance of the newly assembled unit. It was necessary to check its strength, to test the energy systems and the instrument itself. According to the original plans, four-shot trials should take three days. However, the absence of breakdowns and significant difficulties allowed to cope for two.

The EMRG cannon executed four shots. The installation generally performed well. Any corrections or improvements on the results of the test are not needed. Due to this, the prospective sample can continue testing according to the approved program. In the near future, he will have to confirm the calculated characteristics of range and accuracy - for which he was transferred to the current site.

Expected future

The EMRG rail cannon project is being developed in the interests of the US Navy and with an eye to the distant future. Based on this product or using the technologies used, it is planned to create a promising artillery system for surface combat ships.

However, the Navy does not yet specify when the rail cannon will be transferred from the ground stand to the trial vessel. The existence of such plans has been mentioned for the past few years, but they have not yet been implemented. Moreover, the fleet is in no hurry to even name the approximate dates for such work. For the time being we can only assume that carrying out the current tests for range and accuracy will in the future allow us to proceed to the next stages of the program.

Also, the question of the future carrier of EMRG remains open. Rail gun makes special demands on the power systems of the ship, which limits the range of their carriers. For some time it was mentioned that the rail gun for the US Navy will be mounted on destroyers of the type Zumwalt. These ships were originally designed taking into account the use of systems and weapons with special requirements for energy. The first carrier of EMRG could be the ship USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG-1002). However, the further construction of such destroyers is not planned, which raises some questions.

Involving ships or vessels of other types to be tested presents a known difficulty. Before mounting a rail gun, they may need to seriously modernize the design, as well as rebuild the power systems. Such works will noticeably affect both the duration of the program and its cost.

Desired benefits

The development of the EMRG tool is carried out with the aim of further development naval weapons and replacement of existing artillery systems. 155 mm naval guns are capable of attacking targets at ranges of tens of kilometers; rockets work at great distances. Promising rail cannons are seen as capable of firing farther than traditional weapons and cheaper to operate than missiles. However, to achieve these benefits, it still requires completion of a massive development and testing program.

According to current plans, in the distant future, some US Navy ships will have rail guns with ammunition from modern shells. A promising HVP (Hyper Velocity Projectile) ammunition is currently under development. When launched from an EMRG or similar instrument, it will be able to develop hypersonic speed, which ensures firing at a range of 100 miles. Modern guns of the traditional design have already been able to send HVP to 45-50 miles.

The EMRG cannon and the HVP projectile have already been tested together and confirmed the fundamental possibility of obtaining the desired characteristics. However, the further development of such a complex and its prospects in the context of the rearmament of the Navy are directly dependent on the ongoing work at the NSWC test site.

It is expected that after the completion of current programs, surface ships of compatible types will be able to get modern and highly efficient artillery armament based on new principles. With the help of conventional and hypersonic projectiles rail guns will be able to attack targets at distances of hundreds of kilometers and accurately hit them. Destruction will be provided by both the warhead of the projectile and its kinetic energy. In some cases, the ships will be able, as before, to use powder artillery or missiles.

Unsolved problems

The plans of the US Navy in relation to rail guns look very bold and may disturb the likely enemy. However, as long as they are far from complete implementation. The fleet project EMRG, despite recent successes, is still not ready to provide re-equipment of surface ships. In addition, there are difficulties of a different kind.

First of all, rearmament remains a matter of the future because of the need to continue work on the rail gun itself. Just a few weeks ago, it was deployed on a new site, which allows for tests with shooting to the maximum distance. In this case, information on the conduct of such shooting has not yet been received. At the moment, it is impossible to say with certainty how long they will last and how they will end.

The US Navy does not have to solve the simplest question of an experimental vessel to test EMRG at sea. Further similar problems will appear, but on a different scale. Mass introduction of rail guns is impossible without appropriate carriers. To do this, it will be necessary to carry out a rather complicated modernization of cash ships or to develop completely new projects, initially taking into account the special requirements for energy.

Finally, the EMRG project may become a victim of politicians. Programs for the creation of rail guns have been going on for many years, but no such sample has yet been brought to military service. Dear and long-term work without a visible practical result naturally becomes a reason for criticism. It is quite possible that in the near future calls for the abandonment of the EMRG program will re-sound due to its high cost and inefficiency.

Enviable optimism

Nevertheless, the project developers and associated structures of the US Navy remain optimistic and continue to work. Recently, they began a new phase of the program, the implementation of which will bring closer the moment of creating a full-fledged combat system for ships.

At this stage, the developers of the EMRG cannon can only boast of successful execution of firing to confirm the efficiency of the newly mounted installation. However, in the near future a new stage of test firing is expected, during which it is planned to reach the maximum performance. The US Navy looks to the future with optimism, although they understand the complexity of the upcoming work.

Comments

[Feofun]

They fill up cones, close old programs, open new ones, build new prototypes, modify old ones and go to the goal - a real weapon based on new physical principles. It remains only to see off with an envious look, sitting on the mound, husking seeds and talking about overseas budget cuts.

[lucul]

They fill up cones, close old programs, open new ones, build new prototypes, modify old ones

What the Americans just won’t do - if only they wouldn’t develop hypersonic missiles))).

[Blackmokona]

They began to develop and test hypersonic missiles before us, and are actively continuing

[lucul]

They began to develop and test hypersonic missiles before us, and are actively continuing

And which of them are in service? )))

[Feofun]

And what about us ?! Well, if you don't count the Iskander OTRB, which was transferred to the air carrier, which is the same "hypersonic" as Skybolt, Pershing-2 or R-27K from the 1960s / 1970s.

[lucul]

And what about us ?! Well, not counting the Iskander OTRB, which is the same "hypersonic" as Skybolt, Pershing-2 or R-27K from the 1960s / 1970s

Have you been in prison for the last two years?)) Google)))

[Feofun]

I'm afraid that Google will not help you if you take any nonsense out of it at face value.

[lucul]

I'm afraid that Google will not help you if you take any nonsense out of it at face value.

Well, the Internet can be divided into two time periods - before Odessa in 2014 and after.
After - everything became so miserable, in terms of search ....
So it’s worth it, the rest are undergoing state tests.
And the United States has only cartoons)))

[Feofun]

And so you have a crest of the brain ... That explains a lot. Only mentally unhealthy or bot can Odessa to talk about hypersound drag. After such your revelation, the conversation with you does not make sense - you are yet another Lakhtinsky ignoramus who carries absolutely ignorant and incoherent nonsense.

[lucul]

After such your revelation, the conversation with you does not make sense - you are yet another Lakhtinsky ignoramus who carries absolutely ignorant and incoherent nonsense

Aha-ahah, I actually write from Minsk)))
Haifa hello))))

[TARSUS]

I am ashamed that such an ignoramus writes from my city ...

[Ka-52]

FeoFUN (Fedor)
I'm afraid that Google will not help you if you take any nonsense out of it at face value.

YOUR source of information is interesting. Perhaps information is delivered directly to you from the American design bureau and from the bowels of the Pentagon on the sofa?

[Sergey1987]

Quote: FeoFUN

And what about us ?! Well, if you don't count the Iskander OTRB, which was transferred to the air carrier, which is the same "hypersonic" as Skybolt, Pershing-2 or R-27K from the 1960s / 1970s.

Well, of course, you are aware of everything and personally experienced the Dagger. That's just the Americans and experts from other countries do not agree with you.

[The popuas]

New principles, no gunpowder, no acceleration ... bullet yes bullet, the guidance system will be edited to promote ,, hyper, shmiper ,, missiles .... and all Vasya ...

[lucul]

New principles, no gunpowder, no acceleration ... bullet yes bullet, the guidance system will be edited to promote ,, hyper, shmiper ,, missiles .... wassat and all of Uasya ...

It reminds me of a bike - Americans for a million dollars (including inflation - probably already $ 10 million) have developed a ballpoint pen that can write in space, while Russians in space wrote with a simple pencil, for 5 cents.))))
So it is here ......

[Keyser soze]

and the Russians in space wrote in plain pencil, for 5 kopecks.

This is a myth - they also developed a pen, otherwise they would have died from graphite in the trachea.

[The popuas]

Ah, I took the words out of context, why?! ... Reminds me of a bike - Americans for a million dollars ... stop

[Feofun]

Boeing X-51A touches your naivety. How many scaffolds have we achieved there there ?! In seconds, according to Obnosov?

[lucul]

Boeing X-51A touches your naivety. How many scaffolds have we achieved there there ?! In seconds, according to Obnosov?

Strange you oppy))))
They believe that the main feature of hypersound is a ramjet engine)))
In fact, the whole chip in alloys)))

[Feofun]

Namely, the main one is that it is not necessary to drag the oxidizing agent on itself, and the specific impulse is two to three orders of magnitude greater, in comparison with solid propellant rocket motors. But about alloys - these are your ignorant nonsense, which you thoughtlessly repeat after others. What alloys are there in the X-32 ?! Yes, the usual ones are the same as in the old Soviet X-22, the modernization of which it is. They simply raised the flight altitude from 20 km to 40, and no alloys were required.

You ought to "fuse" your brains a little, so as not to be disgraced by your deep ignorance and nonsense generated by it. And also remember what temperatures turbojet turbines and warheads and descent vehicles that enter the dense layers of the atmosphere are experiencing. And then they are used to giving out old stuff, for an achievement. So far, we have not been able to achieve a scramjet operating cycle of at least a hundred seconds. And "alloys" have been there for more than half a century, for every taste, despite the fact that they are not even required, often.

[lucul]

Namely, the main one is that it is not necessary to drag the oxidizing agent on itself, and the specific impulse is two to three orders of magnitude greater, in comparison with solid propellant rocket motors. But about alloys - these are your ignorant nonsense, which you thoughtlessly repeat after others.

Ahahaahah))))
Well, you have reached, with a ramjet engine, hypersound in the atmosphere - then what? ))) How long can you fly without alloys? )))

And also remember what temperatures the turbine turbojets and warheads and descent vehicles entering the dense layers of the atmosphere survive.

Which pass the atmosphere at right angles and in a few seconds at such speeds. It seems you do not understand the difference between a hypersonic missile and a ballistic)))

[Feofun]

Quote: lucul

Ahahaahah))))
Well, you have reached, with a ramjet engine, hypersound in the atmosphere - then what? ))) How long can you fly without alloys? )))

Draw more brackets - they only set off your stupidity. You have already even given a vivid example of the X-22/32, and all of you are "Dad, where mooooreee ???". Well, and also, your this pre about alloys with a head betrays the fact that you are planning warheads of ballistic missiles do not differ from hypersonic cruise missiles. Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the well-known patent from NPO Mashinostroyenia, so that you do not flog such wild ignorant nonsense? It just says that alloys are not needed, but a high flight altitude is needed, including for the operation of a scramjet engine and to avoid exorbitant thermal and mechanical loads on the entire aircraft.

Which pass the atmosphere at right angles and in a few seconds at such speeds. It seems you do not understand the difference between a hypersonic missile and a ballistic)))

Who is there "at right angles" is included ??? Ballistic targets? Are you completely crazy ?! What seconds are you talking nonsense about - especially in the case of the descent vehicle bursting into the atmosphere and at a speed slightly less than the 1st space speed, and even more so in the case of turbojet engine turbines ???

You are insane and ignorant.

[lucul]

Draw more brackets - they set off your stupidity. You have already even given a vivid example of the X-22/32, and all of you are "Dad, where mooooreee ???". Well, and also, your this pre about alloys with your head you give the fact that you are planning warheads of ballistic missiles do not differ from hypersonic cruise missiles.

You are showing a typical example of Western thinking.
And more and more you are disappointing me)))
The Russians found a chip in which the use of hypersound became possible, but the west did not. And now it is spinning, as it were in a pan, denying the possibility of hypersound in the Russians.
The Russians say this is possible, but the west - how? Show, tell, yes put in your mouth - otherwise we do not understand and do not accept)))

[Feofun]

Well, of course I'm disappointing! Brackets, like you, I don’t draw, ignorant and even unscientific nonsense, like you, I don’t whine. What to talk with me to a person like you, who does not even know the basics of physics, who gives out pearls about "alloys" and "enter the atmosphere at a right angle" and communicates with memorized delusional slogans, as if copied from your equally narrow-minded and ignorant colleagues on agitprop shop ?!

[The popuas]

Ie you want to say that, nothing can fly into the atmosphere faster than 1 space speed ..!?

[Feofun]

This is where I wanted to say this ?!

[The popuas]

I apologize, the first thoughts were not about that, I didn’t think about it.

[The popuas]

Take the same avant-garde, this is a hypersonic ballistic missile system ... it, a priori, cannot fall at right angles ...

[vasilii]

Quote: lucul

In fact, the whole chip in alloys)))

I would say that even if it were so, it is strange to think about the existence of certain alloys that have no analogues from a country that could not master the production of high-power gas turbines and was forced to purchase them from Siemens. How is the GTD-110M doing, dopped it?

[Sergey1987]

Quote: vasilii

I would say that even if it were so, it is strange to think about the existence of certain alloys that have no analogues in a country that could not master the production of high-power gas turbines

That's how the USSR created a faster rocket for space flight than a color TV. If it is not yet possible to create a product in one industry, it does not mean that it is not possible to create an advanced, high-quality product in another industry.

[vasilii]

I am not talking about different products in different industries. I am talking about the fact that it is strange from one industry (metallurgy) to expect advanced products in the classified sphere if it lags behind in the observable. This also worked for the USSR; his military electronic technologies were as backward as civilian ones.

[Sergey1987]

Quote: vasilii

I am talking about the fact that it is strange from one industry (metallurgy) to expect advanced products in the classified sphere if it lags behind in the observable.

What is interesting that the iron and steel industry of the Russian Federation lags behind?

Quote: vasilii

electronic warfare technologies were as backward as civilian ones.

Yet again. What radio electronic technology could the military not create in the USSR?

[vasilii]

A gas turbine differs from a steam at a higher operating temperature. We are able to do steam turbines, we are forced to import gas turbines despite attempts to create our own. That is, it does not work to make a more heat-resistant turbine, and this is a problem just of metallurgy.

Radiant resistant semiconductors, for example. A large number of space launches at the end of the USSR was due to the fact that Soviet satellites in space conditions did not work very long.

[meandr51]

Just the motivation of the population in the USSR was successful and without color TVs. And it was impossible to do without missiles.

[vasilii]

Quote: meandr51

Just the motivation of the population in the USSR was successful and without color TVs.

Only the Soviet Union eventually collapsed a little, and no one came out to defend it.

[Ka-52]

FeoFUN (Fedor) Yesterday, 20:02
Boeing X-51A touches your naivety. How many scaffolds have we achieved there there ?! In seconds, according to Obnosov?

yes we already understood your furious american patriotism You can not demonstrate it so fiercely. Believe, believe

[NordOst16]

What Russians will not do, so as not to build an ocean fleet

[shinobi]

Have you read the article carefully? The problem is not in the cannon, by the way, our version in iron has existed since the late 70s, but in energy support. Somehow a powerful weapon requires either a separate source of energy or a ship’s nuclear power plant. That’s the main drawback systems. And if modern gun mounts can work autonomously, railguns can do this in a very distant future.

[astepanov]

Quote: shinobi

either ship nuclear power plant

It's not about the power of the power plant. Let us estimate: let the projectile mass be 10 kg, the departure speed is 2000 m / s, the barrel length S is 10 m. Then the kinetic energy of the projectile is m * v ^ 2/2 = 10 * (2000) ^ 2/2 = 20 MJ. Let the shell move uniformly accelerated in the barrel, then we will find the acceleration a: a = (V ^ 2) / 2S = 200000 m / s / s. Find the acceleration time t:
t = (2 * s / a) ^ (1/2) = (2 * 10/200000) ^ (1/2) = 0.01 s. For 0,01 s, you need to issue 20 MJ, i.e. power when fired is 2000 MW! No power plant, including the nuclear reactor of an aircraft carrier, can produce such power. The power of the power units of the aircraft carrier "Nimitz" is 200 MW; 10 times less! Conclusion: you need a drive that can collect these 200 MJ and throw it out instantly. The specific energy of the capacitors is no more than 0,002 MJ / kg. And so far there is nothing more powerful than capacitors. We get the mass of the battery 200 / 0,002 = 200000 kg = 200 tons. In fact - more, since the efficiency of the railgun is noticeably less than 100%, and the battery still needs "strapping", commutations, converters, converters, etc. As a result, we arrive at a battery mass of at least 400 tons. Vogue somewhere like that.

[shinobi]

And this, too, I was just trying to compress the article to one paragraph. Although the condenser cascade dimensions problem seemed to be solved. But you are right, it takes up a lot of space in the hold and is supposed to replace the ballast. Hence, the design of new ships and the expensive refitting available nowhere The current problem is quick reloading. The rate of fire at the exit is not comparable with the most stale shipborne assault rifle with the same power.

[meandr51]

It reminds the envy of the audience on parkour performers: there are a lot of dexterity and broken legs, little help.

[shinobi]

What envy? All scientific research was done in our mid-70s. Somewhere in the bowels of one of the research institutes of material physics at the Russian Academy of Sciences, an experimental railgun is still alive and well, they are testing new alloys for aviation and space in a vacuum chamber. up to 1 grams to the first space. The military did not just prefer missiles, and the railgun would have cost much less.

[Lopatov]

They are strange ...
Would make, for example, a rail mortar. I think modern technologies are quite enough for this. Would deal with his childhood illnesses. would move to a more ambitious one. For example, to a small-caliber anti-aircraft EM gun .... With the same scenario.

But no, they are on the contrary, only trash, only jumps far above their heads with huge budgets and with very distant prospects. It turns out that they are not interested in the result, but in the process? Drank, I apologize for "mastering" funds for advanced development?

Here's the word, if the development in the field of artillery were originally aimed at creating something like "Big Bertha", then we still used catapults.

[Feofun]

Yeah. And behind each mortar, carry a truck with an array of capacitors and an electric generator. Such systems cannot be compact, with current technologies. Therefore, the railgun for large surface ships was also worn out, initially - not even of land artillery and tanks.

[Lopatov]

Quote: FeoFUN

And behind each mortar, carry a truck with an array of capacitors and an electric generator.

Why "behind the mortar"? All this can be carried by the self-propelled unit itself.

Quote: FeoFUN

Such systems cannot be compact

They can. If you don't chase 100 mile ranges
"Nona" spits out a mine with a long-range charge at an initial speed of 331 m / s

[Feofun]

Well, you started with a mortar. But as you can see, your appetites are growing right before your eyes - already to the size of self-propelled guns have grown.))

[vasilii]

Quote: Spade

They can. If you don't chase 100 mile ranges

There is no point in these systems if you do not chase ranges. Gunpowder will be more practical. And in railgun, meaning only appears at distances and speeds, which, with the help of gunpowder, are in principle unattainable.

[abc_alex]

:) You simply do not know the whole history of the process. They started with tank guns :) But the generals quickly realized the whole trash of the project, and the admirals were all busy ...

[astepanov]

Quote: Spade

They are strange ...
Would make, for example, a rail mortar. I think modern technologies are quite enough for this.

Yes, everyone is stupid there - I won’t save .. But they would ask you ...
Work on electromagnetic cannons has been going on for fifty years, starting with shells weighing less than 1 gram. So we have passed the stages of not only "mortars", but also "slingshots".

[Lopatov]

Quote: astepanov

So we have passed the stages of not only "mortars", but also "slingshots"

Oh, how ... But I don’t know any standing NP weapons and the electromagnetic mortar removed from it

Did I miss something?

[astepanov]

Yes, they did. The advantages of the mortar - low cost, ease and ease of maintenance. Electromagnetic weapons do not possess any of these qualities. And will not possess in the coming decades.

[Lopatov]

The mortar is very easily detected by the sound and "torch" of the shot. The electromagnetic mortar solves this problem.
Well, cheap mortars long ago

[astepanov]

Do you think that passing a current of a million amperes through the sliding contact is possible without a flash, and the flight will be silent - given the thermal expansion of the plasma? Look for videos of railguns working. And about cheapness: everything is relative. A short-lived railgun barrel with a multitude of parts is more expensive than a mortar pipe, even if it is made of gold. Add a storage battery and a "silent" generator - the energy must come from somewhere?

[ilia3075]

If you discard all the beautiful words, then it just drank dough. There is no heap on them. And the fact that Russia in hypersound has become number 1 and ahead of competitors by 5-10 years is nonsense, but the American Potemkin villages in the field of armaments are yes .As we had irrational worship in front of America from the disaster, some still have it.

[NordOst16]

Until I began to put it into service and the first ships began to equip them - then we can talk about leadership.
And, most importantly, they have carriers for their new missiles (I have no doubt that they will be able to make their missiles, maybe 5 years late, but they will, like the Chinese), but then we will have no time for jokes because they have a fleet the ocean is or is being actively built, but we are surviving

[voyaka uh]

The Americans were spurred on by the Chinese, who had already moved on to the stage of testing the railgun on the ship.
And the admirals stirred: to be second after China is a loss of prestige.

[novel66]

Well, not the fleet ...

[meandr51]

Those and other extra money a lot ...

[voyaka uh]

Uh ... an electric gun is a tempting thing. If they solve the problem of accuracy of hits at distances of 100-150 km, and the problem of cost-effectiveness compared to missiles.

[9PA]

These lunatics come off us for 2 generations

[lucul]

Quote: FeoFUN

Well, of course I'm disappointing! Brackets, like you, I don’t draw, ignorant and even unscientific nonsense, like you, I don’t whine. What to talk with me to a person like you, who does not even know the basics of physics, who gives out pearls about "alloys" and "enter the atmosphere at a right angle" and communicates with memorized delusional slogans, as if copied from your equally narrow-minded and ignorant colleagues on agitprop shop ?!

Aha hahah, here it’s burning you)))
Over the past 70 years, the Russians seem to have weaned amers not to believe what was said. But individuals like you always meet. )))
I remind you - 5 stages of accepting the inevitable: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.
You are at the first stage.
Remember, when I first used Caliber, there was a similar reaction too)))

[NordOst16]

The only question is the number of calibers themselves and their carriers.

[Sergey1987]

Quote: NordOst16

The only question is the number of calibers themselves and their carriers.

I do not know the number of calibers in the arsenal of the Russian Federation, you probably know, can share the number? And at the same time tell me how many of them should be in service. Well, probably 150-180 thousand.))))) By the way, do you know who is capable of being a Caliber carrier?

[NordOst16]

Wow as zaminusili really on the patient.
Of course, there are many calibers in the Russian Federation, more than in the United States there are 10 to 20 thousand axes of axes.
There are not so many carriers, frigates of project 22350 of them 2 pieces, ships 11356 3 pieces, corvettes 20385 2 pieces, mrk project 21631 7pcs, 11 apl Schuka-B, 2 apl Ash, our diesel submarines.
If you do not take into account all kinds of MRK and corvettes, then there are not so many ships of the ocean zone with calibers.
How many of them are needed is a complicated question and I don’t understand much, but something tells me that their number should be sufficient to destroy the most dangerous enemy bases, probably thousands of 2 missiles. It seems to me that such a quantity should be sufficient for tog to strain the enemy

[Sergey1987]

Quote: NordOst16

Wow as zaminusili really on the patient.

I don’t put pros and cons on anyone.

Quote: NordOst16

Of course, there are many calibers in the Russian Federation, more than in the United States there are 10 to 20 thousand axes of axes.

So maybe we have them and not so few. Moreover, there are also other CDs.

Quote: NordOst16

There are not so many carriers, frigates of project 22350 of them 2 pieces, ships 11356 3 pieces, corvettes 20385 2 pieces, mrk project 21631 7pcs, 11 apl Schuka-B, 2 apl Ash, our diesel submarines.

Certainly, only Caliber can carry both Su-30 and Su-35 and there are still other airborne and ground-based missile and landing systems.

Quote: NordOst16

If you do not take into account all kinds of MRK and corvettes, then there are not so many ships of the ocean zone with calibers.

Quote: NordOst16

How many of them are needed is a difficult question and I don’t understand much, but something tells me that their number should be sufficient to destroy the most dangerous enemy bases

Here, looking at the war with which state we are considering. You list the ships, so you mean with the country not at the borders with the Russian Federation. Personally, my opinion. Take Saudi Arabia. Not weak from a military point of view. We don’t even take a surface fleet. From the SF send 2 Ash, 1 Antey, 4 Shchuki-B in total 264 KR. This is enough to destroy ABM SA. Again, what are the objectives of the operation. If the destruction of missile defense, airbases and other military facilities, then of course it will be necessary to use both the nuclear submarines and the Pacific Fleet, to form the ASG, and use strategic aviation.

[NordOst16]

Well, in theory, they can su30 / 35 (as with PCR Onyx), but I just didn’t see something on the network that they are armed with them properly. As for the submarines, I don’t know how many missiles you counted. Anteys can’t carry calibers right now, ash, most likely, will take calibers only in vpu (and there are 2 of them for 80 boats), and leave torpedo tubes for torpedoes and mines. Pikes, most likely, will load half of the BK with missiles (i.e. 20pcs or 80 missiles with 4 snouts). And it turns out that only 160 missiles can deliver. It seems not a little, but not that much. At the same time, 6 apron multi-purpose, and this is almost a third of the multi-purpose submarine fleet boats, and probably a much larger percentage of the multi-purpose apls ready for departure, goes on a campaign. I would say that for the sake of this salvo the Northern Fleet will be exposed.
As for the ground - a good way to tickle the nerves of Europe or China, but no more. Still, the fleet is preferable.
So it seems to me that the carriers are still not enough, you need more ocean ships, and with this it’s tight (((

[Sergey1987]

Quote: NordOst16

Well, in theory, they can su30 / 35 (as with PCR Onyx), but I just didn’t see something on the network that they are armed with them properly.

Well, this does not mean that, for example, the Navy did not receive them.

Quote: NordOst16

Antey now can not carry calibers

Eagle converted to Caliber. 72 pcs.

Quote: NordOst16

ash, most likely, will take calibers only at the entrance (and there are 2 of them for 80 boats), and it will leave torpedo tubes for torpedoes and mines.

Absolutely.

Quote: NordOst16

Pikes, most likely, will load half of the BK with missiles (i.e. 20pcs or 80 missiles with 4 snouts)

Why half? If it is completely 28. Total: 264.

Quote: NordOst16

I would say that for the sake of this salvo the Northern Fleet will be exposed.

From the fact that 7 nuclear submarines depart from the coast of the Russian Federation, the Federation Council will not be exposed. There are also surface ships. No one is going to attack.

Quote: NordOst16

As for the ground - a good way to tickle the nerves of Europe or China, but no more. Still, the fleet is preferable.

Here I do not understand what you mean.

Quote: NordOst16

So it seems to me that the carriers are still not enough, you need more ocean ships, and with this it’s tight (((

I do not say that they are not needed. Of course, more ships in the ocean zone are needed. I hope the Leader is not delayed with the destroyers. A good proposal, in my opinion, was the rearmament of Akula Severstal and Arkhangelsk from ICBMs to the Kyrgyz Republic. And the idea with Borem-K is not bad either. Yes, and Condor with Barracuda need to be modernized.

[NordOst16]

I mean that, as I understand it, big problems with installing calibers on dryers and machines require special refinement for this.

I did not hear that on the Orel, the Granitov PUs were converted to Onyx or Caliber, but maybe I overlooked something. Yes, and these boats are of the third generation, they are much louder than ash, astyudes and virginia, so it will be easier to detect them.

And the 12 remaining 650mm caliber torpedoes are suitable for fighting enemy submarines? It seems that these torpedoes were planned to be used only against surface targets. And 12 torpedoes for apl are slightly frivolous.

Well, the surface component and aircraft PLO now does not feel well, so the withdrawal of such forces will become sensitive. Although no one is going to attack - who knows how it will turn in the future.

I meant that the offshore platform for deploying missiles there is a much more flexible option, albeit an expensive one.

Well, it seems to me that we don’t see the destroyers yet because they are frustrating the construction of the project 22350 frigates. The construction of boreas with kr can and is a profitable investment because they are, like, cheaper than ash trees (something like antees will work), but they need to be converted it is unlikely to be profitable, and they are outdated

[Sergey1987]

Quote: NordOst16

I mean that, as I understand it, big problems with installing calibers on dryers and machines require special refinement for this.

The first time I heard about this. I read the opposite.

Quote: NordOst16

I did not hear that on the Orel, the Granitov PUs were converted to Onyx or Caliber, but maybe I overlooked something. Yes, and these boats are of the third generation, they are much louder than ash, astyudes and virginia, so it will be easier to detect them.

Some sources wrote and spoke about the Star. We will not only upgrade PU.

Quote: NordOst16

The construction of boreas with kr can and is a profitable investment because they, it seems, are cheaper than ash trees (something like antees will work out), but it will hardly be profitable to convert those whoppers, and they are outdated

I agree. Boreas are pretty fast, so Sharks may not make sense to rearm. But Condor and Barracuda, I think it makes sense.

[NordOst16]

It’s just that the Indians had to upgrade the Su30 to carry the brahmos and the modernization touched not so much on electronics as on supporting structures

[Sergey1987]

Quote: NordOst16

It’s just that the Indians had to upgrade the Su30 to carry the brahmos and the modernization touched not so much on electronics as on supporting structures

I think that this is precisely why the Su-30M2 is sent to the Navy Air Force, and the Su-30SM to the VKS.

[astepanov]

Quote: Sergey1987

By the way, do you know who is capable of being a Caliber carrier?

As always in the army: two soldiers with a stretcher and ensign. At worst, a sergeant. At all times, these are the main carriers. And not only in our army.

[meandr51]

It is not clear why a cannon shell is better than a rocket. Can he be homing? The low cost of the shot is not very hard to believe.

[voyaka uh]

At the price, compactness, cost of a shot.
Problem: homing.
The higher the speed, the worse the GSN works.

[yehat]

Quote: voyaka uh

The higher the speed, the worse the GSN works.

it is rather an adaptive question, just a matter of compliance

[voyaka uh]

Shells are supposed to be blanks, or with a small explosive charge. In these cases, accuracy is critical. An Iskander with 500 kg of explosives may miss a 10 mW KVO - nothing. It’ll blow the target anyway.
A 10-meter blank miss is a waste of time and money.
Or you need to shower the enemy with such blanks. But it is already expensive. And for the KVO 1 m, complex guidance is needed. And at such a projectile speed it is impossible.

[astepanov]

Quote: voyaka uh

The higher the speed, the worse the GSN works.

The railgun shell is probably uncontrollable. When fired, an acceleration of about 20 thousand g, hardly anything other than a monolithic blank can withstand it.

[yehat]

Quote: FeoFUN

"alloys"

relying solely on materials with the right properties is the level of physics in the late 50s of the USSR, so you should not experience illusions about your competence.
it was already necessary to depart from this dogma at the beginning of work with thermonuclear and other installations. And you can continue to rivet projects with the mossy looks of Von Braun or Tsiolkovsky, I do not bother you. In other matters, the Americans are even worse. Those generally like blind kittens poke around.

[astepanov]

Gridasov, did he change his nickname?

[yehat]

Quote: BlackMokona

Hypersonic missiles

it's all an empty idle talk, as empty as the innovativeness of the iPhone or Tesla.
I have a hypercot at home, this is not a reason to scream everywhere that he is.
Just such an animal. And someone has an ultracott
The main problem of modern power-consuming installations is the imperfection of their power supply, as well as generators, and drives, and even elementary power cables.
Breakthroughs are needed in these areas, otherwise the prototypes will be the same freaks that you see in the photo. When I was engaged in science many years ago, I managed to develop something in the field of capacitors, but let others do it now.

[yehat]

Quote: NordOst16

calibers not so much

we have Iranian volunteers with nuclear cases,
having no analogues in the world.

[yehat]

Quote: Sergey1987

By the way, do you know who is capable of being a Caliber carrier?

what did you run into one rocket?
we have a zirconokalibro granite theme so diverse!

[Sergey1987]

Quote: yehat

what did you run into one rocket?
we have a zirconokalibro granite theme so diverse!

I write specifically for the Kyrgyz Republic about which a comrade writes. Above, I told them that we have a variety of KR and TR, land, sea and air based.

[yehat]

we have half of the missiles - unsuccessful projects, which plugged an urgent and temporary problem. from there appeared giant boats - sharks.
For example, Sineva and Mace - one consequence of failure, the second failure itself.
Caliber is an infrequent exception to reality when they just made a normal rocket, without haste. But praying for it is not worth it - it's just a weapon that becomes obsolete every second. It can serve as an excellent base for the development of the fleet,
but rockets should always be looked at in general, not just looking at the rockets themselves.

[Sergey1987]

Quote: yehat

we have half of the missiles - unsuccessful projects, which plugged an urgent and temporary problem. from there appeared giant boats - sharks.

It’s not like we are discussing ICBMs.

Quote: yehat

For example, Sineva and Mace - one consequence of failure, the second failure itself.

Why is the mace not luck?

Quote: yehat

But praying for it is not worth it - it's just a weapon that becomes obsolete every second.

I agree. No one says that we need to stop in the development of the Kyrgyz Republic. Do not forget there is also the X-101.

[yehat]

Quote: voyaka uh

And at that projectile speed it’s impossible

the strength of the USSR was that "we can build everything that does not contradict the laws of physics"

[Sckepsis]

Quote: FeoFUN

They fill up cones, close old programs, open new ones, build new prototypes, modify old ones and go to the goal - a real weapon based on new physical principles. It remains only to see off with an envious look, sitting on the mound, husking seeds and talking about overseas budget cuts.

and jealousy is apparently due to the fact that at least part of these millionaires were not given to you, because many of these programs drank naturally.