Aeroballistic missile AGM-183A ARRW. US reduces backlog

68
In recent years, the Pentagon has been focusing on hypersonic issues. weapons different classes, including those intended for the air force. Since last year, one of such projects has been under development, and in early summer its first results became known. The promising Lockheed Martin AGM-183A ARRW airborne hypersonic ballistic missile already exists as separate products used in some trials.


B-52H carrier aircraft with ARRW rocket model




What is known about the project


Development of the AGM-183A product started about a year ago. On August 13, 2018, Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control was awarded a $ 480 million contract to build a new aeroballistic missile for the Air Force. The new project is designated as the Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon ("Airborne Rapid Response Weapon") or ARRW.

A little more than three years are allotted for work on ARRW. Serial products AGM-183A are expected until the end of 2021. With their help, the Air Force plans to strengthen the strategic Aviation, expanding its combat capabilities. Aeroballistic missiles with high flight characteristics will have to increase the effectiveness of airstrikes in comparison with current weapons.

The Pentagon and Lockheed Martin are in no hurry to share all the details of the work, however, they publish some reports. So, from the official News It is known that on June 12 the first flight of the prototype ARRW rocket on a carrier aircraft took place. A test flight was held at Edwards Air Base. The official press release was accompanied by several interesting photographs.

The prototype AGM-183A has the dimensions and mass corresponding to the future combat product. He received part of the control systems, and the remaining units were replaced by weight simulators. The missile was hung under the wing of a B-52H bomber, which performed a flight according to a given program. Reset of the prototype was not performed. The purpose of the tests was to test the behavior of the rocket on the external load. When will the new tests take place, incl. with reset and flight - not reported.

What is known about the rocket


A number of technical details and characteristics of the new rocket have not been officially published, which contributes to the emergence of various estimates and assumptions. At the same time, some important details of the project are known. All this does not yet allow us to draw up a sufficiently detailed and plausible picture, but in the future the situation should change.

The AGM-183A is an aeroballistic missile with a possibly detachable warhead. She received a cylindrical body with a conical head fairing and folding stabilizers in the tail. As the head part, it is proposed to use the planning tactical block Tactical Boost Glide, developed in DARPA. Acceleration of the block to the required speeds is provided by the solid-propellant rocket engine.

Aeroballistic missile AGM-183A ARRW. US reduces backlog
AGM-183A rocket prototype close-up


According to various estimates, the rocket has a length of the order of 6-6,5 m with a case diameter of approx. 1 m. Launching mass must exceed 2 t. The bulk of the flight performance of ARRW remains unknown. Only the firing range to 800 km was reported. You can also talk about a ballistic flight profile with characteristic features due to the use of the TBG combat unit.

A prototype for transportation to the B-52H was said to have received some of the on-board equipment. Probably, a full-fledged AGM-183A rocket will be equipped with an inertial and satellite navigation system, ensuring its passage along the necessary trajectory. Similar equipment should have a combat unit. At the same time, his autopilot will have to provide maneuvering in flight.

The estimated and actual flight performance of the entire ARRW system remains unknown. There is also a lack of clarity with the parameters of its key element - the TBG block. So far, only the total firing range in 800 km is called, while other parameters of the ballistic trajectory are not specified.

The alleged combat qualities of the rocket remain unknown. Earlier it was reported that the TBG combat unit will be able to reach speeds of M = 20 and carry a nuclear or conventional warhead. It is also expected that he will be able to maneuver on the downward part of the trajectory before falling onto the target.

The lack of the bulk of the most interesting information does not yet allow a detailed picture. In addition, it provokes the emergence of critical versions. So, we can assume that the AGM-183A project provides for the creation of a “conventional” aeroballistic missile without fundamentally new and bold components, such as a hypersonic planning block.



However, such an assumption contradicts the well-known Pentagon plans and the stated goals of the ARRW program. The result of the latter should be precisely a missile with a hypersonic warhead, and a different outcome is unlikely to suit the customer.

New Air Force Opportunities


It must be recalled that the AGM-183A ARRW project is not the first American attempt to create an aeroballistic missile for strategic aviation. In the past, there have been several similar projects, but not one of them has left the test stage. How the next attempt will end is a big question. However, this time the Pentagon is determined to bring the project to the adoption of the missile into service.

The proposed version of an aeroballistic missile with a hypersonic warhead has a number of important advantages that can give strategic aviation new opportunities. As a result, the ARRW project has a high priority and should be brought to the desired result. In addition, it must be remembered that similar systems are already being created or put into service abroad - there has been a slight lag, and the United States is in an uncomfortable position to catch up.

The AGM-183A is an air-based ballistic missile delivered to the launch point by a long-range bomber. Using the B-52H aircraft allows you to get a combat radius of thousands of kilometers and ensure the destruction of targets almost anywhere in the world. At the same time, one B-52H will be able to carry several such missiles - although during the tests they have so far limited themselves to the removal of one prototype.

The launch of a “conventional” combat unit along a ballistic trajectory over a range of up to 800 km currently does not guarantee the breakthrough of enemy air defense and missile defense. The problem of breaking through the defense is proposed to be solved with the help of a hypersonic planning warhead. It is expected that the TBG product will have all the advantages inherent in hypersonic weapons, and will be able to effectively pass through any defense system. High speed will reduce the allowable reaction time for air defense and missile defense, and the ability to maneuver will make it difficult to intercept.

According to some reports, the TBG unit will be able to carry both special and conventional warheads. This in a known way will expand the range of tasks.



According to the name of the program, the AGM-183A missile should become a means to strike back in the shortest possible time. It is likely that such weapons are planned to be used to destroy important enemy targets along with other strategic missile systems.

Actual problems


Last year’s contract provides for the completion of work on ARRW before the end of 2021, after which the US Air Force will be able to begin full-fledged operation of new weapons. It’s too early to say whether the Pentagon will be able to fulfill its plans on time. To date, the AGM-183A project has only reached the export of a prototype and has not yet reached the testing stage. On the other hand, from the signing of the contract to the first flight with the layout, only 10 months have passed. Lockheed Martin still has a substantial margin of time sufficient to create and test the required weapons.

It should be borne in mind that the success of the ARRW program depends not only on the AGM-183A missile itself. A key element of the project is the TBG hypersonic warhead, which has been underway for several years. According to foreign press reports, in the early spring of this year, the TBG product entered the first flight tests, but it is still far from full-fledged flights in operating modes.

Thus, in the absence of any difficulties in the two promising projects of the US Air Force in the foreseeable future, they can indeed receive a fundamentally new weapon with high technical and combat characteristics. However, difficulties in creating a TBG or AGM-183A can lead to unpleasant consequences in the form of a delay in the adoption of missiles into service or even abandonment of the entire program.

Obviously, the ARRW project is now being monitored not only in the United States. A promising American missile can become a real threat to third countries, and therefore requires an appropriate response. It should be expected that by the time the AGM-183A is adopted for service, potential US adversaries will have at least working ideas on how to deal with such missiles. The US Air Force wants to complete work on new weapons before the end of 2021, and third countries still have a margin of time for an answer.

To date, in the field of hypersonic weapons, the United States has been in the position of catching up. They are currently developing similar projects, while foreign countries are already adopting such systems. The ARRW program, as well as other modern projects, should change this state of affairs. Whether it will be able to reduce the gap or even become a leader with its help will become clear in the coming years.
Our news channels

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

68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    6 August 2019 18: 17
    I don’t understand why someone has the illusion that the Yankees will calm down and leave us behind with new types of weapons ???
    They all have enough Schaub to compensate for any "lag" and this is worth remembering and does not rest on what has been achieved.
    1. 0
      6 August 2019 18: 22
      what lag is it about?
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 09: 37
        what lag is it about?
        About that about which Kiselev and Soloviev are broadcasting.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. +5
        6 August 2019 18: 49
        And nothing so that the word "lag" is in quotation marks?
        I did not begin to add a definition of imaginary / presumed / far-fetched, Schaub of the ura-patriots did not unnecessarily excite.
        America is a strong, rich, technologically advanced power with serious military power and potential! This should not be forgotten ....
        Yes, they also have allies, also not poor and technologically advanced.
        So sho squeeze a vigorous baton harder and work further .... very intensively!
        1. 0
          6 August 2019 20: 14
          The US is catching up with us, but again they have no protection against hypersound
          it’s just that our promising S-500 air defense system is quietly working on targets at a speed of 20 Mach
          77H6-N / H1 missiles have a speed of 7,5 km / second = 23,9 Mach
          1. +4
            6 August 2019 20: 23
            As always, we will clarify.
            Lonely or not very sophisticated missiles can be repelled, with a high degree of probability.
            A massive, comprehensive attack cannot be repelled by anyone! So far, such impenetrable air defense systems do not exist.
            This is the starting point for further efforts in building defense systems.
            We must work, invent, do business .... we only dream of peace!
            1. +2
              7 August 2019 12: 32
              Quote: rocket757
              A massive, comprehensive attack cannot be repelled by anyone!

              Victor! You, the right thing, put us in the "goalkeeper" position. stop
              And it will be a full-fledged ABM / air defense battle or even an operation to repulse an enemy air attack against strategic objectives in our territory. All available forces and means will be involved. Up to SBP !!! And you know this very well!
              Then, forming a "massive strike" is not an easy task! During its formation, it is possible (and most expedient of all!) To influence the "participants" of the strike in stages, starting with the closest ones, taking into account the flight time. At the same time, all radio electronics, as well as GPS / NAVSTAR, are mercilessly choking. This is about organizing in time, organizing interaction and controlling forces ...
              Therefore, not everything is so gloomy and sad, although it is very serious and fraught if we overslept, as in 41!
              IMHO.
              1. 0
                7 August 2019 13: 01
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                to form a "massive strike" is not an easy task!

                the complexity of decision making and implementation thereof !!! .... they can beat their own if they try to jump over the edge, just because the rest want to LIVE!
                But the scenario of attack \ reflection-defense \ retaliatory strike, just in case, is available for all reputable robbers, this is undoubtedly. It is constantly adjusted depending on operational and other data, to the state of pressing one MAIN BUTTON!
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                And it will be a full-fledged ABM / air defense battle or even an operation to repulse the enemy’s air attack against strategic objectives in OUR territory

                I also played such GAMES ... many years ago, but this does not change the essence! since then there have been changes, big but not changing the essence of the task.
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                not everything is so gloomy and sad, although it is very serious and fraught if we overslept, as in the 41st!

                we won’t sleep, if only the false launch of the program of destruction of the WHOLE WORLD would happen!
                for 41 yabs I didn’t chop off my shoulder, there were a lot of things and it was put in different ways ..... although this does not cancel the guilt of so many, because of which the country suffered such terrible losses!
          2. 0
            7 August 2019 00: 37
            Quote: Romario_Argo
            it’s just that our promising S-500 air defense system is quietly working on targets at a speed of 20 Mach
            77H6-N / H1 missiles have a speed of 7,5 km / second = 23,9 Mach

            You see ... about "77Н6-н / Н1 interceptor missiles", I think, the phrase is appropriate: "Can he drink a liter? He can drink something, but who will give him?" In intercepting hypersonic targets, hypersonic interceptors alone are indispensable! We need new means of detection, tracking, new interception algorithms, computers, the main essence of which is super-speed! Does the S-500 have "all the necessary" of the above? I personally doubt it!
            1. +2
              7 August 2019 12: 44
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Hypersonic targets cannot be intercepted by hypersonic interceptors alone!

              Absolutely in the hole!
              1. If "Nudol" is at the very least, then about the S-500 - "is still ahead" ... We, of course, believe our Kulibins, but there is no complex in the hardware yet. And this is a fact.
              2. GZO creates the worst thing in a war - lack of time! Therefore, new ways and means of dealing with it are needed. Against the rocket? - You may not be in time if you miss ... Therefore, only a combat laser / "plasmatorch" is able to solve the problem of intercepting the GZO. I personally do not see any other weapon for the physical destruction of the attacking GZR due to my narrow outlook in this area of ​​military science.
              So, the competition of the sword and the shield spirals to a new level. The one with science will be more thoughtful and technology and technology more advanced! Yes
              1. +2
                7 August 2019 14: 11
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                . GZO gives rise to the worst in the war - the lack of time! Therefore, we need new ways and means of dealing with it.

                Exactly ! Lack of sufficient time to recognize, assess the threat (calculate the trajectory ...), to intercept! That is why "hypersonic interceptors alone" are not enough! And yet ... it's one thing to intercept a target in space (or "near" space ...), when the "target" is launched thousands (!) Km away ... and another thing is AGM-183A with a "distance" of up to 800 km ... maybe! On that "I stand and will stand"! soldier And I don't care about the "idiots" of the "average" inhabitants and the USE "Octobrists" ...
                1. +1
                  7 August 2019 16: 11
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  On that "I stand and will stand"!

                  Sir! Allow me to stand next to you !? soldier
                  1. +1
                    7 August 2019 17: 12
                    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                    Sir! Allow me to stand next to you !?

                    Join now!
        2. +3
          7 August 2019 01: 08
          Write nonsense. The Americans already have ways and means to destroy targets on our territory with nuclear weapons. From the fact that the warhead does not fly to the menitman, but to some kind of hypersonic prodigy, this will not bring any additional profit to the Yankees. We still have no bet on the atmospheric interceptor, and the whole strategy is on the inevitability of a retaliatory strike. In addition, with a range of 800 km, these devices can only hit objects near the border, but not as deep as the territory of Russia.
          Therefore, this is seen as a purely political and loot-sharing motive
          1. +1
            7 August 2019 08: 25
            Quote: Designer 68
            We still have no bet on the atmospheric interceptor, and the whole strategy is on the inevitability of a retaliatory strike.

            That's right, the inevitability of the response blow, NUCLEAR!
            Quote: Designer 68
            Therefore, this is seen as a purely political and loot-sharing motive

            There are of course different reasons to create such and all kinds of weapons. Political background, scare, answer among them!
          2. 0
            7 August 2019 10: 44
            Americans want to ensure themselves the possibility of delivering the first "disarming" strike against the Russian Federation (or China). This requires many, many missiles and they should not be as expensive as ICBMs. Previously, CDs were suitable for this role, but now it is bad with ordinary CDs - the Russians have learned to shoot them down in batches. Those. it makes no sense to bet on CD. And then the Russian Federation got an aeroballistic high-precision long-range strike missile (Dagger). So it's time for amers to pull up the idea of ​​AGM-69 SRAM missiles from oblivion, but with a 5-fold greater range.
            The military and political leadership of the Russian Federation and the United States put different meanings in this class of shock missiles.
            For the Russian Federation, this is an opportunity to get the enemy in a significant part of the globe.
            For the United States - the application of a disarming strike on the territory of the Russian Federation or China.
    3. -6
      6 August 2019 20: 46
      And who told you that they are behind? Just the opposite.
      1. +1
        6 August 2019 21: 10
        Quote: kutuz
        And who told you that they are behind? Just the opposite.

        Comprehensive parity, mutual destruction, takes place! And everything else is "patriotic games" from both sides.
      2. +2
        6 August 2019 22: 34
        In the development and the availability of weapons - lagging behind. And pretty much.
        In financial capabilities, the presence of many allies, the number of military bases at our borders and the control of elites on the globe are ahead.
        Thus, a fragile balance of forces and capabilities is formed, which is gradually changing.
        Not in their favor.
        1. 0
          7 August 2019 06: 25
          "They are lagging behind in development and availability" - who told you that? You just listen all day long and read advertisements about the coolness of the Su 57 which does not exist, the "Armata", which has not entered production, became the best tank in the world, about the "Dagger", "Poseidon" and the "super" nuclear-powered rocket that flies by itself which no one has seen well, except for cartoons but already "America in shock", "Europe in panic." At the same time, 90% of articles about Western developments are from the series "which Americans are stupid", fake how the F22 rusted and how the "leopard" was knocked out in Syria.
          Reminds the USSR when the "Red Army is the Strongest of All" and suddenly it turned out that everything is not so simple.
          1. +1
            7 August 2019 08: 32
            Quote: kutuz
            it suddenly turned out that everything was not so simple.

            And when and with whom did everything turn out so simple?
            We CAN answer, to anyone and everyone taken together ... only then it just won’t be all!
            We work further calmly and according to plan .... I hope that there is one!
          2. +1
            7 August 2019 12: 14
            Quote: kutuz
            "They are lagging behind in development and availability" - who told you that? You just listen and read ads all day

            Young man, don't judge by yourself. My knowledge is much more serious than advertising booklets, but you don't seem to miss a single issue of them. Is this work? Fighter of the "invisible front" from the armies of the Armed Forces of Ukraine?

            Quote: kutuz
            about the coolness of Su 57 which is not,

            A good plane, but not yet about it. We wait until it comes to the troops.
            I’m talking about STRATEGIC AVIATION, which Russia has, but the United States is only conditionally listed. Explain? smile
            - B-52 in service since the mid-50s (production completed in 1962). In the presence of several dozen. Armament - free-falling bombs, the Kyrgyz Republic has long been removed from armament. Russian air defense - not dangerous.
            - В-1В - a depressing technical condition, less than a dozen are in good order at the moment (there is information - from the main headquarters of the US Air Force, which is less than five). They are being converted into non-nuclear weapons of the CD with the clumsy name "ELRASM", which have already successfully knocked down in Syria.
            - V-2 - carriers of the free-falling bombs of the MK-61 in the 12th modification, of which there are no more than two hundred left in the USA, and by 2022 will not remain at all.

            In Russia Long-range aviation in good shape:
            - Tu-95 (produced in the early 80s) - carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic X-101, X-102 (nuclear), X-555, X-55 (nuclear).
            - Tu-160 - carriers X-101 \ 102 (range 4500 \ 5500 km.)
            - Tu-22M3 \ M3M - carriers of the X-32 (including nuclear warheads), the promising X-50, "Dagger" and possibly the "Zircon" airborne. All their missiles can have nuclear warheads.

            The biggest problem in the United States is the degradation of its nuclear potential. For physical reasons, nuclear weapons have a resource of NOT MORE THAN 30 years. The latter was produced in 1992 (warhead for "Trident-2"). Therefore, by 2022, the US will be COMPLETELY unarmed with regard to nuclear weapons. They simply do not have the capacity to produce weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. From this and panic in the headquarters. From this and Obama was worn with the idea of ​​nuclear disarmament.
            An attempt to restore production capacities rested in lost competencies, the lack of necessary specialists, the need for HUGE means, which Congress is constantly cutting back on, and TIME, which is no longer there.
            Nuclear weapons collected in 1989 will be decommissioned this year.
            Missiles "Minuteman-3" are without warheads.
            The warheads for the Trident-2 remain ... only those that were produced in 1990-92. , and this is quite a bit and they are at the limit of the resource.

            But Russia has retained competencies. And its nuclear potential is fully equipped. In the whole assortment.

            "Daggers" are not cartoons, but an irresistible aeroballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads, irresistible for US and NATO air defense / missile defense. Standing in service, and the number of its carriers is growing, with the deployment of such squadrons in all main directions.
            "Vanguard" is not cartoons, but a combat unit that has actually been put into service this year. Irresistible (!) For the US missile defense and its allies.

            Russia is ahead of the United States in the development and deployment of breakthrough promising models. What is now arming in Russia will appear in the United States no earlier than 15 years from now.

            The United States is armed with a lot of old models and a huge military budget, many bases around the world and the dollar is still the main settlement currency ...
            But the world is changing.
            And it is changing not in favor of the United States.
            For you - alas.
            For us - hope.
          3. -2
            7 August 2019 12: 54
            Quote: kutuz
            "The Red Army is the Strongest of All"

            Do you doubt it, even after her Victory in the GREAT PATRIOTIC WAR 1941-1945 years !?
            Yes, you did not draw from the stubborn zapadentsev on the site?
            Excuse me, ukrofashistskoy neglect! am
        2. +1
          7 August 2019 08: 28
          Quote: bayard
          In financial capabilities, the presence of many allies, the number of military bases at our borders and the control of elites on the globe are ahead.

          They just HAVE !!! we have this "sour" ... so sho the vigorous club DO NOT RELEASE!
          Quote: bayard
          Not in their favor

          I don’t think that it could be in anyone’s favor at all.
    4. +1
      6 August 2019 22: 13
      Catching up is sometimes more profitable, you can take into account the mistakes of the one who runs ahead
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 08: 32
        Quote: Chaldon48
        Catching up is sometimes more profitable, you can take into account the mistakes of the one who runs ahead

        But it is dangerous, as a rule, precisely in the military sphere!
      2. 0
        7 August 2019 13: 02
        Quote: Chaldon48
        Catching up is sometimes more profitable, you can take into account the mistakes of the one who runs ahead

        That is if you also have the know-how.
        And if your materials are melted on 20 sweeps, then chase, don't chase, and you can't blind a bullet out of shit! (even if it is severely frozen!) Yes
    5. +1
      April 11 2020 13: 14
      Of course they’ll catch up if we don’t move. But it seems that we used the same American weapon - we came off in some types of strategic offensive arms, and this already scared the Amers, they would be forced to stick their tongues out to catch up. And money doesn’t solve everything, we need very expensive technologies, development and time even for the USA, a lot of time for this. This will push them towards negotiations, not confrontation. Hypersound is the effect of using nuclear weapons without using them. There is something to be scared of. And they don’t have it and will not be soon ...
      1. 0
        April 11 2020 14: 04
        A super race in the military sphere of an ordinary person is unlikely to please.
        It’s good to feel safe, the planet can be burned from any direction !!!
        You won’t sit aside, it’s such a weapon of mass, universal destruction.
  2. 0
    6 August 2019 18: 20
    Our hypersonic aeroballistic "Dagger" (starting weight 3,8 tons) all AGM-183M (starting weight 2 tons) "Iskander" laughing
  3. -10
    6 August 2019 18: 34
    I just recently talked with one on VO, he showed me a video where the type of hyper rocket takes off quickly, looked, there are just cut frames, and so clumsy I do not understand how he did not see, apparently not before
    1. +2
      6 August 2019 19: 02
      NUDOL rocket interceptor! They must start very quickly, precisely because the task is to intercept and destroy in a very short area of ​​interception, a very complex and fast target! Or go beyond the atmosphere and dispersed to reach the distant satellite orbit.
      There, speeds and overloads are very high, especially in an airless space!
      1. -5
        6 August 2019 19: 05
        did you read my offer?
        1. 0
          6 August 2019 19: 14
          If you mean the definition of "like", I didn't refute it, I just put it on the shelves ...... I assume that you already know, ok.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      6 August 2019 21: 01
      Well, where are the frames cut off or in the eyes of the cut
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 03: 13
        are you visually impaired?
    4. +1
      7 August 2019 13: 14
      Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
      looked, there just frames are cropped, and so clumsily I don’t understand how he didn’t see, apparently not before

      Vasya, and Vasya! well you and loshara !!! You are not even able to distinguish the work of the PAD from the start-marching engine of Nudoli!
      And there, damn it, in exPerdy! You’re still stirring up water, Herod! am
      1. 0
        7 August 2019 13: 17
        ok, I have no more questions hi
        1. -1
          7 August 2019 16: 13
          Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
          ok, I have no more questions

          Well, here you go! fellow
  4. +4
    6 August 2019 19: 49
    Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
    like a hyper rocket takes off quickly, looked, there just frames are cut off, and so clumsily I don’t understand how he didn’t see, apparently not before

    I don’t understand what doesn’t suit you - yes, the "CUTTING" video recording of the launch of a rocket taking off with a huge acceleration is provided (I met information about almost 200g) from different angles... Due to the high speed of the rocket (in the working section of the trajectory more than 10 times the speed of the bullet from the AKM), the body of the rocket eludes the operator and goes out of frame. Of course, the speed of 7,5 km / s is not achieved instantly, but if you have not forgotten the physics of high school for grade 5, you will be able to calculate (approximately) the speed of a body taking off with acceleration, at least 100g and the speed that it develops on the border of the frame ... Or do you doubt that the provided footage is not "just another Kremlin cartoons"? Do not doubt! Russia does not scare, but only warns, you should not meddle with us, because we have something to defend yourself and than ANSWER.
    1. +1
      6 August 2019 23: 21
      I always dreamed of putting some amateur r-r-jerk off a traffic light into such a rocket, having thrown slippers into the floor. So that in the last moments of his life he feels what real dynamics of dispersal are, and not like his lousy bucket with nuts laughing
    2. 0
      7 August 2019 03: 14
      a cut is presented, though I don’t understand how you can not see cropped frames
  5. 0
    6 August 2019 21: 00
    sorry and at what speed this bomber flies indicated on the photo
  6. -1
    6 August 2019 21: 29
    So I understand that the problem with the carrier of its type of dagger is why they are not going to launch it with V 52, even though N
    Maximum speed at high altitude: 957 km / h (M = 0,86) [24]
    Cruising speed maximum: 819 km / h
    MiG31
    Cruising speed:
    subsonic: 950 km / h (M = 0,9)
    supersonic: 2500 km / h (M = 2,35)
    TU22M3
    Maximum speed:
    at the ground: 1050 km / h
    at height: 2300 km / h
    Cruising speed: 930 km / h
    So I understand that if they shoot their dagger from the B52 bomber, then they get at best a supersonic but not like a hypersonic complex
  7. 0
    6 August 2019 22: 51
    Outwardly resembles a SREM.
  8. +1
    7 August 2019 00: 57
    The writer learned how to write headlines from yellowheads? The text of the material only with a stretch corresponds to the name
  9. 0
    7 August 2019 09: 25
    I wonder why they need this prodigy?

    Well, okay, everyone there is dreaming of sinking aircraft carriers with "Daggers" (to which, a no brainer, it will almost certainly never come). The Americans, on the other hand, have long learned that it is not profitable to fight with a strong enemy by military methods, and it is quite possible to iron the weak in the old fashioned way (which, in fact, they do). Hence the "lag" discussed above - they simply have no reason to catch up with someone in this topic.

    It would not have turned out that American hypersonic developments are just a way to drag us into the next devastating arms race, which the budget will no longer tolerate.
  10. 0
    7 August 2019 13: 54
    SRAM-III, however, is obtained. Or mini-SkyBolt
  11. +2
    7 August 2019 14: 40
    Quote: bmv04636
    So I understand that the problem with the carrier of its type of dagger is why they are not going to launch it with V 52, even though N
    Maximum speed at high altitude: 957 km / h (M = 0,86) [24]
    Cruising speed maximum: 819 km / h
    MiG31
    Cruising speed:
    subsonic: 950 km / h (M = 0,9)
    supersonic: 2500 km / h (M = 2,35)
    TU22M3
    Maximum speed:
    at the ground: 1050 km / h
    at height: 2300 km / h
    Cruising speed: 930 km / h
    So I understand that if they shoot their dagger from the B52 bomber, then they get at best a supersonic but not like a hypersonic complex


    You're not right. Their system can also be hypersonic, if the speed of the rocket at the end of the ATU is hypersonic. The speed and altitude of the carrier will only affect the maximum speed of the system and the range of this product. In fact, such a system can be considered as a two-stage system, where the first stage of the system is an airplane. As a result, the final speed of the second stage - a hypersonic rocket when launched at supersonic speed of the aircraft will be higher than that of a system where the first stage (plane) will have subsonic speed or supersonic, but less.
    But like any medal there are two sides. The total range of such a system. And here it all depends on the range of the carrier.
    MIG, for example, can have a subsonic part of the flight (1), a supersonic part of the flight (2) plus the flight range of the rocket itself. TU-22M3 has a subsonic stage of flight of the aircraft and a supersonic stage of flight will be more than that of the MIG. Altitude and speed of the carrier will only affect the range and speed of the rocket. MIG’s missile range will be higher than that of TU-22M3 (TU’s speed and altitude will be less). But the B-52 and the speed will be subsonic, and the altitude is less than that of the MIG and TU, but a significantly larger radius of the aircraft will give a significantly greater range of the entire system.


    Quote: Kalmar
    I wonder why they need this prodigy?

    Well, okay, everyone there is dreaming of sinking aircraft carriers with "Daggers" (to which, a no brainer, it will almost certainly never come). The Americans, on the other hand, have long learned that it is not profitable to fight with a strong enemy by military methods, and it is quite possible to iron the weak in the old fashioned way (which, in fact, they do). Hence the "lag" discussed above - they simply have no reason to catch up with someone in this topic.

    It would not have turned out that American hypersonic developments are just a way to drag us into the next devastating arms race, which the budget will no longer tolerate.

    Well, hitting a stationary target with a high-speed missile, no matter what kind of war, local or global, is by no means the worst option. One body, when the same B-52 "pours" from its belly and from the pylons almost 3 dozen cruise missiles, which will move to the target for 2 hours (at a distance of about 1500 km) or approach the target at a distance of 800 km and shoot rockets that will go to the target for 7-8 minutes. What's better? This is the question of why this "wunderwaffle" is needed
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 17: 20
      as I understand it, the carrier plays the role of the first stage, and it must be accelerated if I am not mistaken to Mach 1,5, so that the rocket reaches hypersound. The Americans have a rocket mock-up of a small non-starting engine that would disperse the rocket before turning on the direct-flow system in our case, this is done by the carrier Or I'm wrong
  12. 0
    7 August 2019 15: 26
    If you recall how the epic of hypersonic weapons began, it began with the desire of the United States to quickly respond to terrorist acts like 11 of Senyabr and get terrorist bases anywhere before the terrorists get out. At the same time, it was assumed that the Barmaleans were unlikely to have adequate remedies. Now the situation is different and hypersonic weapons are becoming a new argument in the eternal debate about who is stronger. And here a number of questions appear. Yes, hypersound allows a rocket to reach a target faster than supersonic. But on the other hand, in the arsenal of air defense / missile defense systems there have long been radars with phased array antennas that provide a significant increase in the radar renewal rate and, therefore, a higher probability of detection and stable tracking of high-speed and maneuvering air targets, including hypersonic missiles with maneuvering warheads , especially since effective maneuvering and hypersound are poorly combined. Therefore, I would not cease to ascribe to the hypersound some kind of magical properties and make another wunderwafle from it. The usual round of attack means, against which both the United States and Russia, and most likely China, already have quite effective defenses (radars with electron beam scanning, electron-optical detection means, highly maneuverable missiles, etc.). Of course, each side prefers to develop its own technologies, but in general, it’s hard to come up with something unique here — it’s also physics in Africa.
    1. +1
      8 August 2019 22: 51
      Quote: gregor6549
      physics she and in Africa physics.

      In this, and only THIS agree with you! I disagree only with your opinion that in order to bring down a GZ target it is enough to see it. Not at all! The process is not limited to detecting, While no system has time to react - that is, PERCEPT - to compose a model of the target’s behavior in order to determine its location at the next moment in time - in other words, take a lead, form a mission for its missile to guarantee its destruction of the target’s target , to ensure such a speed for their rocket, so that they really meet at a calculated point in space. While the missile defense target manages to fly by much more than the existing air defense (ABM) means are calculated. I do not mean our means ...
  13. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      7 August 2019 18: 22
      Who are you talking about?
  14. +2
    7 August 2019 17: 52
    Quote: bmv04636
    as I understand it, the carrier plays the role of the first stage, and it must be accelerated if I am not mistaken to Mach 1,5, so that the rocket reaches hypersound. The Americans have a rocket mock-up of a small non-starting engine that would disperse the rocket before turning on the direct-flow system in our case, this is done by the carrier Or I'm wrong

    No not like this. Take two rockets for comparison. The same "Iskander" and its aerial version - "Dagger". The first has a maximum speed of about 6M, the "Dagger", taking into account the fact that the carrier has a supersonic speed at the time of launch - the speed at the end of the OUT will be about 11M. Accordingly, launching from scratch or from an altitude of about 18 km also gives a different range. From a height, of course, it is larger.

    Now for the "starter motor". Ballistic missiles, even our "Dagger", even the American AGM-183A NO STARTING ACCELERATION ENGINE.... The cruise rocket engine starts immediately. The accelerating engine is needed for hypersonic cruise missiles. So in order for the hypersonic ramjet to start - both on the same American X-51 and our Zircon - yes, a starting engine is needed. But AGM-183A, not a hypersonic ramjet missile, but a conventional rocket engine
    1. -2
      7 August 2019 21: 16
      Well right Iskander is not hypersonic speed of 6,4 for a dagger 10-12. After all, they themselves answered, the higher the speed of the carrier, the higher the speed of the rocket itself. Since the carrier is crawling like a turtle, the speed gain will ultimately not be significant. But as you have noticed, all this will be hypersound (everything that is more than five hypersounds is more than correct) is correct. But it’s still slow at light elves, and you won’t be able to refute it, can you?
  15. +2
    8 August 2019 15: 35
    Quote: bmv04636
    Well right Iskander is not hypersonic speed of 6,4 for a dagger 10-12. After all, they themselves answered, the higher the speed of the carrier, the higher the speed of the rocket itself. Since the carrier is crawling like a turtle, the speed gain will ultimately not be significant. But as you have noticed, all this will be hypersound (everything that is more than five hypersounds is more than correct) is correct. But it’s still slow at light elves, and you won’t be able to refute it, can you?


    Dear Maxim! Don't beep such nonsense with speeds anymore. Hypersonic speeds start at 5M. For Iskander it is slightly more than 6M, for Dagger it is about 11. But both missiles are hypersonic.
    Now for speed gains. When firing from a supersonic carrier, the speed will really add up (if roughly) from the speeds of the carrier (like the first stage) and the speed of the rocket itself (like the second stage of the system). What will it affect? Of course, the range of defeat
    I give below a diagram, pulled at one time from the "air base"
    This is a diagram of an attack by the "Dagger" complex against a target when launched from a MiG-31


    As you can see, the attack scheme can be divided into three stages.
    The first stage - subsonic flight for 8 minutes during which the carrier will be removed at a distance of 125 km from the base point
    The second stage - supersonic flight for 15 minutes during which the carrier will move 575 km from the point of transition to supersonic and reach its own speed of 2300 km / h and an altitude, for example, 18 km The duration of this stage depends only on the aircraft engines, their cravings and "gluttony"
    The third stage - shooting the "Dagger" and accelerating it to hypersonic speed at the end of the OUT. This is where the fact that the rocket did not start at zero speed, like the Iskander, that it launched from a certain altitude, will also play a role (this will also add flight range). In total, the range of destruction by the MIG-31 - DAGGER system will be about 2000 km. The target's speed will be supersonic, otherwise, even at altitudes of 10-20 km, a rocket moving at a speed of even 5M will have such a surface temperature that it will simply burn out. And in the zeal of speed as a result of braking is nothing unusual.

    And now we can move on to another stage of discussion. To a discussion of media speed. At what distance the MIG will reach, before we shoot it we discussed - 700 km.
    Now we take the TU-22M3 as a carrier. With a load of at least 3 "Daggers", it is unlikely to be able to reach speeds comparable to those of MIGs. Most likely the speed will be a little over 1M, and the altitude is probably 12-14 kilometers. What will be the result in this case. The speed is lower, the launch height is lower, which means that the Dagger will fly away from the launch point not by 1300 km, as in the case of the MIG, but less. Well, let it be 900-1000 km.
    But TU-22M3 will have a larger radius of the subsonic and supersonic flights. Not 700 km. like the MIG, but, for example, 1500-2000 km. In the sum of three stages, the total reach of the system will be higher than that of the MIG, and will be, for example, 2500 km (or 3000 km)
    And finally, consider the same American B-52 as a carrier. It, in contrast to the MIG and TU-22M3, has a subsonic flight speed, but the radius will be colossal. more than 7000 km. Especially when you consider that even if you put 4 "Daggers" on it with their weight of about 5 tons each, then it will be only 2/3 of the combat load (while for a MIG or TU it will be close to the limit). The range of the "Dagger" rocket when launched from the same altitude of 12-14 km, but at subsonic speed, will of course be less than in the MIG and TU variants, but the range of destruction by a system consisting of a B-52 and a gyro-sonic missile will be greater, since not only how much the missile will fly away after launch, but also the radius of destruction of the entire system. And in this situation, the radius of the B-52 with such missiles will be somewhere in the region of 8000 km.

    In the end case, the main thing is not only the gain in speed, but also the total parameters of the entire system. And with the B-52, they will be higher, despite the fact that we have higher carrier speeds, and because of this, the rocket speed is higher, and the missile range is also higher. But in total we lose to the old carrier with subsonic speed but with a huge radius
    1. 0
      8 August 2019 17: 59
      Quote: Old26
      He, unlike the MIG and TU-22M3, has a subsonic flight speed, but the radius will be colossal. more than 7000 km.

      not a radius, but a range. radius of 1500-2500km with a load of 12t.
      Quote: Old26
      In the end case, the main thing is not only the gain in speed, but also the total parameters of the entire system. And with the B-52, they will be higher, despite the fact that we have higher carrier speeds, and because of this, the rocket speed is higher, and the missile range is also higher. But in total we lose to the old carrier with subsonic speed but with a huge radius

      and with what interruption do you have all the characteristics of the complex ended at the range of the carrier ??? in my opinion, the launch range is much more important. what is the point in the carrier if it is forced to enter the air defense zone to work out? especially such a barn as the B-52! and responsiveness?
      no, your conclusions are extremely doubtful.
    2. +1
      8 August 2019 23: 07
      Quote: Old26
      In the end case, the main thing is not only the gain in speed, but also the total parameters of the entire system. And with the B-52 they will be higher

      I do not agree with you! The most important property of the GZ system is the time from the moment (not even starting) of the DECISION to strike, until the moment the target is hit! It is the high "speed" of the strike that allows, using tactical, in general, means, to solve tasks of an operational, or even a strategic scale! This is the main property of GZ systems! No B-52 is capable of providing this! In general, even the use of such a fast carrier as the MiG-31, despite the high flight speed, introduces a large delay in the execution of the decision - even if the aircraft is on duty in readiness number 1, many minutes still pass before reaching the launch line ... Do not compare with the DIRECT launch of the GZ rocket.
  16. +3
    9 August 2019 14: 48
    Quote: SanichSan
    not a radius, but a range. radius of 1500-2500km with a load of 12t.

    Since when did the V-52 suddenly have a radius of 12 tons of load at 1500–2500 km?

    Quote: SanichSan
    and with what interruption do you have all the characteristics of the complex ended at the range of the carrier ??? in my opinion, the launch range is much more important. what is the point in the carrier if it is forced to enter the air defense zone to work out? especially such a barn as the B-52! and responsiveness?
    no, your conclusions are extremely doubtful.

    On the way, dear Alexander, you read with a drink. I have not said anywhere that the characteristics of the complex end at the carrier's flight range. if you carefully read my "writings", you would notice that I am considering not only the range (radius) of the carrier's flight, but also the parameters of the rocket itself. Its possible speed and range, depending on how high and at what speed the carrier is moving. The maximum speed of the same "Dagger" will be at the start from the MIG at a speed of, for example, 2300 km / h. At the start from the TU-22M3, the flight range of the "Dagger" itself will be shorter, since the initial speed at the start will be lower, and the launch altitude too. When launched from the B-52, the direct flight range of the same "Dagger" will be even less due to the carrier's speed.
    But range SYSTEMS (complex) "aircraft + missile" will consist of:
    R = R1 + R2 + R3,
    where R1 - the distance that the medium travels at subsonic speed, R2 - the distance that the carrier travels at supersonic speed, R3 - flight range of a hypersonic missile, R - the range of the "aircraft-missile" system.

    In all three cases, these data R, R1, R2, R3 will be different. And strangely enough, the maximum range of the complex will be with the carrier at subsonic speed, but with a huge radius.
    And in any case, with a hypersonic missile flying range of at least 800 km, the carrier will not have to enter the coverage area of ​​ground or ship air defense systems.

    With regard to efficiency. This is the other side of the coin. Yes, using MIG as a carrier is the most efficient option. But the least "long-range". it can be realized when the target (KUG, AUG) is detected at a distance of 2-2,5 thousand kilometers.
    A system using the TU-22M3 will be slightly less operational, but given the larger range of the carrier, it is possible to hit targets that will be detected at a distance of 3-4 thousand kilometers without waiting for them to approach a distance where MIGs can be used. Using a subsonic carrier with a large radius, targets can be hit at a greater distance, if targets are detected at all at a distance of 5-6 thousand. In addition, a subsonic carrier with a large radius can barrage at a greater distance from its territory, in contrast to complexes where supersonic MIG and TU will be used as the carrier

    Quote: Igor Aviator
    I do not agree with you! The most important property of the GZ system is the time from the moment (not even starting) of the DECISION to strike, until the moment the target is hit! It is the high "speed" of the strike that allows, using tactical, in general, means, to solve tasks of an operational, or even a strategic scale! This is the main property of GZ systems! No B-52 is capable of providing this! In general, even the use of such a fast carrier as the MiG-31, despite the high flight speed, introduces a large delay in the execution of the decision - even if the aircraft is on duty in readiness number 1, many minutes still pass before reaching the launch line ... Do not compare with the DIRECT launch of the GZ rocket.

    You wrote correctly, Igor, that the main advantage of this system is REACTION TIME. But do not forget about RANGE OF ACTION this system. It's like the "golden rule". We win in one, we lose in another. We win in reaction speed, but at the same time we lose in the range of defeat. For us, most likely the parameter TIME now a priority.

    But the matter in the article and in the discussion is not about you and me. It's about an American rocket AGM-183A. And this also implies the fact that having a huge number of bases and sufficiently large water spaces covering America, they can make priority not such a parameter as REACTION TIME, namely range of defeatwhen carriers of such hypersonic missiles meet an adversary long before he, an adversary, can fire back on US territory
    1. -2
      10 August 2019 10: 38
      Beautiful pictures that found out from your pictures. The first B52 carrier, due to its low speed, cannot give the rocket initial acceleration, hence the low speed of the rocket itself and its shorter flight range, because everything is correct. Therefore, they do not speak not about the flight range, not about the speed of the product (so that they would not be laughed at). The carrier itself is so healthy it can be seen, as they say, a mile away and by its arrival (it flies slowly) the same MiG31 can be sent for interception about an unexpected person, is it not so. The question of where we are going to use the Dagger correctly in Europe on systems about the United States drags to the United States is not necessary; for this, we have other means of delivery Topol Vanguard. So the garbage and drank babos, as always, the Americans turned out.
      1. 0
        10 August 2019 13: 19
        800 km carrier will enter the coverage area of ​​our S500 air defense system
  17. +3
    10 August 2019 20: 00
    Quote: bmv04636
    800 km carrier will enter the coverage area of ​​our S500 air defense system

    And even more so in the S-700 coverage area. It will be able to operate with real data, and not with the data from advertising booklets that can be seen at exhibitions. S-500 is not yet and it is not known when it will be. Remember the epic with a long-range interception missile, first for the S-300, and then for the S-400. About 5-7 years they only talked about her, about where she is, this 40N6 enemy would get. And only last year they announced their arming. Moreover, her range is about 400-600 km. It is unlikely that the S-500 will have a longer range. And you are already trying to laugh. No reason yet.
    1. 0
      10 August 2019 20: 03
      MiG31 boogie ha or not so funny
    2. -2
      10 August 2019 20: 14
      By the way, our dagger from our territory reaches Devesela from the US missile defense system in Romania. And they will not be able to eliminate them on the slow B52 rhino, which can already be seen upon take-off, since for launch he will practically need to fly into a tight one, it’s not cruise missiles to launch on which he was washed down if I'm not mistaken 5 ... 6,5 thousand . km
  18. +3
    10 August 2019 20: 16
    Quote: bmv04636
    MiG31 boogie ha or not so funny

    You can go for a walk at least until you turn blue. If you lack the intelligence and ingenuity to understand that with all the MIG's fastest and highest altitude data, the range of the system with this carrier will be minimal compared to other carriers - well, this is your problem. I already chewed that even a first grader could understand the scheme. You did not understand. Sorry, continue on ...
    1. -2
      10 August 2019 20: 37
      This is apparently you are reading or thinking poorly. I already told you one goal of the dagger system about the United States in Romania in Devesela he gets it without entering the air defense zone. Why do we need a supersonic carrier in the picture, the same as your carrier speed, the higher the range and speed of the rocket, you will not argue with that. What are the advantages of a range of B52 as a carrier, while the range of the launch itself is shorter (And at the same time, according to the established tradition, the United States usually wins the characteristics of its products, but we underestimate them). So why do you need a carrier flight range, explain to me if at the same time the speed and range of the launch itself suffer, what for does it need ah? What you ran into this range is not with the United States, but he will raise the B52, but from the European airdrome, well, a fig goat button accordion. Or everything is just that the USA does not have a suitable suitable carrier for this type of missile. And it's just dust in the eyes of the type we still can do something and will not be accepted into service due to the easy destruction of the carrier which you don’t need to launch cruise missiles with a range of thousands of km
  19. 0
    1 October 2019 17: 23
    I recalled the aeroballistic rocket GAM-87 Skybolt-
    Flight radius with combat load - 3218 km
    Practical range - 1770 km
    Marching flight speed - over 7408 km / h
    Active section of the flight path - 29 sec
    Weight and size characteristics
    Missile length - 11300 mm
    The diameter of the body in the middle - 790 mm
  20. 0
    1 May 2020 17: 00
    A "hypersonic gliding block" is unacceptable for a missile with a non-nuclear warhead. drastically reduces accuracy.

"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"