In the United States, they select the type of suspension unit for placing hypersonic missiles on the B-1B Lancer

In the US, they announced that they will use the B1 strategic bombers as carriers of hypersonic weapons. At the beginning of 2019, the U.S. Air Force was listed as the 61 B1 bomber, but a recent Pentagon report showed that most of them are either under repair or preparing to be delivered for repair and maintenance.

It is planned to attract industry partners to integrate hypersonic missiles with the B-1B Lancer.

At the same time, one of those responsible for the B-1B Lancer modernization program in the US Air Force, Lt. Col. Dominic Ross, noted that "the United States is committed to a strategic offensive arms reduction treaty, and therefore the B1 will not have nuclear warheads in hypersonic weapons." This statement was made during an inspection of the Edwards Air Force Base in California.

Dominic Ross noted that today all possibilities to expand the range of ammunition use on this strategic supersonic bomber are being considered. According to him, today it is 24 type of weapons.

Ross:

We plan to bring this figure to 40. And it is very important to choose the type of pylon (suspension unit) in order to turn the bomber into a carrier of hypersonic missiles.

Also, as stated, the option of placing hypersonic weapons in the internal compartments of the strategic bomber is being considered. To do this, we study the possibility of using a dynamic internal bulkhead between the compartments - in order to separate the various weapons and use one or another of them to carry out a combat mission.

Comments

[Mountain shooter]

They will stipulate and advertise each new bolt. Then they will take a long time to choose the inscriptions on the warheads of their "hypersonic" missiles?
Well, etc. the main thing is to create a "publicity" ...

[ltc35]

And ours simply did without noise and dust. Well, they (Americans) cannot start without working for the public.

[voyaka uh]

Nobody has done it yet. The Russians hung Iskander under the MiG-31 BR and declared it a "hypersonic weapon". The Americans did about the same a year later.
Hypersonic KR has not yet been created by anyone.

[Voyager]

The dagger objectively accelerates to hypersound. What is the difference with a ramjet engine or not? The result is important, not the way to achieve it.

[Amateur]

And what are you going to suspend? Or will they customize the rocket (when it finally appears) under the suspension?

[Andrey Chistyakov]

Quote: Amateur

And what are you going to suspend? Or will they customize the rocket (when it finally appears) under the suspension?

"Noodles" - as always.

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Amateur

Or will they customize a rocket (when it finally appears on them) under the suspension?

And then the plane under the suspension

[KVU-NSVD]

"The United States is committed to a strategic offensive arms reduction treaty, and therefore, hypersonic weapons for B1 will not have nuclear warheads."

In the art of lying with a serious look, Americans have no equal. One of the steps to breaking the START treaty (or rather, preparing for an already pleasant decision)

[silverwolf88]

they are adherents of the treaties)) ... don’t tell our Sarmatians ... the most non-negotiable country ... so far they are profitable within the framework of ... as soon as they have created something ... they immediately forgotten the treaty (the ABM treaty is the best picture ... with the rest too)
there would be a carrier ... let alone the head for it in a nuclear version add the question of time and work of the printing press of the US Federal Reserve ...

[rocket757]

"The United States is committed to a strategic offensive arms reduction treaty, and therefore, hypersonic weapons for B1 will not have nuclear warheads."

This is a fairy tale for internal use and for overly excitable \ nervous "partners" ... the fact that they have already taken their "armored train" out of the siding, it is clear without words!

[Old26]

Quote: Amateur

And what are you going to suspend? Or will they customize the rocket (when it finally appears) under the suspension?

Well, for placing missiles not in the bomb bay, in any case, suspension units, possibly designed for supersonic flight, will be needed. And in any case, you will have to customize the rocket under the suspension. What are they on V-1V, what are we on TU-22M3. Moreover, it all depends on the dimensions of the rocket. If the combined compartment is enough - they will make it on the internal suspension, no - on the external

[Sky strike fighter]

Especially for the Tu-22M3M, the rocket will have to be customized, everything has been adjusted there even for the not-so-small hypersonic X-32 in its dimensions.

[Rwmos]

Whatever the child was amusing, if only not with his hands (and nothing vulgar. Just the padders have hands made of zheppa).
In general, this is a squirrel. Integrating an imaginary hypersonic weapon - this is how to quarrel with an imaginary friend

[rotmistr60]

It is very important to choose the type of pylon (suspension unit),

The node is of course important especially when the rocket is not yet available. In the meantime, la, .lya, poplar for his layman, so that he knows - the US Army will "protect" him from any enemy and introduce democracy in any single country ..

[Old26]

Quote: rotmistr60

The knot is of course important especially when there is no rocket yet.

Actually there is. It is called AGM-183A ARRW. Created according to the "Arrow" project. The most likely candidate for armament is the B-1B.
Work is also underway on the Hacksaw project. so they already have options ...

Quote: RWMos

Whatever the child was amusing, if only not with his hands (and nothing vulgar. Just the padders have hands made of zheppa).

Of course. After all, they are Americans. A priori they know nothing and cannot do anything ....

Quote: RWMos

In general, this is a squirrel. Integrating an imaginary hypersonic weapon - this is how to quarrel with an imaginary friend

What about us? Not this way? This summer, Poseidon only reached the initial stage of sea trials, and last year he was painted as if he was already in the army and only waited for him to come up with a name.

[Voyager]

Quote: Old26

What about us? Not this way? This summer, Poseidon only reached the initial stage of sea trials, and last year he was painted as if he was already in the army and only waited for him to come up with a name.

Not this way. 2 years ago, it was presented by GDP, but did not talk about mass production. Batch production was discussed in the context of the Vanguard, Dagger and laser system. And Poseidon went to the field tests in the middle of the 2018 and passes them, by the way, successfully. You say that about running gears, as if this is the beginning of a path full of uncertainties.

[Sky strike fighter]

Today, the most serious missile in the arsenal of the same B-52N (the main aircraft of the United States Long-Range Aviation) is the AMG-86B. Its capabilities: range - 2400 km, nuclear charge power - 150 kt, KVO - 80 m.
If not difficult, clarify the main performance characteristics of the developed AGM-183A ARRW.

[Sky strike fighter]

AGM-183A Advanced Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) Americans promise to disperse as much as 20 Max, which looks like weighty noodles. The ARRW prototype was suspended from the B-52 Stratofortress in July this year to collect test data, including environmental and controllability characteristics of the aircraft. There was no test launch of the rocket. Video by link.
https://pikabu.ru/story/prototip_giperzvukovoy_raketyi_agm183a_advanced_rapid_response_weapon_arrw_6766740

[Mavrikiy]

In the United States, they select the type of suspension unit for placing hypersonic missiles on the B-1B Lancer

Contact, we will sell.

"The United States is committed to a strategic offensive arms reduction treaty, and so hypersonic weapons for B1 will not have nuclear warheads."

Who will believe, liars.

[Old26]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Today, the most serious missile in the arsenal of the same B-52N (the main aircraft of the United States Long-Range Aviation) is the AMG-86B. Its capabilities: range - 2400 km, nuclear charge power - 150 kt, KVO - 80 m.
If not difficult, clarify the main performance characteristics of the developed AGM-183A ARRW.

Maksim! The data on this missile is "vague" from many sources and in most cases is estimates. And so the data is in principle "classified". What can be said summarizing the known materials

Structurally, ARRW is a solid-fuel aeroballistic missile with a warhead in the form of a detachable hypersonic warhead with a Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) rocket engine, which has been under the auspices of the agency DARPA (Advanced Defense Research Agency) for some time. Work on this block began in 2014. and there are rumors that the test of this unit was in the spring of this year.

Unofficially, its TBG combat unit is credited with speeds of up to 20 Machs according to optimistic estimates, but more realistic figures are 7-8 Machs. Below I will explain why

What can be said about the mass-size model that was tested. In the tail of the rocket placed steering block of four trellised stabilizers in the folded position. The launch weight of the rocket is estimated at 2250 kilograms, with a total length of 6,4 meters. This will allow carrying such a missile not only on the underwing pylons, but also in the bomb bay of the B-1B bomber. The B-52 N bomber is capable of carrying up to four such missiles on two underwing pylons.

The declared flight range of the AGM-183A ARRW missile is 800 kilometers. It is difficult to say how much more or less it will be, since there have been no flight tests, especially for the maximum range. The diameter of the midsection of the product is 0,97 meters. This parameter is key, since the rocket was created in a hurry. It gives us an understanding of what specific type of engine is supposed to be installed on the rocket. With a very high probability this is the Orion 38 XL turbojet engine. The number 38 in the code means the outer diameter of the midsection of the stage in inches, and 38 inches is 97 cm. The engine is well known among rocket engineers. Its thrust is not classified information, it is in all reference books on civilian launch vehicles that provide commercial satellite launch services. Traction - 3,48 tons. Engine running time - 68 seconds, which is a few seconds less than the "Dagger"

If we compare this missile with our "Dagger" ("Iskander"), then the length of the "American" is shorter than that of the "Dagger". 6,4 meters versus 7 meters at the "Dagger". The diameter of the midsection is approximately the same (the "American" is slightly "thicker") 91 centimeters for the "Dagger" versus 94 centimeters for the AGM-183A.

Typically, missiles of a class such as AGM-183A, that is, BRs with a range of up to a thousand kilometers, the cast weight is about 10 percent of the starting weight, that is, in our case it is about 500 pounds or 227 kg.
The Americans, in principle, have a small selection of nuclear warheads. This is either W80-4 LAN, or variants of W-61-3, W-61-4 LAN. These YAZU weigh about 290 pounds (130 kg).

As for the detachable Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) rocket-powered hypersonic warhead. Most likely it is "noodles". bluff because the engine and fuel are then most likely a bluff, since only 97 kilograms of the remaining thrown mass remain on it.

Most likely, the AGM-183A missile is a classic BRVZ missile, without frills, like the X-47 Dagger. The thrust of the Orion 38 XL engine is enough to accelerate 500 pounds of payload to a speed of 2500–2600 meters per second (7,5–8 M) needed to reach a range of 800 kilometers when starting from an air platform flying at an altitude of 10-12 kilometers at a speed of 850-900 kilometers per hour.

Well, that’s probably all that can be said on the analysis of open data

[Sky strike fighter]

Thank you. So they are trying to make an analog of the Dagger at the request of Trump.

[SASHA OLD]

thank you!

[Old26]

Quote: Voyager

Not this way. 2 years ago, it was presented by GDP, but did not talk about mass production.

so the Americans do not say that they have serial production. And both of them are PR, but PR is considered the norm here, but for them it will end in a cut.
If we are already comparing, what should be approached to such a comparison with more significant criteria than PR in the media

Quote: Voyager

About mass production it was in the context of the Vanguard, Dagger and laser installation.

Was the avant-garde positioned as a serial product? So what? You can call anything serial, only the starting minimum will be at the OBD only at the end of this year. Only then will it be possible to say about serial production. What's the point if the plant produces, for example, 50 Avangards in the first half of the year, and one carrier is upgraded for it only at the end of the year. Warehouse work? Or is the end result not important, the main thing is to say?
I can’t say anything about Peresvet, at least it appeared in two positional areas of the taxiway. The rest is quiet. The question is, is there a series?
"Dagger" at the OBD at the training ground. And it continues to undergo tests, which means that there is no question of any series yet. It is enough to look at the photos to see that they sometimes have different rockets in the number of aerodynamic planes.

Quote: Voyager

And Poseidon went to proving ground tests in mid-2018 and, by the way, passes them successfully. You say that about running gears, as if this is the beginning of a path full of uncertainties.

The fact that at the Poseidon training ground a couple of times they shot from the stand does not mean anything. Nobody even knows what configuration it was in. And whether there was a nuclear power plant on it. For no one will ever carry out the first tests with shooting with a product, especially if it has a nuclear power plant
Chassis - yes, this is the beginning of a path full of uncertainty. For only running gear in different modes can provide material on noise. For only the undercarriage will be able to determine the maximum possible speed and answer the question whether it can stay afloat at a speed of 0. For only during sea trials can the navigation system be worked out and it will be possible to answer the question of how high this "product" will be manageable. And hundreds of other questions. So yes it is the beginning of a journey full of uncertainties.

[Voyager]

Quote: Old26

and here they will definitely end with a cut

Listen, but this is an objectively frequent phenomenon among them. See how much they spend on development and how many products remain prototypes. Spoiler: many times more.

Quote: Old26

Only then will it be possible to say about serial production. What's the point if the plant produces, for example, 50 Avangards in the first half of the year, and one carrier is upgraded for it only at the end of the year.

Seriality can be said when mass production begins. It has begun. The development of the Vanguard is officially completed. By the end of this year, it is planned to complete the regiment, which will go on combat duty. What else do you need?

Quote: Old26

No one even knows what configuration he was in. And whether there was a nuclear power plant on it.

How to say... Sorry, I will not comment on the rest.

[Old26]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Thank you. So they are trying to make an analog of the Dagger at the request of Trump.

You could say that. This is the least expensive way than creating a rocket with a hypersonic ramjet. They are now returning to their idea of ​​the late 50s. But then there were problems with management (guidance) and the idea had to be abandoned. Now it is possible to solve this at a new level.
Cruise missiles are certainly an accurate and multi-purpose thing, but subsonic speed makes them slow and vulnerable to air defense systems. Compare. The same AGM-86 missile will overcome a range of 800 km per hour, and AGM-183A in 5 minutes

[Old26]

Quote: Voyager

Listen, but this is an objectively frequent phenomenon among them. See how much they spend on development and how many products remain prototypes. Spoiler: many times more.

It is rather not an objectively frequent occurrence with them, but simply the cost is sometimes much higher than the same weapon in other countries. Take "Caliber" and "Tomahawk" for example. According to the data voiced at one time by Shoigu, one can calculate that the cost of our "Caliber" is equal to 800 dollars against 000 million on average for them. The cost of labor must also be taken into account. Of course there is a drink from them, when they can buy hammers worth 1,5 dollars. Or toilets for the price of gold. But in any case, control, incl. and they have financial, just like we do. But everyone saws (or tries to saw), Some more, others less.
About prototypes. We do not know how many prototypes we have until the moment the product went to the troops. Even those that are well-known, such as rocket systems "Grach", "Sych", "Luch", variations on the theme "Temp-2S - and there were about a dozen of them, air" Agat "and ground" Agat-1 "," Elbrus "," Baikal "and others - all this was created. Something was tested, something did not reach the test, something was not accepted for service. This all has a place to be. How much is spent on this is an interesting question, but alas, closed to us

Quote: Voyager

Seriality can be said when mass production begins. It has begun. The development of the Vanguard is officially completed. By the end of this year, it is planned to complete the regiment, which will go on combat duty.

Clear. So we can talk about a series when not even in service. This is an excuse up there, when # 1 asks the question, but what about what I was talking about. And they take it under the hood and report - serial production has begun. As I said, I don't see the point in such a production when there is no carrier. Working for a warehouse, for the future - it would certainly be possible if all the carriers of this object were in the series. What happens? Well, as I said, 50 Vanguards will be produced. what's next?
By the end of this year, it is not planned to equip the regiment, but it is planned to put into service only a launch minimum. And the starting minimum is TWO MINES and MINES TEAM... The floor itself from 6 silos is planned to be delivered to the HBS by the end of 2020. So? "Sarmat", on which the "Vanguard" is positioned, has never flown. Only tests can show how the "missile-combat load" complex will behave. And what if you have to make alterations to the "Vanguard" due to some problems, well, let's say "incompatibility"? With the Avangards already manufactured at the plant, what should you order? For scrap, or redo an already finished product? Who needs such serial production? Only to say: "And we have it already in the series" !!! ???

Quote: Voyager

Well, how can I say ... smile I will not comment on the rest.

I do not insist. But you must admit that an indistinct 20 second video about the release of "something" and, most importantly, "somewhere" still does not make it possible to say that the product is already at least 10% ready. The initial phase, which is unknown how long it will last. There are few cases when the shift of the end of the tests occurs to the right. An example is the same "Zircon". We talked about putting into service first in 2016-2017, then in 2018, now in 2019-2020 only the first tests from the carriers will take place, after which you can draw some conclusions ...

[Osipov9391]

B-1 in flight performance is inferior to our Tu-160, but it has external suspension components and takes a much larger range of weapons with a more advanced avionics.
So the Americans, if they want to do it, they will.
And we should not forget that this aircraft is not affected by the START treaties as supposedly converted to conventional weapons. But these are all fairy tales.
And now the Americans are returning B-1 back to their nuclear triad and are testing the ground for exiting START-3.

[Old26]

Quote: Osipov9391

B-1 in flight performance is inferior to our Tu-160, but has external suspension components and takes a much larger range of weapons with a more advanced avionics.

Now B-1B has no external suspension units and the movable partition between 1 and 2 bomb compartments is made stationary (fixed). This was a condition for the transfer of B-1B from the composition of strategic nuclear bombers to non-nuclear.

Quote: Osipov9391

And we should not forget that this aircraft is not affected by the START treaties as supposedly converted to conventional weapons. But these are all fairy tales

Fairy tales? And you try to put a 6-meter rocket into the compartment with a length of 4,5 meters and then tell me whether it is a fairy tale or not. Or do you consider our inspectors suckers and traitors?

Quote: Osipov9391

And now the Americans are returning B-1 back to their nuclear triad and are testing the ground for exiting START-3.

They have not yet returned them to the nuclear triad. This can happen only after the AGM-183A hypersonic missile is ready, and that only if it sat down with a nuclear warhead.
Not yet. And by the time they finish the "Strela", the START-3 will expire and it is not known whether it will be prolonged by both sides or will cease to exist.