Military Review

New rules. Than the USA will bring down the Russian "Daggers" and "Vanguards"

75

More sound


About the development of hypersonic weapons lately did not speak only very lazy. It is worth saying that hypersonic speed itself, that is, speed with Mach 5 number and higher, has long ceased to be something out of the ordinary, however paradoxical it may seem at first glance. USA back in 1959 for the first time in stories tested a manned hypersonic North American X-15 aircraft, which proved the ability to fly at speeds above 6000 kilometers per hour. The hypersonic speed is also developed by the combat equipment of intercontinental ballistic missiles, as well as ballistic missiles of submarines.




What then is the meaning of innovations like the American Hypersonic Weapons Systempresented not so long ago? In short, a weapon claiming to be “hypersonic” must not only be able to achieve tremendous speeds, but also be able to carry out a controlled flight using aerodynamic forces. Roughly speaking, maneuver if necessary, up to the moment the target is hit.

There are many problems along the way. Due to the high-speed flow in the frontal point of the apparatus, gas is heated to extremely high temperatures - up to several thousand degrees. The second difficulty is the neutralization of the shielding effect of a cloud of red-hot plasma surrounding the rocket, which prevents the passage of commands, thereby reducing the ability of the product to effectively aim at the target.

Moreover, these problems represent only the tip of the iceberg. It is unclear, for example, how much hypersonic weapons will cost and who exactly should act as carriers of such systems. However, none of these challenges bother the creators of hypersonic missiles: neither Russians, nor Americans, nor Europeans, nor Chinese. Moreover, every year more and more hypersonic missile projects appear. Every year, both the West and the East demonstrate an increasing willingness to invest in such weapons systems.

The reason is clear: for all the difficulties of developing hypersonic weapons, it will be much more difficult to intercept them than a supersonic aircraft. All this forces countries to seek an “antidote.” The United States can get it first.

Three giants


In September, the bmpd Strategy and Technology Analysis Center blog reported on 30 on August 2019 that the United States Missile Defense Agency issued three US corporations — Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon — for conceptual development of anti-sonic weapons. This is all called the Hypersonic Defense Weapon Systems Concept.

A Lockheed Martin unit called Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control was awarded a $ 4,4 million contract to develop the Valkyrie Interceptor Terminal Hypersonic Defense. Boeing received a contract worth 4,3 million dollars: he will work on what is called the Hypervelocity Interceptor Concept for Hypersonic Weapons.

Finally, Raytheon issued a contract worth 4,4 million dollars for the SM3-HAW concept, which, experts say, could be based on the RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 missile family. By the way, has already proven its effectiveness. As early as 2008, the SM-3 launched from the Lake Erie cruiser hit the USA-247 emergency reconnaissance satellite located at an altitude of 193 kilometers, which traveled at a speed of 27 thousand kilometers per hour. The warhead is kinetic. When pointing, a high-resolution matrix infrared homing head is used.



Work in all three areas should be completed before May 2 2020 year. These contracts are only part of the tremendous effort that the United States will invest in creating interceptors that can effectively counter hypersonic threats. Earlier, Deputy Minister of Defense Michael Griffin said that protecting against hypersonic weapons would require investing in several main directions at once, in particular, putting new radar stations into operation, putting new spacecraft into orbit, and finally creating new interceptors, which we wrote about above.

How real are the fears of the Americans? Domestic experts see Russia as an almost unconditional leader in this direction.

“Hypersonic weapons are truly a domestic development. We went a long way to it, because Americans, in principle, learned how to launch hypersound in the 1950s, when they were developing ballistic missiles. But we managed to control hypersonic flight at such speeds. The Americans failed. ”

- said not so long ago a famous Russian military specialist Alexei Leonkov.



In fairness, we note: the expert is not quite right. If only because of the veil of secrecy that takes place in the case of hypersonic missiles. However, something is known even to mere mortals. For example, that the X-47M2 “Dagger” can be attributed to a hypersonic missile with a stretch, since, in fact, we have an aeroballistic complex: an analogue of the Soviet X-15 or AS-16 “Kickback” according to NATO classification. Which at a certain section of the flight could also reach Mach 5, however, could not maintain it throughout the flight path. As for the Zircon, then News there’s not much about him lately, and the timing of adoption and characteristics are still unknown. This is not counting the loud, but sometimes conflicting statements of officials, where the range, weight and types of media are changing.



Missile defense should be economical


The United States is also not going smoothly. Not all of the promising missile defense areas are satisfied with the Pentagon. So, in early September it became known that the military decided to suspend the program for developing beam weapons on neutral particles, which they wanted to use to intercept Russian and Chinese missiles.

“We will focus our efforts on other areas of creating weapons of directed energy, on which we are also working now, in particular, on lasers. We need hundreds of kilowatt lasers, and we give priority to this area, ”

- said the Deputy Minister of Defense.

Griffin also noted that another promising area is a high-power microwave weapon.

This is a completely normal process: some projects survive and get a ticket to life, while others fall under reductions. However, the desire of Americans to get reliable protection against various hypersonic threats is quite obvious. As well as the fact that interest in the interceptors of hypersonic missiles will grow along with interest directly in the missiles themselves.
Author:
75 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 12 September 2019 06: 19 New
    15
    The United States can get it first.

    Why would it suddenly? Everything there is still in the "Concept" state. And RIM that shot down the satellite is an anti-satellite weapon, and not against hypersonic ones. The satellite is not even a variable speed warhead, and certainly not a maneuverable hypersonic target. EVERYONE is working on the counteraction and the first reaction will appear for the one who overcomes all the problems present in the hypersonic person, since the antihypersonic person has the same problems in the cube.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 September 2019 20: 34 New
      -1
      The one who has more laboratories, specialists, the general technological reserve, will overcome first.
      1. lucul
        lucul 14 September 2019 00: 46 New
        0
        The one who has more laboratories, specialists, the general technological reserve, will overcome first.

        Well, the Americans have more of this than the Russians. But the Russians were the first to make hypersonic missiles .....
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 14 September 2019 14: 05 New
          0
          Nonsense. First? Iskander in the aeroballistic version?
          And there are at least some materials specifically about the tests of the Russian scramjet, (like Wave-rider).
          And this is a very serious technological reserve.
          1. ref25
            ref25 14 September 2019 16: 09 New
            0
            We have our own serious technological backlog and in addition there are products that scramjet owners do not have.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 14 September 2019 17: 57 New
              -1
              In the area of ​​OTR, of which the dagger is an air version?
              Full-fledged hypersonic missiles / aircraft can only be with scramjet. And while we are deaf with this.
              It is in this area.
              But there is a Kalashnikov assault rifle and ground-based electronic warfare systems. The USA does not have them (only sea and air).
    2. lucul
      lucul 14 September 2019 00: 44 New
      0
      in hypersonic

      How unpleasant it sounds ......
      Hypersound is better for me.
  2. afrikanez
    afrikanez 12 September 2019 06: 20 New
    +9
    The title of the article is promising, and here. More precisely about the dreams of the Americans.
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 13 September 2019 07: 58 New
      0
      So they have enough money for a large number of studies. The military budget is almost three times larger than the entire Russian one.
  3. YOUR
    YOUR 12 September 2019 06: 29 New
    10
    ... Griffin also noted that another promising area is a high-power microwave weapon ..... Ie when it starts from heaven, not only nuclear warheads and their fragments will be strewed, but they will also fry the atmosphere by making a large microwave out of it.
    The only consolation so far is that the work is being carried out neither shakily nor rolls. Well, what kind of project financing is this for three companies at 4.4 million dollars? So on paper clips and other concertina.
  4. Carib
    Carib 12 September 2019 07: 11 New
    10
    4,4 lama $, this is not even a concept. This is a selection of technical ideas with which you can do something that can remotely help make a concept. On paper and pencils, rental of premises and secretary ....
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 12 September 2019 10: 15 New
      0
      Quote: Carib
      $ 4,4 lama


      This is a group of 5-6 employees with a salary of $ 120000-150000 per year for snouts, who will put together a preliminary design for the year and calculate, in a first approximation, the parameters of a promising project.
  5. rocket757
    rocket757 12 September 2019 07: 14 New
    +3
    Missile defense should be economical

    The obvious fact. You can make a large number of missiles !!! only the enemy will still find methods of overcoming / breaking through any defense .... this is easier and methods to achieve such a goal are more than enough ... besides, it will be cheaper in the end.
    look for an "antidote." The United States can get it first.

    does not exist until the antidotes against everything, everything, are observed in the foreseeable future! Those. traditional, well-known methods this can not be achieved!
    The fight between SWORD and SHIELD has been going on for a long time and ..... the sword has more options for action.
    On that current balance of power has been established! All major opponents have their own effective sword.
    1. Grits
      Grits 12 September 2019 15: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: rocket757
      The obvious fact. You can make a large number of missiles !!! only the enemy will still find methods to overcome / break through any defense

      I wonder if ours are working on systems for the destruction of hypersonic missiles? After all, whatever one may say, but they will appear at our "partners" anyway. We must be ready for this too.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 12 September 2019 17: 18 New
        0
        We are going the other way .... there are achievements, the corresponding systems will appear on time! How many questions will they make! Therefore, the SWORD will again be the main defense!
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 12 September 2019 20: 36 New
          -1
          There is progress, little money. Currency is needed, appliances and high-precision machines to purchase.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 13 September 2019 07: 05 New
            0
            Quote: 3danimal
            There is progress, little money. Currency is needed, appliances and high-precision machines to purchase.

            Machines must not be purchased but DO IT YOURSELF !!! In addition to security, a useful bonus from the military-industrial complex!
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 13 September 2019 07: 56 New
              -1
              I think and would be happy for ourselves, but there are no skills.
              There is a long beaten path - licensed production, training of specialists, then your production. One could come to an agreement with the South Koreans. And here is a plus not only for the military-industrial complex, but also for civilian production.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 13 September 2019 08: 02 New
                0
                Quote: 3danimal
                I think and would be happy for ourselves, but there are no skills.

                There are no skills until we started to do it! The rest of the nuances that could be solved earlier .... did not grow together, i.e. they, grab / steal compradors, take them out there, that's their whole life / political line.
            2. 3danimal
              3danimal 13 September 2019 08: 00 New
              0
              And again, all by ourselves and of good quality (and at an affordable price) is impossible to do.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 13 September 2019 08: 22 New
                0
                "Bananas" hardly grow here, that's true. And what else is so vital that "CAN'T" grow with US ???
                We will move the purely economic aspect, for now, aside! In fact, what can we not do from what archives need?
          2. Andrey Andreev_4
            Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 09: 34 New
            -1
            Quote: 3danimal
            There is progress, little money. Currency is needed, appliances and high-precision machines to purchase.

            Currency can be found, there would be a will. Machines and devices are also not a problem to acquire. The most important thing is the specialists, you can’t buy them. They are few and less every day.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 13 September 2019 13: 34 New
              0
              Technology is equally important. Why do you think there are only 2 major manufacturers of processors for PCs and Macs?
              1. Andrey Andreev_4
                Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 14: 43 New
                0
                Quote: 3danimal
                Technology is equally important. Why do you think there are only 2 major manufacturers of processors for PCs and Macs?

                People are more important. Moreover, technology is the result of the work of people!
                As for the manufacturers of processors. These corporations are again led by people, not technology. The merit of these people is that they hired specialists and organized their effective work in order to develop and introduce new technologies. And for the development of new technologies at our enterprises, again, trained people with experience are required. And an experienced chip developer with 10 years of experience will not go to Saratov to work there for 25 thousand. Russian rubles.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 13 September 2019 16: 26 New
                  0
                  I do not agree. There are proven technological secrets, patents owned by these corporations and protected.
                  1. Andrey Andreev_4
                    Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 16: 53 New
                    0
                    Quote: 3danimal
                    I do not agree. There are proven technological secrets, patents owned by these corporations and protected.

                    And what, you do not know how to kill a patent? Yes, find a good specialist, he will roll a new one on top of you in a short time, you will sit to husk seeds and cut tops from money bushes)
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 13 September 2019 18: 21 New
                      0
                      Then too many would copy the same Intel chips, make exact copies of IPhone'o-v, sophisticated drilling equipment. Reproduced offshore gas production technologies. But this is not so. The sanctions blocked Gazprom access to the Western oilfield services and he abandoned plans for the development of offshore fields.
        2. Grits
          Grits 13 September 2019 02: 17 New
          +2
          Quote: rocket757
          Therefore, the SWORD will again be the main defense!

          It seems that indeed in the confrontation with the West, Russia chose the SWORD.
          - Instead of deep anti-tank defense in the European theater of operations - powerful armored formations.
          - Instead of missile defense - systems for overcoming missile defense missile defense and modernization of the Strategic Missile Forces
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 13 September 2019 07: 02 New
            +1
            Quote: Gritsa
            It seems that indeed in the confrontation with the West, Russia chose the SWORD.

            Recent attempts to defend themselves with a shield ended in collapse! Maginot Line, Atlantic Val, Manerheim Line ...... more Enver Hoxha built bunkers / bunkers everywhere.
            No one did anything good.
            The term active defense has acquired a very peculiar meaning ..... bristling with ROCKETS, better vigorous, if possible bring your strike systems closer to enemy territory! Those. inevitability of retaliation!
            Something like this.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 13 September 2019 07: 57 New
              0
              There was experience preparing the sword: the beginning of the Second World War. The opponent took it out first.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 13 September 2019 08: 19 New
                +1
                Now the same sword has an incredible length, no one can be sure. that will remain intact even when it takes a preemptive strike! The most important opponents have no global military advantage!
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 13 September 2019 13: 33 New
                  0
                  The most important will not apply it first (strong enough in conventional weapons). But 100% will be used in the reciprocal counter.
                  The first to attack is also not in their interests. But, say, in the event of an attempt to capture the Baltic countries (to raise the rating), there will be dead US troops. And the beginning of the escalation.
                  1. rocket757
                    rocket757 13 September 2019 13: 44 New
                    +1
                    Quote: 3danimal
                    in case of an attempt to seize the Baltic countries (raise the rating),

                    Doubtful "pleasure" with vague prospects .... besides, "debit with credit" will not converge. The main thing is, why is it needed in case of incidental losses?
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 13 September 2019 16: 31 New
                      0
                      So I think so - no point. But a number of Russian officials periodically like to recall how many days and what they can capture. I heard in 2015 they directly asked: are you ready to die "for Narva"? Why bully like that? There are already consequences - the deployment of military personnel in several Baltic countries and the course towards diversification of hydrocarbon supplies in Europe.
                      1. rocket757
                        rocket757 13 September 2019 17: 30 New
                        0
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        There are already consequences - the deployment of military personnel in several Baltic countries and the course towards diversification of hydrocarbon supplies in Europe

                        Hydrocarbons are a topic purely for babosiks and who wants to earn them, but with a talkative language, there is no particular harm, it’s just not smart, it’s disgusting to listen accordingly.
                      2. 3danimal
                        3danimal 13 September 2019 18: 26 New
                        0
                        A number of politicians sweat seriously take such chatter.
                        As for gas: look - they are consistently restricting Gazprom’s use of the “flows”, while at the same time preparing difficulties for LNG reception. Obviously, the same “flows” will be partly used to transport American gas. Diversification is strategically important for them in order to exclude the possibility of one of the parties to dictate political conditions to them.
                      3. rocket757
                        rocket757 13 September 2019 19: 06 New
                        0
                        It's all for the loot, but what, these are the details.
                        We will be lost they will arrive.
                        Do you think the gay people will suffer what kind of gas they have? These politicians will breed a tramp, layman do not, if only cheaper.
                      4. 3danimal
                        3danimal 13 September 2019 19: 49 New
                        0
                        We feel bad, if it wanes. And why? - Due to attempts to make political demands, using the threat of supply disruption for pressure.
                        They will suffer some price increases, but safety is more important.
                      5. rocket757
                        rocket757 13 September 2019 21: 09 New
                        0
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        And why? - Due to attempts to make political demands, using the threat of supply disruption for pressure.

                        WHERE? WHEN and WHAT?
                      6. 3danimal
                        3danimal 15 September 2019 06: 31 New
                        0
                        Thick hints of the leader of the nation https://youtu.be/Vr7IaPXMpmQ and more outspoken threats of a number of officials (we’ll cover the gas and you will be silk) and the propagandists of central television channels.
                2. VladGTN
                  VladGTN 15 September 2019 01: 12 New
                  0
                  From Germany or Turkey to us?
                3. 3danimal
                  3danimal 15 September 2019 06: 16 New
                  0
                  Ours to Europe. The largest market, 30+% of their consumption. And they are going to dilute this percentage with American LNG.
                4. rocket757
                  rocket757 15 September 2019 07: 55 New
                  0
                  Verbal husk .... if you collect ALL thick, subtle hints that allow yourself from here to there, from here to there, "serious", as it was thought before, faces ....
                  now everything in the world is mixed, held together by mutual interests .....
                  the rest, mostly empty talk, of small figures trying in this way to raise their significance! old old
                5. 3danimal
                  3danimal 15 September 2019 09: 02 New
                  0
                  So they do not allow themselves like that. No experience St. Petersburg gateways, probably. Majors ...
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 12 September 2019 07: 44 New
    0
    So far "nothing" ... A trifle released for development is just a trifle. To gather a temporary group, propose solutions ... The main danger of hypersonic weapons is the limited time for reaction. It doesn't matter even if you have a weapon against such missiles. She flies - 2 km / sec! Minimum. Emerging from the horizon, such a "thing" leaves the crew, for example, of a ship, not much time to react. Very little. And if there are several of them? For clarity, the anti-tank BOPS flies about 1200 m / s. They are knocked down by an automatic system, which detonates a low-power ammunition fired towards him in his path. But this is a scrap, weighing a dozen kilos. And if a couple of hundred? Even if it hit, the debris at such a speed - why not BOPS?
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 September 2019 20: 39 New
      -1
      Hypersonic speeds are not possible / super costly at low altitude. In addition to the fuel car, how to protect yourself from heating 3000 + degrees?
      Therefore - high-altitude flight, and such a goal will be visible from afar. But the flight time is still small, it will not be too easy to shoot down.
      Now supersonic / subtle subsonic anti-ship missiles are quite enough: the former leave little time for reaction due to speed, the latter - reducing the detection range.
  • K-50
    K-50 12 September 2019 08: 14 New
    +1
    for all the difficulties of developing hypersonic weapons, it will be much more difficult to intercept them than a supersonic aircraft. All this forces countries to seek an “antidote.” The United States can get it first.

    Why did the bathhouse fall? belay
    Did pin dosniki learn to implement manageable hypersonic flight? They can’t do the usual thing, but here they can intercept the same hypersonic weapons !! Than??? How???
    Life is not in Hollywood pictures to shoot. fellow lol
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 September 2019 20: 44 New
      +1
      And they shot a movie about the flight to the moon and everyone believed)
      We have their caps, if that.
  • Vitaly Tsymbal
    Vitaly Tsymbal 12 September 2019 08: 20 New
    +2
    Hollywood, did not get into the number of "beaters", for such a fee, even a second-rate actress will not "think"))) Moreover, Hollywood has a lot of old developments proven over the years and payback))) But if it is serious, then for the fact that to develop something against - it is necessary to specifically and precisely know against what ... While the Americans do not know any specifics .... Putin puzzled them strongly with "cartoons", now they will scratch American American turnips for a penny)))
  • Alex Nevs
    Alex Nevs 12 September 2019 08: 28 New
    +2
    They learned how to hit Twitter posts and the like. social networks!
  • Esaul
    Esaul 12 September 2019 08: 39 New
    +2
    They would first learn how to shoot skads!
  • WIKI
    WIKI 12 September 2019 09: 05 New
    +2
    Michael Griffin said that protection against hypersonic weapons would require investment in several main areas at once.
    Domestic experts see Russia as an almost unconditional leader in this direction.
    Something the author reported. For hypersonic weapons, yes. But as regards the topic of the article, the development of means to combat hypersonic weapons, leadership cannot be attributed to any country here.
  • iouris
    iouris 12 September 2019 10: 30 New
    +1
    Firstly, you need to know the estimate of the probability of "shooting down", and secondly, immediately after receiving such an estimate, it will lose its relevance, because there is no method to test a theoretical estimate of probability without a major war.
  • DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 12 September 2019 10: 36 New
    -1
    Hypersonic weapons are another round of the arms race; protection against them will cost an order of magnitude more expensive than the weapons themselves.
    However, over time, hypersonic missiles or radiation weapons will be created. Then Russia will have to develop protection against hypersonic weapons - which will hit a budget boomerang.
    Not a clever decision to spur the arms race with loud statements about "THE MOST promising weapon."
    Every avant-garde, like a school or a small hospital, stands.

    In Russia, patients are supported with first-generation cancer drugs, when in the USA / Israel / Europe the third generation of cancer drugs is already being used - which cure.
    Unfortunately, thanks to the devaluation of the ruble, third-generation drugs are not available to 95% of the Russian population.
    In Israel, the doctor tells the patient that cancer is not a sentence.
    In Russia, the doctor says - there is money - go get cancer treatment to Israel. No money? Well, no luck, drink the first generation pills - maybe you will stretch for some time ...

    The Russian leadership needs to think more about citizens, rather than protecting its capital.
    1. Nastia makarova
      Nastia makarova 13 September 2019 12: 05 New
      +1
      again the song of the old liberal)))
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 13 September 2019 12: 30 New
        -1
        Quote: Nastia Makarova
        again the song of the old liberal)))

        Well, firstly not old - I'm 50 in total.

        Secondly - until you have friends, relatives of cancer will not start to die yet and have not turned 40 years old (God forbid) - you won’t think about free drugs from the gentleman’s shoulder (which are not treated because of obsolescence).
        Do not understand. Why for the price of the avant-garde, you can’t save several thousand people who are dying from cancer by training doctors abroad - in the same Israel or in China and purchasing technology for the production of third-generation drugs.

        The current rulers simply have their own tasks and are in no way connected with the country's population.
        1. Nastia makarova
          Nastia makarova 13 September 2019 14: 34 New
          -1
          old !!! there is no relationship between the expenditure of MO and drugs
          1. DimerVladimer
            DimerVladimer 16 September 2019 16: 03 New
            -2
            Quote: Nastia Makarova
            old !!! there is no relationship between the expenditure of MO and drugs


            Learn the economy. The connection is direct.
            The cost of weapons and weapons beyond the border necessary for parity is a waste.

            I do not think it is normal that 6,6 times less is spent on health care in the Russian Federation than on national defense (2,56% versus 17,01% of the Russian budget)

            it was even worse in 2014-15-16-17 (2,2% versus 17,01%)

            https://avatars.mds.yandex.net/get-zen_doc/99101/pub_5d49b9486f5f6f00ad03a228_5d49c1cfddfef600add60d98/scale_600
            Health care is slightly better in 2019, 3,6% versus 16,2% for defense - that is, the bias remains monstrous.

            And it is not regrettable to compare with the United States where 17% is spent on defense and .... 24% on healthcare - almost 10 times more than in Russia.

            Well, there the people will tear their heads for their rights, but we will die and not whine.
            1. Nastia makarova
              Nastia makarova 17 September 2019 08: 02 New
              0
              and will never whine, the defense is more important to us
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer 17 September 2019 09: 53 New
                -1
                Quote: Nastia Makarova
                and will never whine, the defense is more important to us


                From whom? :)) Do not listen to propaganda on zomboyaschik.
                Someone would try to threaten a nuclear power that could destroy the United States 20 times and 30 times each of its allies :)) Too much.

                Nobody threatens us, they do not encroach on sovereignty - even during the Cuban crisis, the United States did not dare to get involved in the conflict - and then we were an order of magnitude weaker - only three P-7s on alert duty. And since the days of the USSR, we have something to answer - it itself had to do with delivery vehicles, most of them have been modernized and are in service, and no one except the United States has such a quantity of strategic weapons.
                It makes no sense to get involved in an arms race, to give rise to it.

                Our leadership is more dangerous than any enemy, it itself suffocates the country, quietly privatizing key sectors like Russian Railways.
                For this they were cut off from foreign investments, which they were terribly offended by and now care exclusively about personal safety.
                They are inflating the population how badly they treat Russia, but in general this applies to a certain irremovable group of people.
                1. Nastia makarova
                  Nastia makarova 17 September 2019 09: 59 New
                  +1
                  the only thing that agrees is about our leadership! the fact that privatization is nowhere to go - capitalism
                  I don’t agree about the army, the army must be maintained at a high technological level, especially since the collapse of the military-industrial complex saved our industry
    2. Voyager
      Voyager 30 October 2019 12: 04 New
      0
      Why are both the author and you ignoring the existence of the S-500 today, which is designed to destroy hypersonic targets?
  • Operator
    Operator 12 September 2019 11: 11 New
    +3
    "A high-resolution matrix infrared seeker is used for aiming." - a dead issue in the case of any existing and nominated for the development of Western missile defense bully

    Anti-missile missiles with radar or infrared seekers cannot intercept hypersonic aircraft flying in the atmosphere up to an altitude of ~ 80 km, since the anti-missile velocity must also be hypersonic, causing the generation of plasma around the anti-missile and blocking the radio-frequency missile radar.

    Infrared seeker stops working even at supersonic speed due to heating of the fairing of the seeker. For example, the kinetic interceptors of the SM-3 anti-ballistic missiles start homing on the target only after reaching an altitude of 130-160 km.

    PS The domestic anti-missile A-135 is aimed at the target using external target designation from a ground-based radar and penetrating the radio channel in the plasma using freon injected from the end of the anti-missile. With a high degree of probability, anti-missiles of the promising Nudol missile defense system will also be targeted.
    1. Grigory_78
      Grigory_78 12 September 2019 19: 25 New
      0
      Did you understand what you wrote? Or is it no longer a secret?
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 12 September 2019 20: 58 New
        0
        Quote: Gregory_78
        Did you understand what you wrote? Or is it no longer a secret?

        It's just not true! The windows for communication through the plasma are not being pierced with freon now wassat
        And for maneuvering it is used. Search the net. MHD effect is called. laughing
        Only the striped-eared in this case are far behind ...
  • Old26
    Old26 12 September 2019 11: 31 New
    +3
    Quote: g1washntwn
    The United States can get it first.

    Why would it suddenly? Everything there is still in the "Concept" state. And RIM that shot down the satellite is an anti-satellite weapon, and not against hypersonic ones. The satellite is not even a variable speed warhead, and certainly not a maneuverable hypersonic target. EVERYONE is working on the counteraction and the first reaction will appear for the one who overcomes all the problems present in the hypersonic person, since the antihypersonic person has the same problems in the cube.

    Well, we have no "antidote" against hypersonic missiles like "Zircon" or American X-51. And if there is something also in the form of a "concept". Is it just a rocket with so far unknown characteristics of 40N: (which is either in service or not. Either it has a 30 km height reach, or 180.

    Quote: g1washntwn
    And the RIM that shot down the satellite is an anti-satellite weapon, and not against hypersonics. A satellite is not even a variable speed warhead and certainly not an agile hypersonic target. EVERYTHING works on counteraction and the first cooperation will appear on the one who overcomes all the problems present in hypersonics, since anti-hypersonics have the same problems in the cube.

    This missile is just not anti-satellite, but anti-missile weapons. Means of missile defense, not PSO. A satellite, like a warhead, does not have variable speed. In space - this is constant, when entering the atmosphere - the speed drops. What about satellite, what about warhead
    The most common misconception imposed on us is a certain maneuverability of a hypersonic object, which will make it invulnerable from missile defense. Calculate what loads will be at a speed of at least 20M with a fairly sharp maneuver that can disrupt missile defense

    Quote: rocket757
    does not exist until the antidotes against everything, everything, are observed in the foreseeable future!

    That which does not exist, Victor is an antidote to hypersonic means, especially with direct-flow ones - I agree. But what is not observed in the foreseeable future - I disagree. Why aren't they now? Yes, the reach of air defense systems is below the cruising altitude of hypersonic direct-flow aircraft, and for missile defense systems, the reach is higher than the cruising altitude, but they work as kinetic interceptors, and they cannot work at cruising altitudes of the GZKR. What to do? They can upgrade the same "Standard SM-3 Block 1B, which is now being replaced by block 2A. Instead of a kinetic interceptor, put a heavier high-explosive fragmentation warhead. Parameters will fall (reach in height, but there is nothing wrong with that. This is enough for the eyes to block the flight corridors at 330-50 km altitude. so that in the foreseeable future

    Quote: K-50
    Did pin dosniks learn how to carry out controlled flight in hypersound?

    Did the X-51 make an uncontrolled hypersonic flight? Or X-43?
  • faterdom
    faterdom 12 September 2019 13: 50 New
    +1
    A Lockheed Martin unit called Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control was awarded a $ 4,4 million contract to develop the Valkyrie Interceptor Terminal Hypersonic Defense. Boeing received a contract worth 4,3 million dollars: he will work on what is called the Hypervelocity Interceptor Concept for Hypersonic Weapons.

    Finally, Raytheon issued a contract worth $ 4,4 million for the SM3-HAW concept, which experts say may be based on the RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 missile defense

    It's a shame to be so greedy, gentlemen, American Congressmen! Not if for a concept ... like, for an artist of Mexican nationality, after drinking a cactus and smoking mushrooms, paint you with oil how he sees these concepts ... well then, yes ... And so, for such grandmothers you have a parking lot near "Lenta" "in St. Petersburg can not be done! Not like "Missiles and Fire Control".
    More money is needed, definitely more, and more every year, well, in short, Trump will tell you, and you’ll vote there!
  • Looking for
    Looking for 12 September 2019 15: 26 New
    +3
    I look at the photo. And - Lord. 39 years have passed. But nothing has changed at the Soviet-Russian airfield - the same jacket. The same sliders and the hard manual labor of "techno". But your generals are real peacocks .. without quotes.
  • Pavlov Sergey Alexandrovich
    Pavlov Sergey Alexandrovich 12 September 2019 17: 25 New
    0
    4-5 lyam is a typo, we are talking about lard.
    1. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 13 September 2019 07: 59 New
      0
      There is enough $ 4-5 million for a team of science fiction writers and computer graphics in the presentation of the concept. The numbers will go further in billions and not 4-5, but 45+
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 12 September 2019 23: 17 New
    0
    Nowhere to go - hypersonic arms race announced.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Cry
    Cry 13 September 2019 12: 27 New
    0
    The author - Ilya Legat did not give a single example of a downed hypersonic aircraft, since they (shotguns) are still in the project. Downed in space from the last century does not count, since hypersonic aircraft fly practically on a shaver, and therefore they have high temperature requirements and therefore they are protected by plasma, which is good for an attacker (dagger) and a defender (for example, an aircraft carrier) - death. Anti-missile speed should be at least one and a half times greater than that of the Dagger. How can American aviation giants overcome the hypersonic (thermal) barrier and the surrounding plasma for their anti-rocket? Then you have to overcome the thermal barrier of the attacking rocket. Let Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon headache for such huge amounts of money, and if they can not, which is very likely, they will let Trump under the monastery.
  • Old26
    Old26 13 September 2019 14: 47 New
    +2
    Quote: Choro
    The author - Ilya Legat did not give a single example of a downed hypersonic aircraft, since they (shotguns) are still in the project.

    Well, actually, downed hypersonic objects are the same satellite, not to mention the exercises of the strategic nuclear forces of the same USA. And the question is in the article "How will they shoot down" ...

    Quote: Choro
    Downed in space from the last century does not count, since hypersonic aircraft fly practically on a shaver, and therefore they have high temperature requirements and therefore they are protected by plasma, which is good for an attacker (dagger) and a defender (for example, an aircraft carrier) - death.

    Do not smack nonsense (it hurts), It’s only you who fly on a shaver, but our President in a well-known address said that they fly at speeds of 10-20M in dense layers of the atmosphere. True, BB did not specify then, but what about the laws of physics. How can you fend off temperatures exceeding the temperature of the sun. Well, all right, he gave hope most importantly.

    As for hypersonic missiles, their marching altitude is within 40-50 km. If this is a "shave" flight - then oh. What does plasma protect from? Plasma has always been a negative factor in descent into the dense layers of the atmosphere. A warhead (rocket) covered with a plasma cocoon is seen on the radar screens much better than the same warhead without plasma. With a plasma cocoon, no homing systems work, only an inertial gun. The attacking "Dagger" falls on the target area from a height of 2,5 hundred kilometers. And only at heights of 25-40 km a plasma cloud begins to form around it. At this moment, he is blind and deaf. And only after its speed drops as a result of braking to a speed of 2-3 times the speed of sound (2-3M) does the plasma disappear and it can try to aim at the target. If he doesn't get knocked down ...

    Quote: Choro
    Anti-missile speed should be at least one and a half times greater than that of the Dagger. .

    Where did you read this heresy? And nothing that an anti-missile with a speed of 14M, that is, with a speed of about 4 km / s, knocks down a target walking at a speed of 7,8 km / s? Where is the speeding one and a half times. Read less "Murzilok", where "experts" write this. The speed of the anti-missile must be higher than the speed of the target only if the firing is being carried out "in the vadagon". In all other cases, this is not at all a mandatory criterion.

    Quote: Choro
    How can American aviation giants overcome the hypersonic (thermal) barrier and the surrounding plasma for their anti-rocket?

    Lord, where have you read such nonsense? Modern anti-aircraft missiles already have speeds of about 7-8M, i.e. HYPERSONIC. Missile defense systems (anti-missiles), especially designed for long-range space interception, have speeds from 14 to 28M !!!!. Moreover, the speed increases from lower to higher values. They most often pass the plasma formation zone at speeds insufficient for plasma formation. There is an exception, but this is an exception. And there the question is not that the plasma will do something to the rocket, but the question about the controllability of the rocket during this period. And you confuse two completely different things. Entrance into the atmosphere, when entering the dense layers at hypersonic speeds, leads to the formation of a plasma, which holds until the speed of the descent object becomes supersonic and the situation when the rocket gradually increases speed ...

    Quote: Choro
    Then you have to overcome the thermal barrier of the attacking rocket. Let Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon headache for such huge amounts of money, and if they can not, which is very likely, they will let Trump under the monastery.

    Which, sorry doilco will intercept the target when it goes in the plasma? Among air defense workers and proshnikov and idiots is not observed. Neither among them, nor ours. The interception will be either in the upper layers of the atmosphere (or even in space), when the object is still not able to hit its target and cannot make any body movements, or in the lower, dense layers of the atmosphere, when the speed as a result of banal braking drops to supersonic

    The main problem now is different. Rockets of the "Dagger" type, BO type "Vanguard" can be destroyed even in space. For this, the same Americans have kinetic interceptors. In dense layers of the atmosphere, they can be destroyed by missiles with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead. The problem now is that there is nothing to shoot down exactly the cruise hypersonic missiles flying at an altitude of 40 km. conventional anti-missile systems with OFBCH do not reach, and anti-missiles with a kinetic interceptor cannot work at these altitudes. This height is not enough for them. Therefore, as I already wrote, the optimal and most budgetary option is to equip missile defense systems of the Standard SM-3 type, block 1A / 1B, which are gradually replaced by block 2A not with a kinetic, but with a high-explosive fragmentation part. Yes, the reach in height will drop, possibly in range, but they will cover this line of 40 km
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Yury zaloga
    Yury zaloga 18 September 2019 12: 30 New
    0
    So long as the United States invents countermeasures, while it creates experimental samples, while it is tested, until it is put into production, so much time will pass ...))
    It is ridiculous to hope that Russia will wait for them, spreading .. hugs.
    For all this, the Americans will need a very long time.
    By that time, we will create new types of weapons, to which our sworn "friends" will again catch up for decades!)) Let them dare)
  • Last centurion
    Last centurion 28 October 2019 15: 20 New
    0
    even I don’t think that a vlaser with a capacity of hundreds of kilowatts is having some chances against an object moving from a plasma in a ball. as far as the laser and ordinary fog are aware, a good obstacle. that is, everything that interferes or scatters the waves