How dangerous are stealth rockets AGM-158, which fell into the hands of Russia

172

In the first half of the two thousandths, the latest air-to-surface guided missile AGM-158 JASSM was adopted by several US Air Force attack aircraft. Almost simultaneously with this, work began on the creation of its improved modifications, including specialized. To date, we are talking about a whole family of weapons based on JASSM. Consider the development of the original project and the results of these works.

Base AGM-158


The JASSM (Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile) program started in 1995. Development on a competitive basis continued until 1998, when the Lockheed Martin project was chosen as the winner of the program. Shortly thereafter, tests of the individual components began. The flight tests of the AGM-158A rocket were carried out from 1999. Due to various difficulties, the development of the rocket was delayed, and the order for adoption was issued only in 2003.



AGM-158A was a cruise missile with a normal aerodynamic design with a starting mass of 975 kg. The glider was built taking into account the decrease in radar visibility, introducing the concept of "stealth". A low power turbojet engine is used. Control systems include inertial navigation and an infrared homing head to search for targets at the end of the flight. Defeat the target is made 420-kg warhead. Flight speed - subsonic, range - 370 km.

The AGM-158A JASSM missile can be used by a wide range of US Air Force planes. It is compatible with tactical and strategic land and deck vehicles. aviation.



Experienced JASSM rocket in flight. Photo US Air Force

The first episode of the combat use of JASSM took place on April 14 2018. Two B-1B bombers launched 19 missiles at targets on the territory of Syria. According to the Pentagon, all missiles have reached their goals. The Syrian and Russian military, in turn, spoke about the defeat of most of the missiles by air defense forces. In addition, two AGM-158A products fell and went to the Syrian army, which transferred them to Russia for study.

Extended range


Even before the completion of work on JASSM, the customer considered its flight range insufficient to solve some problems. In this regard, the project JASSM-ER (Extended Range) was launched in 2002. The upgraded missile with the AGM-158B index was supposed to fly at a distance of 575 miles (925 km) and be able to carry new warheads. There were no other special requirements for the rocket.

The development of AGM-158B took several years. Lockheed Martin managed to ensure the maximum possible unification of the new and basic product. The design of the two missiles is identical at 70%, and the software at 95%. Customer requirements were fully met. Estimated flight range increased to the desired 575 miles. The main objective of the project was solved by increasing the volume of fuel tanks and replacing the engine.

JASSM-ER trials started in 2006. The B-1B bomber was the first carrier rocket. The tests were associated with some difficulties and lasted several years. The missile was officially adopted only in 2014. The introduction of the product into the range of ammunition of various aircraft also stretched for several years.



The AGM-158A missile hits the target. Photo Lockheed Martin / lockheedmartin.com

According to its results, the missile AGM-158B can carry all the main combat aircraft of the US Air Force. Long-range bombers are capable of carrying from 16 to 24 missiles on external and internal suspension. Tactical aircraft carry only a few items. It is curious that due to the large dimensions of the JASSM-ER does not fit in the cargo compartment of the F-35 fighter. This in a known manner limits the combat qualities of an aircraft and rockets.

Since 2016, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin have been implementing a program to further increase flight range. The modernization of the rocket is planned to be completed in the near future. Improvements will be introduced as mass production.

Ultimate range


The JASSM-ER project provided for a limited design change to the basic cruise missile required to increase flight range. Since last year, Lockheed Martin has been developing a completely new project with similar goals. The JASSM-XR (Extreme Range) missile should be based on AGM-158A / B developments, but have a different design and higher performance.

JASSM-XR starting weight will be increased to 2300 kg; warhead - up to 910 kg. The flight speed will remain subsonic, and the range can be brought to 1000 miles (more than 1600 km).



AGM-158B LRASM anti-ship missile in aircraft version. US Navy Photos

The JASSM-XR project is still at the design stage. Tests are scheduled for the early twenties. Not earlier than the middle of the decade, the rocket will go into service. It can be assumed that the increase in size and launch weight in comparison with the base AGM-158 will reduce the list of carrier aircraft and adversely affect the size of their ammunition.



CHAMP Project


Since 2012, several organizations led by the Air Force Research Laboratory have been working on the CHAMP (Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project) project. Its goal is to create a compact electromagnetic weaponscapable of hitting enemy electronic systems. The finished product must fit on different types of media.

A few years ago it became known about plans to install the CHAMP unit on the JASSM-ER cruise missile. Such weapons will appear at the disposal of the Air Force in the mid-twenties. Meanwhile, electromagnetic weapons of other models are already entering the troops. In May of this year, the delivery of 20 missiles manufactured by Boeing with a load in the form of a CHAMP block was reported. Prototypes from Lockheed Martin will appear later.

Anti-ship LRASM


In 2009, the Pentagon launched the LRASM (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile) program, which aimed to create an anti-ship missile based on the AGM-158B. It was necessary to make various changes in the design, change the composition of the equipment, introduce a number of new functions, and also ensure compatibility with the Mk 41 ship launcher.



Tests of the LRASM rocket, 25 September 2013 Photo DARPA

The first tests of the systems of the future rocket were carried out in 2012. The first launches from the carrier aircraft and from the Mk 2013 installation took place in 41. In the future, new launches were carried out from different carriers and in different conditions. At the end of 2018, the LRASM missile in aviation performance was accepted for initial operation in the Air Force. In the near future, the Navy will receive its modifications.

For RCCs, AGM-158C developed a new control system based on a multifunctional radar seeker. Search for a target is made in a given area. Possible re-targeting of the rocket during the flight. Various work algorithms and flight modes are provided, providing an effective target search with its subsequent defeat in all expected conditions.


In dimensions and weight, the AGM-158C is close to the base AGM-158B. Flight performance remains at the same level. The customer is offered two versions of the rocket. In the first case, the product is used independently and is intended for suspension on airplanes. For ships with Mk 41 launchers, a rocket with a solid-propellant launch engine is intended.

While the AGM-158C LRASM missiles of two modifications are produced in a small series. In the early twenties, a large order is expected to appear for the full-scale re-equipment of the Air Force and Navy. With the help of new anti-ship missiles LRASM it is proposed to replace several obsolete missiles, including Harpoon products.

Unified family


At the beginning of the last decade, the US Air Force received the latest AGM-158A JASSM air-to-surface cruise missile. Within a few years after this, the development of several of its modifications began, with various differences and characteristic features. According to the results of several such programs, the Pentagon has already managed to obtain several types of aviation and naval weapons, and new models are expected in the future.

How dangerous are stealth rockets AGM-158, which fell into the hands of Russia

Launch AGM-158C by installing Mk 41. Photo Lockheed Martin / lockheedmartin.com

Based on the base JASSM, missiles were created to destroy ground and surface targets with an increased flight range. The appearance of another type of weapon with enhanced flight characteristics and the carrier of electromagnetic weapons is expected. At the same time, the basis of all new products is a missile, adopted by one and a half decades ago. In new projects, a high degree of unification with basic products remains.

Using a similar approach to the creation of new weapons, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin to a certain extent simplify and accelerate the process of creating new weapons. In addition, it is possible to obtain advantages associated with the unification of weapons of different classes, including for different types of troops.

The base missile AGM-158A JASSM appeared and entered service quite a long time ago. Its last derivatives go to the troops only now, and in parallel, the development of new models. All this clearly shows that the weapons of the AGM-158 family have firmly taken their place in the US arsenals and will not leave them in the foreseeable future. Moreover, in the near future this family is waiting for a new interesting replenishment.
Our news channels

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

172 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -12
    8 December 2019 18: 14
    Subsonic - in modern realities - this is no longer a cake.
    1. +21
      8 December 2019 18: 29
      With a mass launch, they can cause "saturation" of air defense and missile defense. Then some of the missiles will reach the target.
      1. +4
        8 December 2019 21: 48
        Quote: Chaldon48
        With a massive launch, air defense and missile defense systems can "saturate".

        saturation is one to one, but glut (that is, exceeding the capabilities of air defense / missile defense to intercept air targets, if academically) is yes.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. 0
            9 December 2019 12: 42
            Who knows his inner enemy.
        2. +6
          9 December 2019 17: 32
          Unfortunately, a glut is one of the options for using such a weapon to destroy the defensive air defense system. The only question is whether the rocket will be cheap enough to launch it in a flock of 1K pieces.
          And the opening of the air defense / missile defense system carries with it a blow to the positions of ICBMs.
          That is why a counter-preemptive strike is at the heart of our defense. Whether this decision is good or not, we may never know it EVER if we don't hear and see the work of the "Dead Hand", but the residents of the taiga and towns far from megacities, on fifty / fifty, still have a chance to stay alive residents of NPs close to the missile positions can count on (if the first massive strike does not reach them and the missiles leave in response).
      2. 5-9
        +7
        9 December 2019 09: 57
        Mass launch of rockets for a million bucks each with the expected result of "missiles will reach the target"?
        The result of the most massive launches in the world in Syria in 62 and 101 missiles somehow did not impress ...
        1. +1
          9 December 2019 15: 01
          I was not impressed, probably because the air defense, at least partially, did my job.
          1. 5-9
            +1
            9 December 2019 15: 05
            What is the point, if even the Syrian air defense knocks down the KR dozens at a time, then what is the use of them?
        2. 0
          10 December 2019 07: 45
          Quote: 5-9
          Mass launch of rockets for a million bucks each with the expected result of "missiles will reach the target"?

          dummies cost less.
        3. 0
          18 January 2020 23: 16
          As soon as the launch of such things is detected, an attack on the carriers will begin and the places where they are based will be destroyed and the drone will be destroyed, as well as the satellites, and then it will go and it is unlikely that anyone will live to the end, unless there are sober heads on both sides to stop all this.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. 0
        9 December 2019 11: 26
        Dangerous infection!
        With a mass launch, with such a powerful warhead, they can cause trouble.
        Well, that fell into our hands, it will be easier to find an antidote for this rubbish! ..
      5. 0
        16 December 2019 14: 52
        KILLED IN 2014 AGM142 air defense Syria https://topwar.ru/64647-siriyskaya-pvo-sbila-izrailskuyu-raketu-vypuschennuyu-vo-vremya-aviaudara.html captured two AGM 158 and sent to Moscow httpsk: //www.krskrsk .kp.ru / daily / 26818.4 / 3858241/2018 and now in 2019 the world in dust agm 158 is great and terrible)))))))))) the same tomogavk in profile. and we will throw 100500 missiles at a single target for a button accordion, it has become unbecoming for a long time. subsonic flight is suitable only for stationary unprotected civilian objects of the smallest countries without an army and allies. the price of a rocket with a seeker is astronomical and well overshoots the price of many of its "targets". time on the way for an hour or two .... in Yugoslavia, 1100 WTO strikes fell on tanks and ATOs of less than 2 distinct hits on air defense and less than 20 on tanks / self-propelled guns, 2 aircraft were lost, a dozen topoins flew to neighboring countries, several are in the war museum as trophies, while knocked down and not fallen. the same Irna could be part of the big Republic of Ingushetia without some people who received weapons from abroad, that is, Lenin. However, nowadays, it will respond to blows with such rattles with a blow of the same), okay, simpler and from above the BR for 2000 km of range. reception so where and VNATO air defense nebylo is not and never will be. stupidly no.
        1. 0
          16 January 2020 08: 55
          And how is things going with radar observability. Speed ​​though a turtle, what would you need to bring down to see it)?
    2. +9
      8 December 2019 20: 24
      This is "not a cake" for us, we need to heat the AUG with Aegis, the States have no such enemy, they have enough.
      1. -1
        8 December 2019 21: 07
        Quote: bk0010
        the US has no such adversary

        But very soon it will be.
    3. +4
      9 December 2019 17: 18
      Let me explain that once again we are becoming a victim of the ambiguity of the concept of "rocket", which means both a guided unmanned kamikaze charge (cruise missile) and an aircraft propelled by a rocket engine that repels a working fluid from itself to move in as a result of the combustion of fuel and oxidizer, which the rocket carries with it.

      Flying on jet engines allows you to achieve maximum flight range, since the oxidizer is taken from the air, the weight of the aircraft is less. Subsonic flight is more economical than supersonic factor of. Therefore, pseudo-supersonic Bramos cruise missiles or Tu-160 bombers reach supersonic mode only at the stage of missile defense breakthrough, briefly accelerating. Rockets with rocket engines have an engine life, measured in tens of seconds until the fuel burns out. Accordingly, the range is minimal (well, I exclude ballistic missiles).

      A jet engine of an unmanned projectile provides a reasonable compromise between speed (flight time) and fuel consumption (range of hitting a target). But even barrage shells with piston engines, much slower than jet ones, have a potential for use.

      I think that the "brains" of missiles are now rapidly becoming cheaper and unified, allowing them to hold and aim at the indicated maneuvering target, which makes it rational to shoot in advance, with the risk of displacement of the target and re-guidance by means of the missile itself, rather than entering the air defense zone of the carrier and a quick accurate strike.
      1. +1
        13 December 2019 21: 06
        Cruise missile X-32
        Machs 3,5–4,6 (from 4000 to 5400 kilometers per hour or 1,1–1,5 km / s)
        Launch range - 600–1000 km
        Warhead 500kg
        The coverage range of the GSN radar is 200–300 km (when starting from a longer range, external target designation is needed about the approximate target presence area before the target is captured by the GSN).
        Maximum flight height - 40 km
        1. 0
          13 December 2019 22: 26
          Yeah. And the mass and size are almost like a fighter. And in fact, everything is the same antediluvian obsolete X-22 with new electronics. The American rocket will solve all the same problems, being much smaller and without an acid rocket engine.
    4. 0
      7 August 2020 21: 29
      What are the benefits of a supersonic / hypersonic missile?
    5. 0
      21 August 2020 21: 10
      And hypersonic creates a trail of plasma that make it "optically" trackable.
    6. 0
      3 September 2021 08: 46
      Well, will you order to write off the X-101 missile for scrap, supporter of supersonic and hypersonic?
  2. +3
    8 December 2019 18: 20
    Quote: lucul
    Subsonic - in modern realities - this is no longer a cake.

    When there are dozens or more of them on one target, more than a suitable weapon.
    1. +4
      8 December 2019 18: 32
      When there are dozens or more of them on one target, more than a suitable weapon.

      This is how many planes are needed for delivery? )))
      1. +17
        8 December 2019 19: 21
        -. Long-range bombers are capable of carrying from 16 to 24 missiles on external and internal suspension. Tactical aircraft carry only a few items.
        Considering that the missile range is twice that of the S-400 threshold (600 km), then the carriers remain "unpunished?
        It turns out that one long-range bomber can handle the air defense system. And there are also escort aircraft.
        Here is some information to think about. Without electronic warfare systems, you definitely can not do.
        1. +6
          8 December 2019 19: 30
          Quote: knn54
          It turns out that one long-range bomber can cope with an air defense system.

          Is not a fact. The S-400 will cover at the near borders, say, the Shell, Thor, or even Tunguska, which will receive target designation from the S-400 radar.
          1. 0
            21 August 2020 21: 11
            Putin has admitted that the S-400 is compromised.
        2. -2
          8 December 2019 19: 36
          It turns out that one long-range bomber can cope with an air defense system

          24 Subsonic missiles, against say our S-350 Hero. This is not a problem for him.)))
          1. +6
            8 December 2019 21: 58
            Quote: lucul
            against say our S-350 Knight. This is not a problem for him.)))

            And how many of them are in the army now?
            1. -3
              9 December 2019 01: 11
              and whose special service are you working for? can also provide you with coordinates;)
              1. +11
                9 December 2019 01: 15
                Quote: SteelBird
                and whose special service are you working for? can also provide you with coordinates;)

                And they are not there yet, next year they will only go to the troops, YOU are our "smerschevets" ...
                https://topwar.ru/156954-zrk-vitjaz-gotovitsja-k-sluzhbe.html
                1. +1
                  9 December 2019 11: 43
                  In fact, already in this
                2. 0
                  2 March 2020 22: 43
                  In fact, 1 division is already in operation
              2. +5
                9 December 2019 02: 21
                Quote: SteelBird
                can also provide you with coordinates

                You can see them. S. Linnik did excellent google maps air defense reviews.
            2. -2
              9 December 2019 12: 45
              Agent, kysh from the site.
            3. -1
              9 December 2019 13: 21
              Quote: PSih2097
              And how many of them are in the army now?

              S-350 Knight - this is just a lightweight part of the S-400.
              Already S-400 is even sold to the Turks.
          2. -2
            9 December 2019 02: 20
            Quote: lucul
            24 Subsonic missiles, against say our S-350 Hero. This is not a problem for him.)))

            It is highly probable that Vityaz (let’s say it exists) will not be able to do anything at all. Against AGSN, reduced visibility plays best. Even if you manage to visit, the arithmetic is simple: 6 CR per launcher. Even if they do not break through, they are guaranteed to be discharged.
            1. +1
              9 December 2019 13: 31
              Quote: Octopus
              6 CR for one launcher.

              You really, really don't know what the 9M100E missiles are for?
              With a mass of 140 kg, they specialize in self-defense against anti-radar and cruise missiles. Just designed to ruin enemies.
              1. +3
                9 December 2019 14: 42
                Quote: Genry
                You really, really don't know what the 9M100E missiles are for?

                1. Do they exist?
                2. They are installed GOS relatively small size and power. That is vulnerable to counteraction of all types. The same problem with CM6, for example, but its typical purpose is much simpler.
                3. You see, your enemies are such that it is difficult to ruin them.
                1. 0
                  9 December 2019 14: 59
                  Quote: Octopus
                  1. Do they exist?

                  Is there a S-400?
                  Quote: Octopus
                  GOS relatively small in size and power. That is vulnerable to counteraction of all types.

                  The optical multi-spectral seeker on the side of cruise missiles is absolutely stable.
                  Quote: Octopus
                  your enemies are such that it is difficult to ruin them.

                  The ratio of the cost of missiles and their delivery vehicles is more than 10 times.
                  1. +2
                    9 December 2019 15: 06
                    Quote: Genry
                    Is there a S-400?

                    Is it the same thing?
                    Quote: Genry
                    Optical multi-spectral seeker

                    Oh, is she also optical? Wow.
                    Quote: Genry
                    The ratio of the cost of missiles and their delivery vehicles

                    Missiles and aircraft? And why did you say that?
                    1. +1
                      9 December 2019 18: 04
                      Quote: Octopus
                      Is it the same thing?

                      On the use of missiles 9M100E, ....
                      Quote: Octopus
                      Oh, is she also optical? Wow.

                      You do not need?
                      Are you sad?
                      You feel bad?
                      Quote: Octopus
                      Missiles and aircraft? And why did you say that?

                      ... to a simpler missile (MANPADS level) with a ground launcher.
                      1. 0
                        9 December 2019 22: 47
                        Quote: Genry
                        You feel bad?

                        To me? Quite acceptable, thanks for the trouble.
                        Quote: Genry
                        On the use of 9M100E missiles

                        This product flashed at the exhibition two years ago. The sharp face of the camera’s layout was not supposed, but the words really spoke about IR, you’re right.
                        Quote: Genry
                        simpler missile (MANPADS level) with ground launchers.

                        So what? Are you trying to say that ZR is cheaper than KR, or what?
                      2. +2
                        10 December 2019 00: 00
                        Quote: Octopus
                        Are you trying to say that ZR is cheaper than KR, or what?

                        Well, the Kyrgyz Republic is about a million cu (complex orientation system, miniature turbojet engine).
                        A small missile defense system with a GOS of less than 100 thousand (MANPADS is even more expensive due to miniaturization).
                        And missiles for SAM systems such as "Pantsir" or "Sosna" are generally cheap (there is no complex seeker, but they can only strike in line of sight and have a limit on the number of control channels).
                      3. -1
                        10 December 2019 01: 10
                        Quote: Octopus
                        Are you trying to say that ZR is cheaper than KR, or what?

                        But why?

                        1. The cost of means of destruction is considered based on the value of the target. For CR, the cost of the goal can be very high. Starting with the radar of this same S-400.
                        2. Partners have been fighting for 100 years, spending more money on aircraft than destroying enemy property. This is their national identity. The taxpayer could have questions, but the rest would not matter, by and large.
                      4. +2
                        10 December 2019 05: 22
                        Quote: Octopus
                        The partners have been fighting for 100 years, spending more money on the aircraft than destroying enemy property.

                        They calculate the entire amount of profit that they receive in the form of geopolitical and economic influence on the conquered territory.
                        Only because of the Russian S-400 is a "big bummer" - they lose more than they gain.
                      5. -3
                        10 December 2019 07: 06
                        Quote: Genry
                        Only because of the Russian S-400 is a "big bummer"

                        I don’t remember that the S-400 prevented at least someone at least in something.
                        Quote: Genry
                        They calculate the entire amount of profit.

                        Unfortunately, you are raving. Americans exist in the logic of their two-year electoral cycles. This has its pros and cons, but strategic planning certainly does not apply to the pros.
                      6. +1
                        10 December 2019 13: 12
                        Quote: Octopus
                        I don’t remember that the S-400 prevented at least someone at least in something.

                        Who didn’t help? List in the studio!
                        Quote: Octopus
                        Unfortunately, you are raving.

                        You definitely have an infection .. Pruritus?
                        Quote: Octopus
                        Americans exist in the logic of their two-year electoral cycles. This has its pros and cons, but strategic planning certainly does not apply to the pros.

                        In the absence of popular vote (only a small number of "electors" vote), the US election is nothing more than a show.
                        The decision-making center is a little away from the president and congress, and therefore, as they fought, they are fighting.
            2. 0
              2 March 2020 22: 50
              1 launcher s-350 - 12 missiles, subsonic 6 pieces 12 missiles will certainly be knocked down. So the arithmetic is different. And these missiles are not cheap there. I understand that the states have a budget of 12 times that of the Pentagon, but the main expenses are still the bases and maintenance of the military, plus all sorts of R&D. So even there, thousands of such missiles, I somehow can’t imagine
          3. +1
            9 December 2019 17: 22
            It seems to me that if Division C (hereinafter, any number) will be covered by armor, can I deal with it? And then, after all, the Americans have a norm of BP consumption for targets, in other words, well, they will not launch 300 missiles against the 1st c400 battalion.
            1. +1
              26 December 2019 23: 19
              I hasten to remind you of the realities of Iraq. When at first they threw such a WTO, well, what was modern in the realities of 1991 and 2000s. And how did it end? And the fact that the same racially correct "cast iron" flew down. When the money from the budget of the campaigns of the "coalition partners of the Enlightened West" and the fuse of their generals / admirals ran out. Everyone knows: the modern realities of such conflicts. Our opponents cannot stand long-term and many annual protracted wars. They do not like to lose loved ones and friends en masse, fearing massive losses like fire. Otsuda and all these Wishlist "for a massive disarming global strike." And also another hobby hypostasis of "doves of peace from the West": they no longer need a desert scorched by fusion with sterile rats and cockroaches the size of a bucket! They need a submissive wake up to follow orders from Washington or London. Serfs are needed for their wealthy and consumers of their goods and media. From there such a fashion for these aircraft ammunition.
        3. -3
          9 December 2019 02: 31
          Quote: knn54
          Considering that the missile range is twice that of the S-400 threshold (600 km), then the carriers remain "unpunished?

          Naturally. Bush air defense can prevent only small attacks, and not rush in the style of partners. And individual planes, as Syria shows, get off only if the enemy is incompetent.
          1. +1
            9 December 2019 18: 18
            Quote: Octopus
            And individual planes, as Syria shows, get off only if the enemy is incompetent.

            So after all, with the complete absence of modern long-range air defense systems.
            1. 0
              9 December 2019 22: 49
              Quote: Genry
              So after all, in the complete absence of modern complexes

              At the S-400 there were problems with the spherical shape of the earth, as far as I remember.
              1. +2
                9 December 2019 23: 44
                Quote: Octopus
                At the S-400 there were problems with the spherical shape of the earth, as far as I remember.

                The S-400 had no problems, except for the neutrality of Russia with Israel and the lack of appropriate goals (small UAVs for small air defense).
                1. 0
                  10 December 2019 00: 22
                  Quote: Genry
                  S-400 there were no problems except the neutrality of Russia with Israel

                  Well, you see how complicated it is. And they said very weightily, as I remember now, that not a single cropped fly will fly into the sky of Syria.
                  1. +2
                    10 December 2019 00: 27
                    Quote: Octopus
                    And they said very weightily, as I remember now, that not a single cropped fly will fly into the sky of Syria.

                    laughing
                    I couldn’t say that - I don’t suffer from scholastic maximalism.
                    But the S-400 is really very deadly.
                    1. -2
                      10 December 2019 01: 07
                      Quote: Genry
                      I could not say that

                      I'm talking about official and semi-official persons.
        4. -1
          9 December 2019 19: 17
          Quote: knn54
          Long-range bombers are capable of carrying from 16 to 24 missiles on the outside
          Considering that 80% of carriers capable of delivering 15-25 missiles are subsonic and large, most modern fighters will get them.
          Again, weapons against the Papuans ... For whom to fight outside the borders allotted by the Americans - criminal prosecution by a county judge (district center in Russian) Deboshir.
        5. 0
          9 December 2019 21: 44
          Quote: knn54
          Long-range bombers are capable of carrying from 16 to 24 missiles on external and internal suspension

          As I understand it, are you considering a blow to Russia?
          In one S-400 air defense division (full) - 12 launchers, 4 missiles per installation, i.e. 4 * 12 = 48 missiles.
          And in the full regiment there are already 8 divisions i.e. 48 missiles. We multiply by 8 divisions = 384 missiles in a full regiment.
          A total of 27 regiments / 54 divisions / 432 launchers, 1728 missiles were produced (for the Russian army)
          Note, this is only the S-400, but there are S-350, and S-300, and beeches, and at the end of Ponziri and Torah.
          I'm not talking about aviation.

          All this is called a layered defense system.
          Quote: knn54
          It turns out that one long-range bomber can handle the air defense system. And there are also escort aircraft.

          At the expense of the carriers, I would not be so unambiguous, your statement is "a spherical horse in a vacuum."
          For example, you do not take into account fighter aircraft and its long-range missiles. And many more factors.

          Now about the rocket:
          1. From a distance of 600 km, it will telepath to the target for at least 40 minutes. (at this distance, the S-400 will not shell rockets, but the carriers will most likely not come closer if it is not B-1, but it is without rockets, it only has bombs) there is enough time to raise the aircraft. It is unlikely that a flock of missiles will have a fighter cover. At a distance of 200 km, they will be received by missile systems and from that moment to the very goal, they will be under fire from air defense systems.
          2. The European part of Russia is not very conducive to hide and seek in the folds of relief. Starting from the sea all the more.

          Estimate the probability of achieving the goal yourself.
          And yes. Each cruise missile costs $ 2000000.
          1. 0
            9 December 2019 23: 00
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            All this is called a layered defense system.

            She is not there.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            1728 missiles

            That is, even if all of them are collected in one place, in order to guarantee that they are enough to discharge a volley of 37 Lancers. Lancers in the ranks 61. In addition to everything else.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            For example, you do not take into account fighter aircraft and their long-range missiles

            Against massive CDs, it is practically useless.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            B-1, but he is without missiles, he only has bombs

            Who told you this about him? He is without nuclear missiles, with the usual questions no.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            whether they’re likely to come closer if it’s not V-1, but it’s without missiles, it only has bombs) there’s enough time to raise the aircraft

            How do you know what time to raise? ZGRLS famous?
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            The European part of Russia is not too conducive to hide and seek in the folds of relief

            Suppose the enemy wants to get into Gadzhievo. And the folds of the relief are in Norway.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            Estimate the probability of achieving the goal yourself.

            Close to 100%
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            Every cruise missile stands

            All the same, they have already been done, but you need to put it somewhere.
            1. 0
              2 March 2020 22: 59
              When this Lancer could carry, in your opinion, almost 50 kr (1728/37-skoka will be?). And then - well, they don’t have 1000 such missiles yet
        6. 0
          10 December 2019 01: 23
          Are the fighters sleeping?
        7. 0
          13 December 2019 21: 14
          That is, if the victim does not have his own fighter aircraft, without punishment only small states can be bombed. Yes, and even this expensive missile can be shot down with cheap like Shell or Thor, etc.
      2. +3
        9 December 2019 02: 15
        Quote: lucul
        This is how many planes are needed

        B-52N - 12 missiles
        B-1B - 24 missiles
        B-2 - 16 missiles
        F-15E - 3 missiles
        F-16C / D, F / A-18E / F, F-35C - 2 missiles each
        1. 0
          9 December 2019 22: 01
          Quote: Octopus
          B-1B - 24 missiles

          And how did they get into it?
          And the letter - V, do not bother you? No?
          It means that it is a clean bomber, it does not have equipment for cruise missiles.

          To read you like this, a spatial pocket was pushed into B-1. It is one and a half times smaller than the Tu-160, and "carries twice as many missiles" - miracles and nothing more.

          Maybe you B-1, mixed up with Ohio (this is a submarine).
          1. 0
            9 December 2019 23: 05
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            And how they got into it

            In a row 3 reels of 8
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            She means it's a clean bomber jacket.

            It means the second version.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            less than Tu-160 by one and a half times, and "carries twice as many missiles" - miracles and nothing more.

            Yes, life is unfair.
            Quote: Old Skeptic
            Maybe you are B-1, mixed up with Ohio

            No. By the way, Ohio in the variant PLARK knocks out just about a full regiment of S-400 from one salvo. Purely on missile consumption.
            1. 0
              2 March 2020 23: 02
              They wrote to you - a regiment of 384 missiles, how many missiles in the SSGN variant carry Ohio?
              1. -1
                2 March 2020 23: 25
                Do you have problems with Wikipedia? Or with a calculator?
                Quote: Oleg2003
                how many missiles in the submarine variant carries ohio?

                154
                Quote: Oleg2003
                1 launcher s-350 - 12 missiles, subsonic 6 pieces 12 missiles will certainly be knocked down. So the arithmetic is different.

                Arithmetic is exactly the one I wrote. 6 discharge PU, the rest are guaranteed to go to the object. Guaranteed in the world without Konashenkov. On one Virginia 12 KR.
                Quote: Oleg2003
                When it Lancer could carry, in your opinion, almost 50 cr

                One missile defense per missile defense is not enough. At least 2. KR on Lancers 24 in drums, without pylons.
                By the way, with your arithmetic just now noticed.
                They wrote to you - a regiment of 384 missiles,

                384 missiles in full regiment.
                A total of 27 regiments / 54 divisions / 432 launchers, 1728 missiles

                What kind of game is this? 1728/384 = 4,5 what are 27 more regiments?
          2. -1
            10 December 2019 18: 19
            Isn't he got a drum inside
      3. +2
        9 December 2019 18: 39
        Somehow, the phrase about the possibility of working with the Mk41 installation was left out of my ears - this option is much more dangerous than an airplane, since such installations cost almost nothing, recharge in a few minutes and are mobile no worse than our MLRS. If it turns out that they can still be equipped with low-power nuclear facilities, this will be a paragraph altogether.
        By the way, amers now lack plutonium, so they began to throw out the stuffing of thermonuclear charges from thermonuclear charges and leave only a nuclear detonator laughing
        1. 0
          9 December 2019 21: 13
          According to Hans Christensen, instead of developing a new and unique low-power ammunition, it is possible to equip Trident D5 ballistic missile submarines with W76-2 warheads.

          That is, it is supposed to create new warheads for this SLBM on the basis of W76-1 by removing thermonuclear fuel (uranium, lithium and deuterium). As a result, only the plutonium trigger will remain, and the TNT equivalent of the new warhead will drop from one hundred to five to six kilotons.
          https://vpk.name/news/217652_ponizhennaya_moshnost_kak_ssha_gotovyatsya_k_yadernoi_voine.html
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. -6
        8 December 2019 22: 00
        Quote: Salieri
        When there are dozens or more of them on one target, more than a suitable weapon.

        TARS_LOL - Lol, do you understand when it can be? Then, when only ash remains on the earth. There is a nuclear weapon to contain this!

        Do you believe that at least someone will use nuclear weapons (strategic from 300 kt)? I, no - Americans / Chinese need clean land, and ours in NATO countries have children and real estate.
        1. +21
          9 December 2019 03: 36
          The submarine commanders and crews do not have children and real estate in the west. Only houses and families in garrisons, launch codes, and many many deaths in mines. And if we all will not be in these people, I believe. Revenge.
          1. -1
            15 January 2020 14: 06
            They stood up for the USSR? - for Honduras named after Chubais, why are they afraid? - Is it so that they may not know that the war is already over and in the Kremlin - "ours?" - Didn't try to wake up when you juggle warheads?
        2. +5
          9 December 2019 10: 23
          Do you believe that at least someone will use nuclear weapons (strategic from 300 kt)? I, no - Americans / Chinese need clean land, and ours in NATO countries have children and real estate.

          do not write nonsense. Americans do not need clean or any other land. They are ready to use tactical nuclear weapons when the conflict escalates, when their strategic plans are under threat. How prepared they were to use nuclear weapons in Vietnam shortly before the northerners took Saigon (Operation Fracture of the Jaw "). And also leave the liberal delusional clichés" about children "for your circle. First, if a serious military conflict starts (and it starts with conventional weapons) between NATO and the Russian Federation, the "kids" will either be deported or arrested. And most likely the daddies will be taken out in advance to another hemisphere, somewhere in South America. Away from radioactive Europe. Secondly, no "kids" are anyone Because in the event of a global nuclear war, it makes no difference where they burn up - here or there.
          1. +1
            9 December 2019 21: 08
            Good post: they really don’t need land and people, they need obedience to territories, +.
        3. +2
          9 December 2019 12: 13
          What will apply - no doubt. That from 300 kT there are less chances: at one time it was estimated that, given the accuracy of the missiles in the cities, it would be optimal (over the covered area) to plant warheads of 150-200 kT, and in the mines - 0.5 MT. 300 - neither there nor here.
          PS Discussions about the connectedness of economies, who are relatives and who have children where were widespread before World War I, did not help, as you see.
        4. +1
          9 December 2019 14: 39
          Then hang out the white flag now!
          and ours in NATO countries have children and real estate.

          If there are children and real estate, then there will be no war! Calm down already, why would someone let in expensive rockets if you can negotiate with the kids and seize the property? It's amazing that there is a rearmament in the army! It turns out that something is wrong with your logic. Either the kids disagree with you, or rearmament is only whose imagination! negative
        5. 0
          9 December 2019 19: 20
          Quote: PSih2097
          Americans / Chinese need clean land

          Americans need nothing but unconditional obedience from the Papuans. And to erase 500-1000 million people for them is not even a question if there is no answer.
          If only the rest remained silk.
        6. -1
          10 December 2019 18: 22
          Donald and Vladimir disarm the planet
    3. 0
      8 December 2019 21: 02
      Inefficient use? Why dozens, hundreds for one goal? Some kind of stupidity.
      1. +3
        8 December 2019 21: 12
        Carrying out a DDoS attack by air defense by airplanes is even less effective.
        However, you are right. There is no need to direct all these hundreds to one goal. The main thing here is to overload the air defense system with the number of targets.
        1. 0
          8 December 2019 21: 22
          Translate...?
          1. +9
            8 December 2019 21: 41
            Quote: Kunar
            Translate...?

            What happens if you throw five balls at the same time?
            So it is here. There are so many targets (all of them, that is, aircraft, UAVs, aircraft weapons, including cruise missiles, decoys, and even air targets) that the air defense system simply does not have time to "work out" them.
            That is, a complete analogue of a DDoS attack in computer networks
            1. 0
              8 December 2019 22: 08
              Well, I conditionally agree ..... Just the question? Why is this necessary? Are you considering some sort of one-sided attack, well, or the last and decisive .. Or is the air defense system calculating the military use 1/1?
            2. +3
              8 December 2019 23: 58
              The point is that there really is no need to send dozens and even more so hundreds of such missiles at one target. All the more stationary. Firstly, attack aircraft are covered by an electronic warfare group - both aircraft and UAVs, which put a continuous veil of interference in front of the enemy's air defense. Through which it will be difficult to make out where what and how. Secondly, there are a huge number of missile simulators - false targets, cheap missiles, in fact a container with fuel, rudders and a simple control unit for a given program and route. With their characteristics, they imitate attacking missiles and are launched en masse by the first wave or together with combat ones, forcing to shoot part of the air defense air defense missile system at them. And thirdly, the search and guidance components of air defense systems (radars) will not have much time to work in an active search and guidance mode during an enemy attack - since no one has canceled anti-radar air-to-ground missiles either.
              1. 0
                9 December 2019 09: 38
                Yes, in addition to EW aircraft, there will also be MALDs on the same level as missiles. How will the S-400 weed out all this and look for the right target?
                1. +2
                  9 December 2019 12: 18
                  What for? Just to solve such problems, there is a special warhead. Not only to spend them on ballte boxes.
              2. 0
                2 March 2020 23: 09
                In all radars, there is a selection of targets. So maybe not all, but a substantial part will be screened out. And yes, airplanes with the same functions exist with us. And if it comes to that, then there will be an epic scribe. After which a vigorous war
            3. +1
              9 December 2019 14: 06
              Quote: Spade
              There are so many targets (all of them, that is, aircraft, UAVs, aircraft weapons, including cruise missiles, decoys, and even air targets) that the air defense system simply does not have time to "work out" them.

              Opponent-GE or Gamma-DE type mobile radars can carry 150-200 targets. You can launch missiles 9M100E or 9M96e with GOS unlimitedly (no guidance channels are required).
          2. -2
            9 December 2019 01: 20
            Quote: Kunar
            Translate...?

            four hundred thousand / million / billion / trillion reconnaissance in force (and the server died and went to "hot resumes" (CTRL + ALT + DEL)) or the same and one point attack (data in Moscow and the server died completely due to the release of hard drives suicides (at 7200 to 14400)) ...
        2. -2
          8 December 2019 21: 45
          It looks like you think in digital terms (now it’s fashionable) ... I’m just wondering if all countries with nuclear weapons shy away from their entire arsenal ... will air defense systems, the number of targets, DoS attacks be important?
          1. 0
            8 December 2019 21: 49
            Quote: Sergey Averchenkov
            if all countries with nuclear weapons

            Well, not everyone has it ...
            And it is not always possible to apply it.

            Quote: Sergey Averchenkov
            It looks like you think in digital terms (now it's fashionable) ...

            Rather, it is most similar to how to overcome more or less normal air defense
          2. +1
            9 December 2019 01: 25
            Quote: Sergey Averchenkov
            DoS attacks?

            DDos attacks on the Pentagon + NSA + NORAD + satellite constellation, etc. - yes they are important.
            1. -1
              9 December 2019 19: 25
              They will disconnect the cables from Europe - only 18 - and add up how much they fit in - no computer will even enter the local network.
    4. 0
      8 December 2019 21: 21
      But not easier to get out ....
  3. +39
    8 December 2019 18: 26
    How dangerous AGM-158 stealth missiles that fell into Russia's hands did not see in the article what was written in the heading ...
    1. +4
      8 December 2019 18: 44
      If I’m not mistaken, the fact of such a thing was once questioned ...
    2. +9
      8 December 2019 19: 39
      Quote: smaug78
      I did not see in the article what is written in the title ...

      good
      and I.
      while reading Ryabov, I almost fell asleep.
      letters, letters, letters .. the journalist works for signs
      1. +1
        8 December 2019 21: 13
        Quote: opus
        and I.

        "What is dangerous for us a missile, which ..."
        Just the title may have two interpretations. Moreover, the second, non-obvious, is correct.
        1. +1
          8 December 2019 21: 47
          Quote: Spade
          It’s just that the title can have two interpretations

          no no!!!! headline broadcasts
          Quote: Ryabov Kiril
          How much

          The word “how much” is a pronoun, derived from the cognate pronoun “how much” using the prefix and suffix.

          ie to what extent (dangerous)?
          and about it the author has zero.
          Mantras about JASSM
    3. -5
      8 December 2019 22: 09
      So you have not read the article. Like 17 people who rated your comment plus.
      1. -1
        8 December 2019 23: 02
        Quote: IGAR
        Like 17 people who rated your comment plus.

        read, we read ... but "misunderstood", we brakes

        Article structure
        1. Title
        2. Introduction
        3. The content of the article
        4. Заключение

        we will consider it a conclusion
        Quote: Ryabov Kiril
        Using a similar approach to the creation of new weapons, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin to a certain extent simplify and accelerate the process of creating new weapons. In addition, it is possible to obtain advantages associated with the unification of weapons of different classes, including for different types of troops.

        The base missile AGM-158A JASSM appeared and entered service quite a long time ago. Its last derivatives go to the troops only now, and in parallel, the development of new models. All this clearly shows that the weapons of the AGM-158 family have firmly taken their place in the US arsenals and will not leave them in the foreseeable future. Moreover, in the near future this family is waiting for a new interesting replenishment.

        giving the answer to the question (in fact)
        Quote: Author
        How much (to what extent) AGM-158 stealth missiles that hit in hand of Russia

        belay
        to whom are dangerous? the hands of Russia, in which they fell? in the sense of a woman and his hands torn off? or they (which fell into the hands of Russia) are dangerous for Russia (for Russian air defense, for mines of ICBMs, for ships, for ..)
        I believe that the anatomical topic is not fully disclosed!
        wassat
        I would like to see the hands of Russia, which hit
  4. +5
    8 December 2019 18: 30
    Unify them all. The United States is now subject to this principle. Somewhere it turns out, somewhere not very. Of all that will be of greatest interest is a microwave with wings.



  5. +9
    8 December 2019 18: 35
    Cyril, this is not an article, but a collection of short paragraphs about missiles! There is little specific information, but in fact, the article does not match the title.
  6. +4
    8 December 2019 18: 45
    The first episode of the combat use of JASSM took place on April 14, 2018. Two B-1B bombers launched 19 missiles at targets on the territory of Syria. According to the Pentagon, all missiles have reached their goals. The Syrian and Russian military, in turn, spoke about the defeat of most of the missiles by air defense forces. In addition, two AGM-158A products fell and went to the Syrian army, which transferred them to Russia for study.

    Cyril, dear, wasn’t the wreckage of "smart and beautiful" tomahawks shown at the MO briefing?
    1. +5
      8 December 2019 19: 11
      Quote: asv363
      Cyril, dear, wasn’t the wreckage of "smart and beautiful" tomahawks shown at the MO briefing?

      Tomahawks and more. There it seems like some new French ammunition arrived almost completely intact. BUT, according to the content of the article, I did not understand how dangerous and what promising solutions we can find on the "antidote" based on the fact that this stray was in the hands of our specialists. At the end of the title, a question mark suggests itself.
      1. +1
        8 December 2019 19: 30
        There, it seems like some new French ammunition flew in NEARLY fully preserved.
        1. +2
          8 December 2019 20: 37
          Quote: Corn
          There, it seems like some new French ammunition flew in NEARLY fully preserved.

          Thanks for the photo. It is really far from preserved, and very much falls short of "almost". But I had more in mind the "international of used b / supplies", among which were the French pribluda, which fell into the hands of our specialists. It is a pity, of course, that only as such fragments. hi
          1. 0
            10 December 2019 00: 39
            Anything can fall into the hands of specialists, although so far only scumbags have shown something, but this is not important, without its own elemental base, processors, software, sensors, etc. (before 2014, the Russian Federation almost everything that she wanted to get, unlike the PRC), it will be impossible to compete in the high-tech segment of the military-industrial complex, as well as to create an analogue of a captured weapon model. A separate, very important topic is mechanical engineering, which was on the rise at the beginning of the 2000s, but all these state-conglomerations have cheated, the competition has blown away and where is it all now ...
    2. -2
      8 December 2019 22: 10
      Weird question. You and half do not know what happened and is happening in Syria. Like me
    3. +1
      9 December 2019 09: 41
      Showed the pieces of Axes and the pieces of European Storm Shows.
      1. -2
        10 December 2019 00: 58
        Quote: arkadiyssk
        Showed the pieces of Axes and the pieces of European Storm Shows.

        After the rocket hits the target, debris remains, it does not pulsate at the same time. Typically, the lower third of the rocket leaves large debris after the warhead detonation. It is very doubtful that the Syrian air defense can shoot down the Kyrgyz Republic, and the Russian Federation naturally didn’t use its air defense against any missiles of the NATO / USA / Israel, as this would provoke not only diplomatic, but also a military conflict with the latter. And this is normal, since the Russian Federation is not able to wage war with the United States and others and cannot simply bring down something without a minimum announcement of intention, at the highest level, which was not there.
  7. +5
    8 December 2019 19: 17
    In the presence of "Carapace" with "Nails", no subsonic stealth / nestels KR can whip from the word at all.
    1. +6
      8 December 2019 21: 59
      Quote: Operator
      In the presence of "Carapace" with "Nails", no subsonic stealth / nestels KR can whip from the word at all.

      A childish approach. One Shell, even in theory, can intercept no more than 4 missiles from one direction and no more than two missiles from two directions. In fact, everything can turn out much worse there. So volley Garmami (AGM-88 Harm) and immediately behind them are already heavy missiles.

      Unfortunately, in the long-standing competition of armor and shell, today the advantage is on the side of the shell. There are no means of guaranteed protection.
  8. -3
    8 December 2019 19: 19
    How dangerous are stealth rockets AGM-158, which fell into the hands of Russia
    The same "trophy" rockets that no one ever saw, despite the fact that with pomp they demonstrated rare fragments from numerous tomahawk strikes?
    Others would not have given attention, but Kirill Ryabov even on this basis managed to file a capital article, that’s what talent means.
    1. 0
      9 December 2019 00: 51
      It seems that there was a shortage of one of the Tomahawks who fired from the Red Sea.
      They shot at one object from three sides: the Mediterranean, Red and Persian Gulf.
      To check the accuracy and synchronism of such attacks.
      Perhaps this Tomahawk came to Russia.
      1. +3
        9 December 2019 02: 25
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Perhaps this Tomahawk came to Russia.

        fellow
  9. -1
    8 December 2019 19: 22
    To combat helicopters, there are mines based on the strike nucleus; they can be adapted to protect stationary objects by providing a control and guidance system.
  10. -5
    8 December 2019 20: 12
    Quote: Salieri
    When there are dozens or more of them on one target, more than a suitable weapon.

    TARS_LOL - Lol, do you understand when it can be? Then, when only ash remains on the earth. There is a nuclear weapon to contain this!

    Listen to you, so Daggers and Zircons, and the like prodigies are not needed - nuclear weapons solve problems everywhere.
    1. -4
      8 December 2019 20: 31
      Quote: TARS_LOL
      To listen to you, Daggers, Zircons, and the like child prodigies are not needed - nuclear weapons decide everywhere.

      TARS_LOL (TARS), how old are you, strategist from Ukraine! It is felt that the intelligence and knowledge you are clearly lacking in such matters! In order to conduct a substantive dialogue, you need to know the topic, namely, why each type of weapon, tactical and technical characteristics and tactics of use ... If in doubt, then listen to the speech of US generals in the US Congress on Russian hypersonic weapons and other types of weapons. And this is not a prodigy, but a real powerful weapon, which is only to deter aggressors in various areas of military weapons.
      1. +2
        9 December 2019 02: 26
        Quote: Salieri
        then listen to the speech of American generals in the US Congress

        Very selfish people, I heard. They want money all the time.
  11. -2
    8 December 2019 20: 16
    Quote: lucul
    It turns out that one long-range bomber can cope with an air defense system

    24 Subsonic missiles, against say our S-350 Hero. This is not a problem for him.)))

    There was news recently that the SU-34 at low altitude broke through the S-300 defense. What makes you think that STELS rockets are not capable of this when their ESR is noticeably lower?
    1. 0
      9 December 2019 12: 04
      And the Su-34 and the electronic warfare complex is quite powerful, and even the three hundred is already quite ancient.
  12. +2
    8 December 2019 20: 25
    Some kind of addictive plans: to make a stealth rocket with an active rocket homing system, replace Harpoon, which weighs less than the warhead of this rocket ...
  13. +2
    8 December 2019 20: 46
    What is the RCS of the AGM-158? From what distance is the escort taken? Maybe in this formulation of the question "subsonic" is not a "bug", but a "feature"?
    1. -1
      8 December 2019 23: 15
      Quote: Zufei
      What is the EPR of the AGM-158?

      direction of radar radiation relative to the velocity vector AGM-158? monostatic or bi? is there an underlying surface (flight altitude, surface type) / no?
      Quote: Zufei
      From what distance is taken for escort?

      radar power? altitude AGM-158? Relief? Is AWAC used?


      Quote: Zufei
      maybe in this formulation of the question "subsonic" is not a "bug", but a "feature"?

      The Yugoslavs wanted to fight low-flying subsonic cruise missiles by pulling a mesh (like a chain-link) along "dangerous" directions ...

      feature: cheaply costs 850-1000 thousand $
      Teledyne CAE (Wyman-Gordon Forgings stamping) is not a 3M22 engine, and L3 equipment is not a "zircon" equipment
      1. 0
        9 December 2019 21: 51
        On balloons, you can pull the network and NLCs will not reach the goals.
        1. 0
          16 January 2020 09: 05
          The real theme, our idea, in threatened areas. As I understand it, it is not noticeable for radar.
  14. +1
    8 December 2019 21: 09
    Was it embarrassing for me alone that the photos of the tests show objects that can be destroyed with an ordinary hundredth?
    Or are these tests "for accuracy", without a warhead?
    1. xax
      0
      8 December 2019 21: 55
      Quote: Deathmaker
      objects that can be destroyed by the usual hundredth?

      A bag of dollars thrown from a turntable can also destroy these buildings, and it will come out cheaper.
  15. +3
    8 December 2019 21: 21
    IMHO, but Israel bombed Syria with planning bombs, and did not shoot down ...

    So why do people often think it's easy to put together a nimble stealth rocket?
    1. xax
      +2
      8 December 2019 21: 49
      Quote: Alex2000
      and not shot down

      A shell without ammunition can do little to bring down laughing
      1. -1
        10 December 2019 22: 36
        That Shell in general can not be taken into account, an isolated case.
        But they bomb regularly ... for example, when our Syrians shot down, 4 bombs were not noticed by the roofing felts, they were noticed by the roofing felts, but they were bombed anyway ...
  16. xax
    +2
    8 December 2019 21: 48
    The first pictures of the article cause a strange feeling. A high-tech contraption worth under the bucks of bucks is about to sacrifice itself for the destruction of some penny buildings.
  17. -3
    8 December 2019 22: 37
    Quote: Salieri
    Quote: TARS_LOL
    To listen to you, Daggers, Zircons, and the like child prodigies are not needed - nuclear weapons decide everywhere.

    TARS_LOL (TARS), how old are you, strategist from Ukraine! It is felt that the intelligence and knowledge you are clearly lacking in such matters! In order to conduct a substantive dialogue, you need to know the topic, namely, why each type of weapon, tactical and technical characteristics and tactics of use ... If in doubt, then listen to the speech of US generals in the US Congress on Russian hypersonic weapons and other types of weapons. And this is not a prodigy, but a real powerful weapon, which is only to deter aggressors in various areas of military weapons.

    You yourself showed your intellect, almost immediately accusing your opponent that he was from Ukraine. Therefore, you automatically have a biased opinion and constructive dialogue with you to make no sense. And I'm from Belarus.
    1. -4
      8 December 2019 23: 10
      Quote: TARS_LOL
      And I'm from Belarus.

      And you look like from Ukraine
  18. +6
    8 December 2019 22: 41
    Quote: Saxahorse
    AGM-88 Harm

    But nothing, that the range of the AGM-158B JASSM-ER is 980 km, and the AGM-88E Harm - only 106 km? laughing
  19. -4
    8 December 2019 23: 07
    The USA abandoned Tamagavk anti-ship missiles with a range of 450 km, because they were not effective, so they flew to the target for a long time! The target in 40 minutes of the missile’s flight, without waiting for the enemy’s attack, managed to retreat back to its base laughing
    Now they load the holds with even more long-range missiles, but also subsonic, it can fly to the target for more than an hour! During this time, the Third World War will end ... who will highlight the target within an hour? what
    Either we don’t understand something, we are suffering over hypersound, or do the Americans know something, what the hell is a rocket for them?
    1. 0
      10 December 2019 12: 19
      "who will highlight the target for an hour?" ////
      -----
      A stationary target does not need to be highlighted. A rocket flies on GPS. At the final site, it corrects itself with the help of its GOS.
      The latest Tomahawk models have been taught to "scour" for moving targets.
  20. +2
    8 December 2019 23: 19
    When I was very young and the phrase “cruise missile” was secret, I could not imagine that such articles could be simply read. Well, in the public domain, I'm talking about it. Good car. I am only offended that we are wasting time and energy on the destruction of their own kind. Something is wrong here.
  21. 0
    8 December 2019 23: 21
    Quote: Geo⁣
    Quote: TARS_LOL
    And I'm from Belarus.

    And you look like from Ukraine

    Any questions?
    1. 0
      8 December 2019 23: 25
      fellow
      Our people :)
    2. -2
      9 December 2019 04: 16
      Quote: TARS_LOL
      Any questions?

      What do you do in Ukraine with a Belarusian passport?
  22. -5
    8 December 2019 23: 27
    Quote: Eroma
    The USA abandoned Tamagavk anti-ship missiles with a range of 450 km, because they were not effective, so they flew to the target for a long time! The target in 40 minutes of the missile’s flight, without waiting for the enemy’s attack, managed to retreat back to its base laughing
    Now they load the holds with even more long-range missiles, but also subsonic, it can fly to the target for more than an hour! During this time, the Third World War will end ... who will highlight the target within an hour? what
    Either we don’t understand something, we are suffering over hypersound, or do the Americans know something, what the hell is a rocket for them?

    Dear, where did you see a range of 450 km? Maybe before you write frank nonsense, is it worth checking basic things?
    Flight range from 870 to 2500 km. A speed of 900 km.
    1. 5-9
      +2
      9 December 2019 10: 02
      They wrote about Tomahawk-RCC to you ... he planned a range of 450 km, 2500 is nuclear, there are no more.
    2. 0
      9 December 2019 23: 31
      Honestly, I do not have enough phone permissions to examine your tablet. But the BGM-109B version in the RCC version everywhere writes 450-550 km (who didn’t go right) about 450 as I heard more often! The range you specified is 900-2500 (the last for a nuclear warhead and then, in my opinion, 1500km), this is for ground targets to plow hi
  23. 0
    9 December 2019 00: 31
    Quote: knn54
    Considering that the missile range is twice that of the S-400 threshold (600 km), then the carriers remain "unpunished?

    So who will deploy S-400 without cover?
    1. +1
      9 December 2019 05: 05
      But after all, a volley of a likely enemy will also be leveled by our electronic warfare and electronic warfare means, and then it’s all about multi-level air defense, which, thank God, is created and is rapidly increasing. So not everything is so bad.
      1. -1
        9 December 2019 09: 55
        Sense of this multi-level air defense? Not hundreds of 300,400 divisions but several will take part in the entire attack. A couple of divisions will be knocked out in one place and a couple in another, then all forces deep into the country will be led into these corridors in the direction of airfields, communication centers, etc.
        1. 0
          9 December 2019 12: 20
          While these divisions will pick, interceptors will fly up.
        2. 0
          2 March 2020 23: 20
          Oh strategist! And our generals do not even suggest this! Class !!!
  24. 0
    9 December 2019 05: 53
    It is always interesting to delve into the weapons of the enemy.
  25. 0
    9 December 2019 08: 35
    as for me over something like a drone or an anti-aircraft missile with an electronic warfare system and launching it right in the direction of the enemy launching a wave of missiles, it will be much cheaper and no less effective
  26. +1
    9 December 2019 09: 47
    I read the article, I did not see the answer to the question posed in its heading.
    all data on the rocket can be easily google (which the author did).
    but where is the analytics, analysis, conclusions?
    none of this ... request
    1. +1
      16 December 2019 14: 57
      wassat the main thing is on the fan and there the bots in the kament will stretch. but how it is, no one knows who has more budget for trolot and that and malades)))) though sometimes you have to invite "your" Taliban to capitulate in front of him on the anniversary of September 11 right to nyyork to Trump, but this is not a cost for them. current business.
  27. 5-9
    0
    9 December 2019 10: 09
    Without special warheads, this (as well as the Tomahawks, Caliber) is more likely a media weapon ... well, is it beautiful to fire from the Papuans-Barmales safely? Handsomely. Only now at a price of lam bucks apiece with 420 kg warheads are somehow a little expensive. Or for single dictators / leaders of terrorists of any kind. Or as the first wave of a strike on air defense, followed by waves of airplanes with Kharmas (all the PRRs somehow did not live up to their hopes) and the DzheyDamami ... although it’s expensive to saturate the goals with the help of the bucks of air defense bucks.
    The result of the simultaneous launch of 62 and 101 missiles in Syria somehow did not impress ... and these were the most massive volleys (well, like volleys, it went on for dozens of minutes) launches in history.
  28. 0
    9 December 2019 10: 50
    What again is empty argument? No one will attack Russia with axes and other logging tools, this will be the last war
  29. +1
    9 December 2019 11: 46
    The title of the article poses the question "How dangerous are AGM-158 stealth missiles that fell into the hands of Russia," albeit without a question mark. But in the course of the article, I do not find the answer. This is wrong. An unfinished article as an interrupted act.
  30. 0
    9 December 2019 17: 25
    in short, read komenty - the Americans won, the curtain, went to another article
    1. 0
      2 March 2020 23: 22
      Test, multiple test!
  31. 0
    9 December 2019 18: 53
    Quote: arkadiyssk
    A couple of divisions will be knocked out in one place and a couple in another, then all forces deep into the country will be led into these corridors in the direction of airfields, communication centers, etc.

    You probably smoke something obscene, and maybe even eat. Who will stand on ceremony in the current realities with an enemy who is going to knock something out there? While someone there tries to introduce something deep into us, after the first attempt, he will instantly receive what he deserves. And I do not think that is adequate, but more than !.
  32. 0
    10 December 2019 11: 25
    Quote: Chaldon48
    I was not impressed, probably because the air defense, at least partially, did my job.

    And this is in conditions of passive reflection of the attack. Add to the results the destruction of the launchers themselves in the process of mutual strikes.
  33. 0
    10 December 2019 17: 31
    Why don’t the RF Ministry of Defense provide these missiles for public display once they were captured
    1. +1
      16 December 2019 14: 55
      Helfaer in Cuba, the comrades sent themselves by mail where he studied for a year.
  34. 0
    10 December 2019 20: 57
    Quote: Al Asad
    Why don’t the RF Ministry of Defense provide these missiles for public display once they were captured

    Why reassure the enemy. Say showing damage to essential parts? Let winces in a dream, expecting the worst ....
  35. 0
    10 December 2019 21: 24
    Well, the Americans have always sinned with impudent espionage: either our hijacked plane will be disassembled, then in Avgan they will carry out an operation to steal MI-24 ... in general, they were always very interested in our developments, waging wars on almost all continents ... the Ukrainians themselves brought a lot of equipment to them for analysis (for example, T-84) ... In general, the Americans have always been better aware of the armaments of the USSR, until now ... And here is such a paragraph, the most modern missile ... the consequences of analyzing such technologies of a potential adversary is a gift of fate ... Of course, it all depends on the state, but in practice, sometimes a piece of casing is enough ... for progress ... And not the last thing in this "find", if possible, analysis of the software of this rocket, if possible ...
  36. 0
    12 December 2019 12: 01
    Would you like to replace the BGM-109 Tomahawk and AGM-86B / C ALCM with BCH?
  37. 0
    16 December 2019 14: 54
    Quote: Sergey Sfyedu
    American rocket will solve all the same problems

    good pasib neighing
  38. 0
    6 January 2020 22: 34
    Quote: 5-9
    What is the point, if even the Syrian air defense knocks down the KR dozens at a time, then what is the use of them?

    You look at the result, and not at the reports of the Syrian Krivorukov air defense. Ash-Shairat airfield was smashed into the trash, take other declared goals - also into the trash. The Syrians may have shot down 10 percent of the targets, but in any case, the American KR showed themselves very well.
  39. 0
    7 August 2020 21: 28
    Nothing has been written about how these missiles ended up in Russian hands. Any evidence, photos, for example?
  40. 0
    3 September 2021 08: 48
    How dangerous are AGM-158 stealth missiles in Russian hands?

    Since they did not fall into the hands of Russia, it is not yet possible to find out exactly how dangerous they are)

"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"