“Putin now has the Vanguard: abroad, they comment on the adoption of the complex for arming the Armed Forces


According to the largest (and not the largest) world media, information was received that in Russia the first regiment was put on combat duty, the main weapons which is an intercontinental ballistic missile with a Vanguard hypersonic unit. Appeared in the media in Europe, USA, India, China, Ukraine, etc. news materials in which the authors inform their readers that “Putin now has Vanguard.”


In the Indian media, it is stated that the first mention to the public about the “Vanguard” was made in 2018 from the lips of Vladimir Putin - and a year later these hypersonic missile systems appeared on the arsenal of the Russian Armed Forces. It is noted that the Russian army was the first in the world to receive such hypersonic weapons at its disposal.

It is additionally noted that in the West many of the statements of the Russian leader were not taken seriously, considering them a bluff. Now these people prefer to be silent.

Europe recalls the words of Vladimir Putin, in which he noted that the Soviet Union in terms of armaments was mainly catching up: "the United States was constantly trying to catch up, starting with the atomic bomb." Now, as the Russian president emphasized, the situation has changed dramatically:

Let them catch up with us now.

Experts in the United States regarded this statement by the Russian president as "a provocation to the arms race." Opponents of the immense inflation of the military budget in the United States, and there are some, say that Putin "consciously demonstrates steps in terms of the latest weapons to spur the US Congress to even greater spending." Moreover, it is stated that the larger the volume of the military budget, the greater the volume of corruption. An example is an attempt to conduct (for the first time in several decades) an audit at the Pentagon.

As a result, this attempt was unsuccessful, as the US Department of Defense stated that "many items of expenditure are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified." Critics of this approach have accused Pentagon officials of knowingly hiding information, believing that this is the extent of corruption. In this regard, one gets the impression that there will be those who would call the adoption of the hypersonic “Vanguard” in Russia “interference in the internal affairs of the United States” ...
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

208 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. MoJloT 27 December 2019 17: 06 New
    • 19
    • 25
    -6
    “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
    Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.
    1. Udav kaa 27 December 2019 17: 11 New
      • 49
      • 17
      +32
      Let them catch up with us now.

      Now it’s clear why such harassment of Russia began at the end of the year on all fronts ... Well, gentlemen, build your own AUGs and yell about democracy! But Russia has its own path and we will protect it with OUR real weapons, despite all your sanctions!
      1. Aerodrome 27 December 2019 17: 31 New
        • 19
        • 32
        -13
        Quote: Udav Kaa
        Let them catch up with us now.

        Now it’s clear why such harassment of Russia began at the end of the year on all fronts ... Well, gentlemen, build your own AUGs and yell about democracy! But Russia has its own path and we will protect it with OUR real weapons, despite all your sanctions!

        I ask to change the "nickname" ... "The Boa Kaa" is already taken, and we respect it very much.
        1. cniza 27 December 2019 17: 39 New
          • 8
          • 3
          +5
          Quote: MoJloT
          “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
          Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.


          There is no public audit, as without it ... it’s just not disclosed and that’s it.
          1. orionvitt 28 December 2019 06: 35 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Quote: cniza
            just not disclosed and all

            Well, there’s a dozen of billions, another for covert operations, but it’s almost one and a half trillion dollars. about which the pentagon cannot report. That's what I understand cut. It is clear that for decades, but still, the scale is impressive. It seems to me that everyone there knows everything perfectly and without any audit, they just don’t want to "make dirty linen in public." The reputation of the states as a universal model has been shaken lately, and they do not need another scandal.
        2. Pereira 27 December 2019 17: 42 New
          • 13
          • 11
          +2
          I join the urgent request about Nick.
        3. Udav kaa 27 December 2019 18: 12 New
          • 23
          • 15
          +8
          Quote: Aerodrome
          I ask to change the "nickname" ... "The Boa Kaa" is already occupied, and we respect

          It just so happened and not for you to teach me what and how I should do hi Am I disturbing you ?
          1. Thrifty 27 December 2019 18: 15 New
            • 8
            • 15
            -7
            Boa Kaa - just modify the avatar a bit hi You do not bother anyone, because you did not have time to write anything bad hi
            1. rich 27 December 2019 19: 21 New
              • 22
              • 5
              +17
              Quote: Udav Kaa
              Quote: Aerodrome
              I ask to change the "nickname" ... "The Boa Kaa" is already occupied, and we respect

              It just so happened and not for you to teach me what and how I should do hi Am I disturbing you ?

              You do not bother anyone. If you are not a neoliberal or Ukrainian Troll welcome to the site drinks
              1. 3danimal 28 December 2019 12: 32 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                Well, what a primitive labeling! Is the argument so weak (or the mind so lazy) that there is nothing left but the transition to the individual?
              2. Nymp 28 December 2019 18: 44 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Rich, welcome Bro! soldier
          2. Edik 27 December 2019 18: 25 New
            • 6
            • 7
            -1
            Quote: Udav Kaa
            It just so happened and it’s not for you to teach me what and how I should do it. Am I bothering you?

            Well, here people are not ingenious, looked closely, no, not he drinks
      2. 1976AG 27 December 2019 17: 40 New
        • 15
        • 3
        +12
        Quote: Udav Kaa
        Let them catch up with us now.

        Now it’s clear why such harassment of Russia began at the end of the year on all fronts ... Well, gentlemen, build your own AUGs and yell about democracy! But Russia has its own path and we will protect it with OUR real weapons, despite all your sanctions!

        The baiting of Russia began in 2008 after Georgia, and on all fronts in 2014
        1. Pereira 27 December 2019 17: 46 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          That's right. Since the beginning of August 08.
        2. Svetlana 27 December 2019 20: 58 New
          • 8
          • 4
          +4
          Nope .. it all started in 1917 ..
          1. voyaka uh 27 December 2019 21: 31 New
            • 14
            • 29
            -15
            Alexander Samsonov believes that the campaign of the hosts of the West against Russia
            began in the days of Hyperboreans-Aryans-Rus.
            Somewhere between their taming of mammoths and their destruction of dinosaurs.
            Even in those bygone days, the great-Masons-Anglo-Saxons-Vaticans began to pull
            its sweaty pens to the future oil reserves of Siberia.
            1. Lontus 27 December 2019 22: 21 New
              • 13
              • 6
              +7
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Alexander Samsonov believes that the campaign of the hosts of the West against Russia
              began in the days of Hyperboreans-Aryans-Rus.
              Somewhere between their taming of mammoths and their destruction of dinosaurs.
              Even in those bygone days, the great-Masons-Anglo-Saxons-Vaticans began to pull
              its sweaty pens to the future oil reserves of Siberia.

              Feel better over obscurantists whom the fire from the bushes ordered the boys to cut genitals.
              1. 3danimal 28 December 2019 12: 19 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                And who drove round the poles? (Some still continue) IMHO, various religious cults - childhood diseases of mankind.
            2. cherkas.oe 27 December 2019 22: 51 New
              • 15
              • 5
              +10
              voyka.hu, you remind me of my classmate Zelik, who tried to become either the headman, the Komsomol, or the CPSU. But when all his attempts were in vain, in view of the bright characteristic appearance, similar to your profile picture and lack of intelligence, in the mid-nineties he grew paisas and dumped him in Israel. And already from there, now in all social networks, as far as the education received in the USSR allows him to, he sophisticatedly, and sometimes not so much, tries to desecrate the land that gave life to his parents and him.
              1. voyaka uh 27 December 2019 23: 01 New
                • 13
                • 12
                +1
                I treat Russians well.
                And I laugh at the absurd false history of the ancient world. Not only
                Russian.
                Ancient Russia of the VIII-XIII centuries was a developed and respected state
                of his time. There is no problem with this.
                But it has nothing to do with Hyperboreans and Aryans.
                Therefore, your claims are not to me, but to some articles by Alexander Samsonov on
                historical branch of VO. hi
                1. cherkas.oe 27 December 2019 23: 23 New
                  • 14
                  • 7
                  +7
                  Of course, of course, you treat Russians well, only with what edge of hyperboreas and arias the topic of the article relates. And your Jesuit methods of discussion are visible with the naked eye. A little bit more literate - you are visible through and through. Can you still tell me that you can’t eat and sleep from worries about the country that gave birth to you who fed and learned you? Do not tell the people present on the site.
                  1. voyaka uh 28 December 2019 02: 00 New
                    • 9
                    • 10
                    -1
                    "Maybe you can tell me that you can’t eat and sleep from experiences
                    for the country, "////
                    ----
                    I worry about Israel, which I love and for which even
                    fought a little.
                    And I’m simply sympathetic towards Russia, as my people live in it
                    classmates, relatives, friends.
                    I hope your curiosity has satisfied, Mr. moralist. smile
                    1. cherkas.oe 28 December 2019 11: 10 New
                      • 8
                      • 1
                      +7
                      I didn’t ask you anything, I simply assumed that you were not saying what you were thinking. Your sympathy for Russia rushing from you, no matter what you say. No one is asking you to sympathize with Russia and there is no need to deceive even yourself.
                2. nickname7 29 December 2019 11: 53 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Ancient Russia VIII-XIII centuries

                  Ancient This is the 1st century, and the 18th century is not ancient. Then, in terms of development, Russia roughly corresponded to Europe, but for some reason, they went to accelerated industrial development and scientific and technological revolution, and feudalism began to lag behind.
              2. Xnumx vis 27 December 2019 23: 30 New
                • 7
                • 6
                +1
                We had in our group such an “Abkhazian” by the name of Lifshits ... The head of the group compiled lists, asked for nationality .. We were surprised .. Lifshits and “Abkhazian” ... In principle, a normal guy, but “Abkhazian.” Shy .. a Jew ... ..
                1. cherkas.oe 27 December 2019 23: 51 New
                  • 13
                  • 4
                  +9
                  I will tell you Yuri, this does not depend on nationality, but on what kind of person. I have a childhood friend, a Jew - Serega Furman, a bully, an excellent student, could stand up for himself and for a friend, became a cool drill master, lived like a torch, was not shy about his nationality, because no one had any questions for him. He died saving people; his colleagues brought him to his native village for six thousand kilometers. We, classmates and friends all gathered, because in his notebook we were all recorded with phones and addresses.
                  1. Xnumx vis 28 December 2019 13: 20 New
                    • 5
                    • 1
                    +4
                    Quote: cherkas.oe
                    I will tell you Yuri, this does not depend on nationality, but on what kind of person.

                    I’m talking about that. There is one decent nationality ... I think the concept is not worth deciphering ... Although many do not understand this definition.
                  2. Alex Justice 28 December 2019 16: 35 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Politicians divide us by nationality. Everyone wants to be a prince in his little kingdom.
            3. Guru 28 December 2019 04: 07 New
              • 5
              • 2
              +3
              voyaka uh (Alexey)
              The first mentions that have survived to this day about the desire to clean up Siberian reserves by the Great Masons, Anglo-Saxo-Vaticans, refer to Ivan the Terrible.
              Regarding Hyperborean-Aryan-Rus, well, look at the video in Sanskrit smile and everything will become clear.
              But with the Mammoths, maybe in Siberia in bulk, the Dinosaurs also find throughout Russia.
              Have you found a lot of things in Israel ??? Imagine that your distant descendants will be laughed at with the words "These primitive Jews tamed cows"
              I’m not scoffing-understand correctly -BUT the official history of Russia is complete nonsense. (I'm talking about gray-haired antiquity which can only be judged by excavations)
              1. Connor MacLeod 28 December 2019 04: 50 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                Quote: Guru
                I'm not kidding - get it right -BUT the official history of Russia is complete nonsense.(I'm talking about hoary antiquity which can only be judged by excavations)

                What exactly is nonsense?
              2. voyaka uh 28 December 2019 14: 48 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                "And you have found a lot of things in Israel ??? Imagine that they will laugh at your distant descendants with the words" These primitive Jews have tamed cows "////
                ----
                It's funny to me too! laughing We didn’t even manage to tame cows,
                only sheep and goats.
                And even then, not Jews (Jews are a young people, only 4 thousand years old), but peoples,
                living in the Middle East in the Bronze Age. Their names have not been preserved.
                And the tribe of Jews (the tribe of Abraham) came from Iraq (from the city of Ur),
                about 4 thousand years ago and grazing sheep and goats primitively in Judea.
                Pyramids to build, as the Egyptians did not know how. The villages are houses in one room and pantry.
                Peasant was a Jewish people ... sad
                Where are we to mammoths-hyperboreas! fellow
              3. nickname7 29 December 2019 12: 15 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                BUT the official history of Russia is complete nonsense

                You cross out the titanic work of thousands of archaeologists and historians around the world who have worked for several generations, dedicated life to work, and compiled fact libraries. Really all these researchers, scientists and archaeologists have generated nonsense? Something is doubtful.
                If you put on the scales the titanic work and the opinion of lonely ignoramuses, then the official version will be most correct, and loneliness will be for loners of alternative people. Because officials use the scientific approach, the most ingenious method invented by mankind, unlike alternative ignoramuses, all that is written by them, is bullshit.
                1. Guru 31 December 2019 07: 08 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  You cross out the titanic work of thousands of archaeologists

                  And what did they dig up? The answer is simple - NOTHING that could go against the version of Christians.
                  and historians from all over the world who have worked for several generations, have dedicated life to work, have compiled fact libraries.
                  What are the facts? Those who say that before the Christians all Rusichi worked the land with a digger with a stick, and were just a Beast, as Patriarch Kirill said.
                  Really all these researchers, scientists and archaeologists generated nonsense

                  Alas, delirium and nothing else. For example, now they are generating nonsense about the fact that America defeated the Second World War and the Soviet Union later turned out to be so-so. (Do you want more facts of generating delirium?)
                  The Russian world is much older than you would like.
                  Although I will not hide the fact that they tried hard, at first the Christians, and then the Petrine historians. To destroy all traces of the Great Civilization.
            4. meandr51 28 December 2019 14: 24 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              And what prevents them from pulling now? Is Vanguard really?
          2. 1976AG 28 December 2019 06: 03 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Svetlana
            Nope .. it all started in 1917 ..

            Nah, it all started in 1812
            1. Connor MacLeod 28 December 2019 06: 16 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Quote: 1976AG
              Nah, it all started in 1812

              In 1612 ...
              1. djdf.tvtkz 28 December 2019 16: 45 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                All wrong. It began with the following. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God .... and then everything else, and what and how it was in history, we will not know, because each subsequent ruler changes the past to his present.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. eklmn 27 December 2019 21: 15 New
        • 4
        • 24
        -20
        “Let them now catch up with us!”
        And running ahead you improved yourself / family what? Sleep well? So after all, the salary has not increased, you still have to pay the bills, what a dream! Improved self / family health? Does not look like it! Prices lowered? So they, according to the law of the military genre, must increase! So what did you achieve / get in return?
        By the way, on the next branch, where they discuss the article
        “The launch of the Nord Stream was carried for a year (end 2020)”
        https://lenta.ru/comments/news/2019/12/27/nord/
        There is a very interesting comment by one reader:
        “We already have all kinds of vanguards and Poseidons. Can't they lay pipes with the swings? ”
      5. Alex Justice 28 December 2019 16: 39 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Generals and lobbyists rub their hands with joy. There is reason to ask for money for weapons.
    2. businessv 27 December 2019 17: 21 New
      • 6
      • 4
      +2
      Quote: MoJloT
      Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.

      Everything is so, only the whole point is that this does not give a reason not to carry out cost accounting and the audit in general! When bureaucrats point out to auditors that it is impossible to audit a certain amount allocated for something secret, the question is in the sum itself, but when bureaucrats do not want to allow control in principle, this is nonsense! I can imagine how many babos they saw there! smile
      1. MoJloT 27 December 2019 17: 33 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        bureaucrats do not want to allow control in principle, this is nonsense!
        It seems that not everything is at stake.
        “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
        1. demo 27 December 2019 18: 39 New
          • 6
          • 2
          +4
          Secrecy, in market conditions, is a very relative concept.
          All enterprises, including super secret ones, submit tax reports.
          And there is an article there - payment for services of third-party organizations.
          Not all transactions go through the Treasury. Many go through simple banks.
          Suppose a company is subcontracting a state-owned enterprise.
          He will receive money for materials, equipment or services under the guise of a regular payment.
          Bank secrecy is from the category of unscientific fiction.
          All transactions can be decoded by the developers of Windows, or other third-party organizations.
          Because bookmarks to the hardware have not been canceled.
          And a bunch of tails, for which if a specialist pulls, then everything will fall out.
          So, we can’t check the expenditure of our funds, and the adversary knows for sure who, how much and when, and most importantly - for what is listed.
          It is very fast, I whip up.
          And if you sit, think, then you can still find ways.
          Do not want to strain and think.
          Friday, New Year's Eve.
    3. Nyrobsky 27 December 2019 21: 44 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Quote: MoJloT
      “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
      Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.

      No dear, the answer is not correct. The state is a monopoly in ensuring its sovereignty, and therefore it is also the main customer and, accordingly, picky controller of how his money is spent to ensure his own security. Another thing is that, regardless of nationality and state affiliation in the world, there are enough cunning officials who are ready to cover up their unseemly activity of stealing budget funds with a secret regime.
    4. Boris Chernikov 27 December 2019 22: 24 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      only one moment, even with these audit programs, a billion bucks could not be found
    5. Pravodel 28 December 2019 08: 44 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Of course, the biggest secret that is not subject to audit: Tram is not Trump, but Putin dressed as Trump. Sorry for betraying military secrets, but it’s locked. I did not receive money for this. Although, they could have thrown away from stolen billions even with a millionaire for such a secret.
      Now, let them now understand and conduct the audit.
    6. Okolotochny 28 December 2019 14: 05 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.

      This is not a normal practice. For these purposes, in the Russian Federation there is the Accounts Chamber, KRU AP, and auditors of the Moscow Region. Employees have access to state secrets.
  2. private person 27 December 2019 17: 10 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Moreover, it is stated that the larger the volume of the military budget, the greater the volume of corruption.

    Golden words, and in other matters, both here and they all love money.
  3. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 11 New
    • 14
    • 10
    +4
    Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace? And then already from every iron sounds about hypersound, and yet any ballistic missile is hypersonic in essence.
    1. private person 27 December 2019 17: 16 New
      • 9
      • 5
      +4
      how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar

      Here the whole joke in the speed and method of delivery of these warheads. It all boils down to the fact that the ABM adversary is powerless against the "Vanguard".
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 22 New
        • 9
        • 17
        -8
        A ballistic missile flies in near space, then warheads fall on the target. Naturally, in the atmosphere they are inhibited and there can be no talk of any hypersound from the point of view of physics. Therefore, I wonder if this is not a figure of speech.
        1. Thrifty 27 December 2019 18: 02 New
          • 12
          • 4
          +8
          Robertophysicist — now calculate the trojectory of the entry of the warhead into the dense layers of the atmosphere, different from the ballistic one, with minimal loss of speed, and kinematic energy accumulated by the maneuvering unit during its acceleration at the time of launch of the carrier (ICBM), and before the unit is separated from the carrier! This will answer your question about hypersound. ...
          1. Avior 28 December 2019 03: 30 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            kinematic energy accumulated by the maneuvering unit during its acceleration at the time of launch of the carrier (ICBM)

            the fact is that the kinetic energy accumulated after the start of the carrier turns into potential with increasing height, while the speed decreases sharply when it reaches the highest point.
            Then, with a decrease, the speed increases again, but after getting into the atmosphere due to air resistance, the speed starts to decrease again
            hi
        2. Brturin 28 December 2019 00: 25 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: Robertocalos
          Naturally, in the atmosphere they are inhibited and there can be no talk of any hypersound from the point of view of physics.

          It is unlikely that now anyone will say what the highlight is ... Physics ... There is a simple torpedo, but there is a Flurry - there and there physics ... only here are speeds ... maybe here, another environment, another idea, only who say about this ....
          1. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 01: 36 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            There are no questions to the Flurry, everything is clear there.
        3. djdf.tvtkz 28 December 2019 17: 09 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Do you think ???, the dense layers of the atmosphere begin for 100 km, the ICBM flies at a speed of 6 km sec, that is, it needs 17 sec to slow down to zero, that is, about the earth, in fact it does not slow down at all, not air friction heats the object entering into the atmosphere, and what kind of process can this be learned if physics is considered not from the point of view of physics of its level, but as a science explaining these processes as a whole. The avant-garde from the point of view of hypersound is generally not new, any ICBM does this, which is why ICBMs it’s almost impossible to shoot down, any, both the Russian Federation and the USA, if the current at the start or in space, maneuvering the warhead only enhances its penetrating power against missile defense, plus it says that there is technology that allows you to control a projectile in hyper sound, which is good for creating missile defense the country that possesses this technology.
      2. RUSS 27 December 2019 20: 44 New
        • 5
        • 9
        -4
        Quote: private person
        how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar

        Here the whole joke in the speed and method of delivery of these warheads. It all boils down to the fact that the ABM adversary is powerless against the "Vanguard".

        What is your evidence?
        1. private person 27 December 2019 21: 24 New
          • 5
          • 5
          0
          What is your evidence?

          Personally, I don’t want to prove anything, BUT I can advise you to turn directly to GDP, he will tell you something.
      3. Procyon lotor 29 December 2019 19: 19 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        And what, before the adversaries were able to shoot down all missiles or warheads?
      4. Procyon lotor 29 December 2019 19: 20 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        And what, before the adversaries were able to shoot down all missiles or warheads?
      5. The comment was deleted.
      6. The comment was deleted.
    2. Prjanik 27 December 2019 17: 27 New
      • 8
      • 3
      +5
      One thing a warhead falls, albeit with great speed, but along a predictable ballistic trajectory, another thing - it also maneuvers.
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 30 New
        • 8
        • 12
        -4
        That is, there is a rocket engine on the warhead? Does maneuvering actually go over the target? Then about hypersound it is not clear where it comes from?
        1. Prjanik 27 December 2019 17: 40 New
          • 9
          • 3
          +6
          Details about the Vanguard will not very soon be in the public domain.
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 55 New
            • 6
            • 8
            -2
            This is without a doubt about open access. But the principle of movement is not a military secret. It's hard to argue with physics.
        2. Thrifty 27 December 2019 18: 17 New
          • 8
          • 7
          +1
          Robertophysicist -you just ask, or veiled-thin spy? ?? wassat
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 18: 20 New
            • 11
            • 12
            -1
            It is hardly necessary to spy on this site) I want to find out if a duck was slipped to us under the guise of a child prodigy.
    3. Aerodrome 27 December 2019 17: 33 New
      • 10
      • 18
      -8
      Quote: Robertocalos
      Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace? And then already from every iron sounds about hypersound, and yet any ballistic missile is essentially hypersonic

      SUCH questions began to crumble from the "gray avatars" in recent years, apparently with the aim of scratching itnf
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 38 New
        • 13
        • 10
        +3
        Such a question is asked by any technically savvy person. The principles of jet propulsion are not military secrets; they are simple physics.
        1. Aerodrome 27 December 2019 17: 40 New
          • 10
          • 19
          -9
          Quote: Robertocalos
          Such a question is asked by any technically savvy person. The principles of jet propulsion are not military secrets; they are simple physics.

          so go and learn physics ... tongue
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 43 New
            • 11
            • 8
            +3
            Thanks for the advice, I’m a physicist in my first education.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. AlexG83 27 December 2019 19: 21 New
              • 3
              • 7
              -4
              Quote: Robertocalos
              Thanks for the advice, I’m a physicist in my first education.

              And the second shpien?
              Okay ... this is just a joke. Now is the time, to suspect everyone around.)
        2. Prisoner 27 December 2019 17: 46 New
          • 9
          • 8
          +1
          laughing Oh oh Technically savvy answers to such questions are given along with the horseshoes. But for the troll, such questions are very characteristic. hi
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 53 New
            • 14
            • 14
            0
            There are sensible experts on this site. And, I believe that there are more of them than trolls and amateurs to speculate about "has no analogues." And to repeat as the ass journalistic clichés "hypersound-hypersound" a lot of intelligence is not necessary.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 18: 10 New
                • 10
                • 12
                -2
                “We have such devices, but we won’t tell you about them”)) but with hypersound, on the contrary.
                1. The comment was deleted.
        3. jonht 28 December 2019 01: 12 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          From open data, the Vanguard flies in the upper layers of the stratosphere, without space exit. The main point is sliding, and if there are even weak aerodynamic forces, it is possible to perform maneuvers without the use of rocket engines. And it’s very good that nobody knows how our people got it. And one more thing, the lower the trajectory the less the flight time and the distance traveled.
    4. dorz 27 December 2019 17: 35 New
      • 9
      • 5
      +4
      Quote: Robertocalos
      Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace? And then already from every iron sounds about hypersound, and yet any ballistic missile is hypersonic in essence.

      Vanguard will reach Washington in 15 minutes.
      1. Aerodrome 27 December 2019 17: 42 New
        • 13
        • 11
        +2
        Quote: dorz
        Vanguard will reach Washington in 15 minutes.

        Will Robertocalos have time for refuge?
        1. dorz 27 December 2019 17: 49 New
          • 5
          • 3
          +2
          Quote: Aerodrome
          Quote: dorz
          Vanguard will reach Washington in 15 minutes.

          Will Robertocalos have time for refuge?

          “We will all die someday, and some will die.”
          The poet Mechislav Shargan.
        2. Prisoner 27 December 2019 18: 56 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Who will let them go there? This vassals are consumables. laughing
        3. Mestny 27 December 2019 22: 14 New
          • 2
          • 6
          -4
          Have time together. There is just under Kuev.
      2. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 49 New
        • 7
        • 7
        0
        And the mace for the same time.
        1. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Victoria-V 27 December 2019 20: 01 New
        • 4
        • 8
        -4
        What is the fact that he will fly in 15 minutes? Are you not familiar with the term “mutual assured destruction”? Stop writing nonsense, not fools here ...
    5. Captain45 27 December 2019 17: 40 New
      • 9
      • 5
      +4
      Quote: Robertocalos
      Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace?

      The disclosure of state or military secrets is punishable by law, however, like espionage lol
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 17: 47 New
        • 9
        • 14
        -5
        Suspicions that "hypersound" is just a buzzword are very real. Apparently, gas engines were inserted into the warhead, which can work for several seconds and correct the trajectory. And the block falls under the influence of gravity, that is, about Mach 4.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 18: 18 New
            • 8
            • 17
            -9
            If I am right, then the Vanguard cannot be a miracle weapon. At launch and in space, it is vulnerable to Standards. And only in the final section of the flight can complicate targeting a warhead. That is, in essence, an "improved Mace."
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. D16
              D16 27 December 2019 19: 28 New
              • 6
              • 2
              +4
              At launch and in space, it is vulnerable to Standards.

              Excuse me, are you going to launch standards from our territory? There, after all, 100-150 km up and north and that's it. OUT has ended. And then everything.
              1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 19: 32 New
                • 4
                • 11
                -7
                Standards from Berkov are planned to be launched. In orbit, an ICBM can be intercepted.
                1. D16
                  D16 27 December 2019 19: 43 New
                  • 12
                  • 3
                  +9
                  Burki will be far from the silos. So with the start of a bummer. For space utopia in general. There, the blocks fly with a group of comrades. Determine which of them is who. It is one thing to gasp for them with an atomic bomb, another is a kinetic interceptor. But there’s no bomb. laughing And the main question: "How many APs from ICBMs were shot down by SM-3?"
                  1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 19: 50 New
                    • 5
                    • 6
                    -1
                    Not one, if not confused. But the satellite was shot down, so a theoretical possibility exists. Another thing is that there is no 100% protection against ICBMs, a fact recognized.
                    1. D16
                      D16 27 December 2019 20: 18 New
                      • 5
                      • 3
                      +2
                      Pfff ..... wassat ! 00% noah? 1% no. What are you speaking about? I'm talking about amers, if that laughing .
                      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 28 New
                        • 4
                        • 8
                        -4
                        I that Americans learned to remove satellites from orbit.
                      2. D16
                        D16 27 December 2019 21: 42 New
                        • 5
                        • 3
                        +2
                        We learned this in the 70s.
                      3. lucul 27 December 2019 22: 21 New
                        • 4
                        • 2
                        +2
                        I that Americans learned to remove satellites from orbit.

                        We learned how to shoot down static satellites with an easily calculated trajectory.
                        Did they learn how to maneuver with overload under 60G blocks? ))))
                      4. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 23: 00 New
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        -3
                        I’m talking about orbital. I’m explaining the flight .. there are no maneuvers and the trajectory is in the palm of your hand. .
                      5. lucul 28 December 2019 01: 38 New
                        • 5
                        • 1
                        +4
                        I’m talking about orbital. I’m explaining the flight .. there are no maneuvers and the trajectory is in the palm of your hand. .

                        Yes, it does not appear in space, everything is within the atmosphere)))
                        The Avangard complex’s GPB is launched by a modernized 15A35 missile (UR-100 N UTTH) to an altitude of approximately 80 km, after which it plans to descend to an altitude of approximately 60 km in a short flight section. in sufficiently dense atmospheric layers at a distance of the order of 60 km at speeds from 10000 to 18 Mach. The final dive site is as short as possible and is about 22 km. The angle of incidence on the target can be calculated by yourself. During the flight, the unit can make up to 100 side maneuvers, avoiding all zones of possible interception "
                      6. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 01: 54 New
                        • 3
                        • 3
                        0
                        That is, at 80 km the block is separated from the rocket and then it flies without engines? 10 thousand km. Yes, and at Mach 22? Performing horizontal maneuvers?)
                      7. lucul 28 December 2019 20: 10 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        That is, at 80 km the block is separated from the rocket and then it flies without engines? 10 thousand km. Yes, and at Mach 22? Performing horizontal maneuvers?)

                        And you do not need to know more. .
                      8. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 21: 33 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        It is clear even to a graduate of 8 classes that this cannot be.
                      9. lucul 28 December 2019 22: 08 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        It is clear even to a graduate of 8 classes that this cannot be.

                        (Yawning) Flies after all .....
                        But you can continue to amuse yourself with the thought that these are cartoons ....
                      10. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 23: 13 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        Quote: lucul
                        It is clear even to a graduate of 8 classes that this cannot be.

                        (Yawning) Flies after all .....
                        But you can continue to amuse yourself with the thought that these are cartoons ....

                        Specifically, such a flight profile is not feasible. It is impossible to fly several thousand kilometers at an altitude of 60 km without an engine. So do not whistle, you just do not understand the basic principles of movement in the air. Instead of chewing, I recommend reading school textbooks.
                      11. lucul 29 December 2019 12: 26 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        So do not whistle, you just do not understand the basic principles of movement in the air. Instead of chewing, I recommend reading school textbooks.

                        (Yawning) So it flies after all ....
                        Maybe someone just read the wrong school books ...
                      12. Robertocalos 29 December 2019 14: 41 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        I understood. You are one of those who believe in newspapers. Continue, I will not interfere)
                      13. lucul 29 December 2019 14: 51 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        I understood. You are one of those who believe in newspapers.

                        I understand that you are one of those who do not believe their eyes .....
                        In Russian aircraft engines, the combustion temperature is more than 3000 g Celsius, but they work and do not burn ....
  • Mestny 27 December 2019 22: 16 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1

    Apparently, gas engines were inserted into the warhead, which can work for several seconds and correct the trajectory.

    All wrong.
    Hypersonic engines were inserted into a known part of Svidomo skakuas.
    And the latter is known to be able to dig out the Black Sea, having where necessary the appropriate wick.
  • lucul 27 December 2019 22: 19 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    If I am right, then the Vanguard cannot be a miracle weapon. At launch and in space, it is vulnerable to Standards. And only in the final section of the flight can complicate targeting a warhead. That is, in essence, an "improved Mace."

    Aha-ahah ....
    Standards still need to catch up with him at the start - this is the time, even if the Standards can catch him - these Standards can be brought down - these are two.
    Well, three - in the final section you do not have the means to bring him down))))
    1. Boris Chernikov 27 December 2019 22: 34 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      1) how will you intercept them "at the start" if all positional areas are removed at least 1 km from the coast, 000) interception in space is possible subject to prior information about the launch and route, otherwise it is unlikely to intercept them, and if there’s another electronic warfare turn on ...
  • djdf.tvtkz 28 December 2019 17: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    howitzer coalition essentially improved squeak, but the result .....
  • ccsr 27 December 2019 18: 24 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Quote: Robertocalos
    Apparently, gas engines were inserted into the warhead, which can work for several seconds and correct the trajectory.

    It is possible that the design of the block itself allows you to change the orientation of the surface during the flight, and this in itself will lead to maneuvering, just as a flat stone thrown onto the surface of the water can ricochet in different directions, observing the general direction of movement.
    And additional engines will correct the accuracy of getting the warhead, and compensate for the loss of speed when moving in a denser environment than in space above 100 km.
    But the main problem is not even this, but how to avoid overheating when moving at such speeds in dense layers of the atmosphere. As the saying goes, "This is not Newton’s bin ...."
    1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 18: 44 New
      • 3
      • 9
      -6
      Thermal protection is the first question. Aiming is the second.
      And where does the "hypersound" come from — that is, 2-3 km / s in the atmospheric section — the third.
      1. D16
        D16 27 December 2019 20: 03 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        You are like a child, by golly. laughing Atmospheric plot is a relative concept. The land has one, but another 60 km.
    2. gunnerminer 27 December 2019 18: 50 New
      • 4
      • 19
      -15
      Thanks to hypersound, this block in the atmosphere will burn out before meeting its intended purpose.
      1. Piramidon 27 December 2019 19: 35 New
        • 7
        • 3
        +4
        Quote: gunnerminer
        Thanks to hypersound, this block in the atmosphere will burn out before meeting its intended purpose.

        Tests conducted. Not burned out.
      2. D16
        D16 27 December 2019 19: 56 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        Ordinary BBs for some reason do not burn. It is clear that there are 4-5 swings near the ground, but in the case of Vanguard, the decrease in speed is compensated by maneuverability at the finish. And you throw these cliches. It is clear that the earth has no hypersound. But the opportunity to drop this thing at an altitude of 60-80 kilometers without a drop in accuracy, rather than a classic ballistic trajectory, is worth a lot.
        1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 24 New
          • 3
          • 8
          -5
          Conventional BB armored with thermal protection, without wings and engines. And yes, you need to retarget something when changing course. Even the Masked Dragon does not land anywhere and maneuvering capabilities are very limited.
          1. D16
            D16 27 December 2019 20: 33 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            Conventional BB armored with thermal protection

            And this one, think without?
            without wings and engines

            And this one can be without wings, and certainly without engines. At such speeds, fairly small deflected surfaces.
            maneuvering capabilities are very limited.

            So no one in America is going to twist dead loops. laughing
          2. lucul 27 December 2019 22: 22 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            Even the Masked Dragon does not land anywhere and maneuvering capabilities are very limited.

            As I understand it - is this the technology standard for you? )))
            1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 23: 04 New
              • 2
              • 6
              -4
              Is there something more perfect in metal? Is that Boeing reusable ..
      3. Boris Chernikov 27 December 2019 22: 35 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        so he does not fly constantly in the atmosphere) he is there only when he falls on the target)
  • gunnerminer 27 December 2019 18: 24 New
    • 2
    • 11
    -9
    If we discuss this topic without confirming with scans of schemes, calculations, lists indicating military ranks, full names, and positions, then this is balabolism.
    1. MMX
      MMX 27 December 2019 20: 10 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: gunnerminer
      If we discuss this topic without confirming with scans of schemes, calculations, lists indicating military ranks, full names, and positions, then this is balabolism.

      Shchaz the whole world military-industrial complex tensed, because of such a little fork ...
  • Piramidon 27 December 2019 18: 12 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    Quote: Robertocalos
    how is the Vanguard different from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace?

    The main difference is that the “Vanguard” is CONTROLLED up to the target, and the trajectory of conventional BGs after separation from the LV is impossible to adjust. Well, the very fact of the possibility of maneuvering makes it very difficult to intercept
    1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 18: 38 New
      • 3
      • 14
      -11
      That is, you assume that the last stage for atmospheric flight with a solid propellant rocket engine was mounted on ICBMs? Then, for sure, there can be no hypersound, it will burn to vigor / hair dryer ..
      1. Piramidon 27 December 2019 19: 27 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Quote: Robertocalos
        That is, you assume that the last stage for atmospheric flight with a solid propellant rocket engine was mounted on ICBMs?

        This is what you assume, not me. You have not noticed or do not want to notice that the full name of the hypersonic PLANNING warhead. Or do you think that it is impossible to control a glider without an engine?
        1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 19: 38 New
          • 3
          • 10
          -7
          In a cloud of plasma to control a glider? And if this block is essentially a cruise missile, attached to a ballistic, then there can be no hypersound. On three Machs, titanium is already deformed. Yes, and thermal protection must be provided for speed relief. So wherever it goes - doesn’t converge.
          1. Piramidon 27 December 2019 20: 26 New
            • 9
            • 5
            +4
            Quote: Robertocalos
            On three Machs, titanium is already deformed.

            The trollik is stubborn. How do you know what materials there are? Maybe there is not titanium, but damn it, plywood, polystyrene and percale. You are one smart, and all those who developed this block are ignoramuses. negative
            1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 43 New
              • 4
              • 9
              -5
              And who am I the troll? Those who blindly believe agitation? Great honor. All ears buzzed in hypersound, but where is he? And this is just about this - the layman heard a buzzword and believes that this is some kind of super-duper.
              1. D16
                D16 27 December 2019 21: 57 New
                • 3
                • 2
                +1
                Those who blindly believe agitation?

                Are you here to convey the truth to each user?
                All ears buzzed in hypersound, but where is he?

                Near space.
                the layman heard the buzzword and believes that this is some kind of super-duper.

                In Russia, all middle school graduates in the Kurrrs laughing .
              2. businessv 28 December 2019 00: 01 New
                • 4
                • 2
                +2
                Quote: Robertocalos
                All ears buzzed in hypersound, but where is he?

                And where would you like to see him, colleague? Or hear? smile The fact is that you clearly consider yourself smarter and more experienced than foreign experts who have no doubt about it, I'm not talking about us, members of the forum, we just went for a walk here. hi
                1. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 01: 42 New
                  • 3
                  • 5
                  -2
                  As you show the opinion of a foreign "expert" with at least a specialized higher technical education, so you can begin to "believe." Although I am used to understanding what is happening, to believe is to priests.
                  1. businessv 29 December 2019 12: 35 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Robertocalos
                    Although I am used to understanding what is happening, to believe is to priests.

                    I do not lead discussions about faith. If you are not too lazy, you will find a lot of evidence of the presence of the indicated weapons. Start at least from here: https://www.rbc.ru/politics/18/12/2018/5c1864119a79477b75999255. or https://ria.ru/20180418/1518916477.html
                    1. Robertocalos 29 December 2019 14: 44 New
                      • 0
                      • 1
                      -1
                      In stock I have no doubt. In the overwhelmed characteristics - yes. Moreover, now I already know for sure that the complete disinformation was originally voiced - this does not happen, but as it happens, I'm trying to figure it out.
                    2. Procyon lotor 29 December 2019 19: 45 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Strange somehow it turns out. The first flight of the T-50 took place in 2010, but was put into service but can not. And here in a year and a half they already report that the product is already in production.
        2. D16
          D16 27 December 2019 20: 52 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          And if this block is essentially a cruise missile, attached to a ballistic, then there can be no hypersound.

          If Tomogavk, then definitely can’t laughing .
    2. D16
      D16 27 December 2019 20: 11 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      with solid rocket engine?

      There are already liquid ones, which will be thrown out from almost the first space one. You think you need one more? wassat
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 19 New
        • 2
        • 6
        -4
        I think that with the first comic, it will begin to slow down in the atmosphere, like any descent vehicle. Like the Shuttle, for example, but the Shuttle did not possess any hypersound. And it never occurred to him to call him that.
        1. D16
          D16 27 December 2019 20: 23 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Formally, space begins at 80 km altitude. That is, BB or Vanguard flying at an altitude of 79999m at a speed of Mach 22 is hypersonic laughing .
        2. djdf.tvtkz 28 December 2019 17: 25 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Examine the trajectory of the shuttle and the entry of ICBMs, so as not to pose as a dock. I give a hint, the ICBM enters almost from the top to the surface, the shuttle or the descent vehicle is still almost at the end of the earth opposite to the target, that is, one object needs to fly 100 km to the target, the second several thousand, I think you can draw conclusions
          1. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 18: 19 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Yes, I have long studied. And if the Vanguard is essentially Glider, then it is closer to the Shuttle than to the traditional BB of the ICBMs. Down below, some seriously believe in horizontal guided flight at 60 km altitude at 22 Mach, and even at 5 thousand km range.
    3. lucul 27 December 2019 22: 23 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      burns to vigor / hair dryer ..

      So that's the thing - do not burn .....))))
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Kasym 27 December 2019 20: 22 New
    • 8
    • 2
    +6
    Robertocalos (Vadim), if simple, then ... "Just as you throw a pebble on the water, and he bounces several times, so does Vanguard."
    And if it’s tricky, “the use of the Senger principle is to ricochet due to the aerodynamic quality of the atmosphere. That is, not by a ballistic trajectory in the field of gravity - as a freely thrown body, but by using the aerodynamic potential of the atmosphere. This weapon has both advantages and flaws ... "Gen. design MIT Solomonov Yuri Semenovich.
    It seems that it is not possible to calculate the trajectory of the warhead due to these bounces. hi
    1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 33 New
      • 1
      • 4
      -3
      Thank. That is, after separation from the second stage, the combat unit without engines jumps to the target with a pancake? And how can correction take place?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Kasym 27 December 2019 20: 45 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Yu.S. Solomonov spoke only of principles, and the rest ... "the topic is rather closed."
      3. Piramidon 27 December 2019 22: 21 New
        • 5
        • 5
        0
        Quote: Robertocalos
        And how can correction take place?

        You know less - live longer. Do you need to submit a full description, technology, drawings, apartment keys ...? Here they’ll remove the “vulture,” and then you will find out.
        1. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 01: 45 New
          • 1
          • 4
          -3
          No secrets needed. You just need to explain physics just above the level of the school curriculum. I have already dealt with hypersound, there are doubts about the "controllability" of the combat unit.
    2. D16
      D16 27 December 2019 20: 43 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      You are too serious. I’m afraid that Vadim is far from understanding all kinds of leaps there. He needs 3km / s near the ground. No way without it lol .
      1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 20: 53 New
        • 2
        • 6
        -4
        Yes, it’s no more stupid than a steam locomotive) and I just don’t need 3 km / s, because I understand that this is utopia. But I have a desire to understand the fundamental difference from the good old Ballistic missiles. And for other readers this is useful.
        1. D16
          D16 27 December 2019 21: 01 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Conventional ICBMs may use "low" trajectories. But they have no accuracy at the same time. Avant-garde on a low trajectory will get faster and more inconspicuous of all. And he will be able to choose guidance errors.
          1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 21: 03 New
            • 2
            • 6
            -4
            Particular clarity was not added))
            1. D16
              D16 27 December 2019 21: 06 New
              • 5
              • 3
              +2
              That's why I write that: "Vadim is far from understanding all kinds of leaps there." lol
              1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 21: 10 New
                • 1
                • 5
                -4
                I'm trying to figure it out. There is a basis.
                1. D16
                  D16 27 December 2019 21: 11 New
                  • 4
                  • 2
                  +2
                  Flag in hand laughing .
  • voyaka uh 27 December 2019 21: 41 New
    • 4
    • 5
    -1
    "How is the Vanguard different from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace?" /////
    ------
    The Poplar or Mace warheads fall almost vertically on the target.
    And the Vanguard begins a gentle decline in half-space (100-50 km)
    And only then they proceed to an almost vertical attack.
    Advantage: This attack path makes it difficult to intercept the Vanguard system
    PRO (THAAD, for example)
    Disadvantages:
    1) Vanguard - a large warhead. And instead of a few ordinary
    Warheads in ICBMs will fit only one Vanguard.
    2) accuracy. A gentle decline is poorly controlled. Anangard can fly away
    from the goal.
    1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 22: 02 New
      • 1
      • 4
      -3
      Thank. That is, in the BB of the engine there is a controlled fall, like the Shuttle? And who controls?
      1. voyaka uh 27 December 2019 22: 41 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Management is carried out by gas rudders.
        There is no conventional jet or ramjet engine.
        There are probably several astro correction points on the path
        gentle descent to the goal.
        There is no external management. The accuracy is very, very dubious.
        Rather, a weapon of intimidation, a "factor of uncertainty." recourse
        The tests were partial in western Siberia. In Kamchatka
        shot only once and without a gentle stage of decline. Vanguard
        fell like an ordinary warhead.
        1. Robertocalos 27 December 2019 22: 54 New
          • 2
          • 4
          -2
          That is, Vanguard will not replace Poplars and Maces? So, for a change of arsenal adopted?
          1. voyaka uh 27 December 2019 23: 07 New
            • 3
            • 4
            -1
            Yars (Poplar replacement) - modern and accurate
            solid fuel ICBMs. The basis of the strategic arsenal.
            In fact, besides it, Russia does not need anything for a tough nuclear
            deterrence.
            But the Kremlin, of course, is nervous about the development of the US missile defense.
            Although it is so far only "anti-Chinese" (over the Pacific Ocean).
            And comes up with "jokers" like Vanguard.
    2. Avior 28 December 2019 03: 41 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      In fact, the interception height is that THAAD, that the SM-3 is more than 100 km, that is, if as you wrote, then these systems, it turns out, can intercept on a ballistic site.
  • lucul 27 December 2019 22: 09 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of the same Poplar or Mace? And then already from every iron sounds about hypersound, and yet any ballistic missile is hypersonic in essence.

    Yes, everything is simple - all ballistic missiles cross the dense layers of the atmosphere along the shortest path, otherwise they will burn out. Because of this, their flight path is easy to calculate.
    The avant-garde is able to fly and maneuver longer in dense layers of the atmosphere, because of which its trajectory is very difficult to calculate, and therefore impossible to shoot down (not yet possible).
    1. Avior 28 December 2019 03: 43 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Yes, everything is simple - all ballistic missiles cross the dense layers of the atmosphere along the shortest path, otherwise they will burn out. Because of this, their flight path is easy to calculate.
      The avant-garde is able to fly and maneuver longer in dense layers of the atmosphere, because of which its trajectory is very difficult to calculate, and therefore impossible to shoot down (not yet possible).

      Dense layers of the atmosphere are 40 km and below.
      Missile defense intercepts at high altitudes.
  • Boris Chernikov 27 December 2019 22: 31 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    the main point is in the maneuver .. the combat unit performs maneuvering, and since the main way to defeat is to damage the combat unit using the kinetic warhead of the PRO-scrap rocket, the probability is very small
  • businessv 27 December 2019 23: 54 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Quote: Robertocalos
    But any ballistic missile is hypersonic in essence.

    In fact, yes, but so far we have managed hypersonic controls only (according to the representatives of the General Staff), control of the warhead in hypersound mode is the most difficult part of the program.
  • cherkas.oe 28 December 2019 00: 19 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    In short, the entrance to the dense layers along the lay trajectory, at the minimum possible angle, the shape of the planning block contributes to its controlled re-meshing from dense layers with the effect of maintaining the speed imparted by the carrier.
    1. Robertocalos 28 December 2019 01: 31 New
      • 1
      • 4
      -3
      Dealt with this. But it is absolutely not clear how aiming is carried out after “unpredictable jumps”. Here I support the warrior, the CVO will be higher than that of traditional BBs. And that means only semi-merciless targets and no point hits. Not to mention anti-aircraft maneuvers. And the pathos of "hypersound" is of course only pathos.
  • nickname7 29 December 2019 13: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Someone can plainly explain, And already from every iron sounds about hypersound

    It's simple, this is a marketing method.
    For example, TVs with quantum dot , what is it ? In photography and lighting technology, the term light filter, these are films and paints that affect the light, and quantum This is a term from physics. So, to increase sales, marketers called the light filter a quantum dot and it turned out, as it were, a new super duper product having no analogues. Buyers would frown on the light filter, but they do not spare money on the points. Although in fact, these are the same balls, only in profile.
    The same marketing method was applied to regular ICBMs. Say there is combustion in the rocket - a molecular reaction, which means it can be called a molecular rocket. Or you can call a rocket plasma rocket and it will not be a lie, since the plasma is present. In fact, the “vanguard” is an ordinary ICBM.
    If you recall when the word hypersound was pronounced, in the election speech of the guarantor. If there is no new product, you can sell the image, which was done to win the election.
    ps
    And morality - do not get fooled by marketing.

  • Procyon lotor 29 December 2019 19: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And what, before the adversaries were able to shoot down all missiles or warheads?
  • astepanov 27 December 2019 17: 13 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    Good luck. Good New Year's news.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Hunter 2 27 December 2019 17: 13 New
    • 16
    • 7
    +9
    Well, I certainly did not expect an assessment as a "provocation to the arms race."
    Who got out of the ABM Treaty? Who ignored the RDSM agreement?
    Treating any arrangement as profitable is the US Prerogative.
    So get Balalaika on Baska! yes
    1. Vadmir 27 December 2019 17: 35 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      Who got out of the ABM Treaty? Who ignored the RDSM agreement?
      Ask some John from Texas and he will seriously say that Russia. And some congressmen seem to be of the opinion that Russia and Putin personally are to blame.
      1. cniza 27 December 2019 17: 42 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        So they are “exceptional”, all that they do is right, and everyone else only with their permission ... now let them run now.
    2. Incvizitor 27 December 2019 19: 01 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      They always turn everything upside down.
  • Thrifty 27 December 2019 17: 14 New
    • 5
    • 8
    -3
    Well, well, ukroin is on this list too! Their voice is more important than the voice of the United States, so from now on in all news ukroin needs to be placed in front of the United States, that is,, figuratively speaking the cart, in front of the horse lol
  • Thrifty 27 December 2019 17: 15 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    Actually, "Vanguard" is in Russia fool
  • Alien From 27 December 2019 17: 16 New
    • 7
    • 5
    +2
    The main thing is that Russia has this complex, the rest is empty chatter!
    1. Thrifty 27 December 2019 17: 19 New
      • 7
      • 7
      0
      A rare case when Russia can be proud of its complex! !! lol We are notorious "-Vanguard" !!! lol
      1. The comment was deleted.
  • Connor MacLeod 27 December 2019 17: 23 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    "Listen now!"
  • Pariv 27 December 2019 17: 29 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: MoJloT
    “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
    Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.

    The audit is most likely classified too.
  • Vadmir 27 December 2019 17: 30 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    In this regard, it seems that there will also be those who would call the adoption of the hypersonic “Vanguard” in Russia “interference in the internal affairs of the United States”
    Unlike other far-fetched cases, the adoption of the Vanguard is really an interference in the internal affairs of the United States, because, at least, it violates some of the plans of the hawks there, undermines the myth of American "exclusivity", the most advanced weapons exclusively made in America, and the invulnerability of the barrier PRO.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • sir_obs 27 December 2019 17: 38 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    As a result, this attempt was unsuccessful, as the US Department of Defense stated that "many items of expenditure are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified." Critics of this approach have accused Pentagon officials of knowingly hiding information,



    Of course, gentlemen simply cannot steal from the treasury, how can you imagine such a thing? This is all the Kremlin’s intervention, not otherwise.
  • Shahno 27 December 2019 17: 47 New
    • 3
    • 7
    -4
    Quote: Robertocalos
    Thanks for the advice, I’m a physicist in my first education.

    There is not a physical forum, but a military-political one ..
    1. Stakan-m 27 December 2019 18: 46 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: Shahno
      Quote: Robertocalos
      Thanks for the advice, I’m a physicist in my first education.

      There is not a physical forum, but a military-political one ..

      And here there are very angry men from all over Russia (who have a triple for physics)))) ... hi
  • sergo1914 27 December 2019 17: 52 New
    • 2
    • 16
    -14
    . Putin now has Vanguard


    He had it before. EdRo called.
    1. sergo1914 27 December 2019 20: 20 New
      • 2
      • 9
      -7
      Quote: sergo1914
      . Putin now has Vanguard


      He had it before. EdRo called.



      Putinoids are rampant today.
    2. sergo1914 28 December 2019 22: 57 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Quote: sergo1914
      . Putin now has Vanguard


      He had it before. EdRo called.


      Cool. United Russia rallied. Why you can not see personally minuscule, just interesting. Yunarmiya VO, pouring right and left sand ... who are these people?
  • Shahno 27 December 2019 17: 58 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Quote: Robertocalos
    There are sensible experts on this site. And, I believe that there are more of them than trolls and amateurs to speculate about "has no analogues." And to repeat as the ass journalistic clichés "hypersound-hypersound" a lot of intelligence is not necessary.

    Of course have. It's just that everything has its time ..
  • Shahno 27 December 2019 18: 30 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Quote: Udav Kaa
    Quote: Aerodrome
    I ask to change the "nickname" ... "The Boa Kaa" is already occupied, and we respect

    It just so happened and not for you to teach me what and how I should do hi Am I disturbing you ?

    Wish you luck. You are an interesting opponent .. yes
  • Operator 27 December 2019 18: 30 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    The Russian Federation now has two Vanguards - liquid ICBM UR100N UTTKh and PKB (planning winged block) 15YU71

    The launch weight of the rocket is 105 tons, the weight of the design bureau is 4 tons

  • Lena Petrova 27 December 2019 18: 43 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Quote: dorz
    We will all die someday, and some will die. ”
    The poet Mechislav Shargan.

    “We will go to heaven, and they will simply die.” (C) The poet ... and no matter what.
  • Stakan-m 27 December 2019 18: 44 New
    • 4
    • 8
    -4
    Now, as the Russian president emphasized, the situation has changed dramatically:

    Immediately the Urals will be wet (if something happens), but there is no special cover, unlike Moscow!
    Again we Uralians and Siberians have to save Russia?
    And few of us remained here, everyone in Moscow rushed bastards for a long ruble .. angry
  • GibSoN 27 December 2019 19: 20 New
    • 2
    • 16
    -14
    “Putin now has Vanguard:
    Great news! And 15-20 years ago, it wasn’t .. And in 2008 it wasn’t .. Actually, what personal benefit is it for me, if I can’t spread it on a spit? That is, either it needs to be used, or why is it needed by at least 100+ million people? (I removed the rest in the form of amendments, maybe someone really needs .. well, in the sense of who exactly everyone needs, they already know). The country's security guarantee is perfectly worked out by a triad of nuclear weapons delivery vehicles. No matter how it is here. Everything else, 50 to 50.
    1. Alexey G 27 December 2019 23: 05 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      You are wrong sir! You reason like a slave, not like a master. A weapon of such quality as Vanguard is like a lightning of Zeus! It is able to crush any missile defense of our opponents. It can make the entire American Navy and army afraid. This is SUPER terror of their consciousness. And what do you and all of us get from this?
      A question for children.
      First, we are increasingly respected by those who literally yesterday considered us second or even third grade. They continue to trade with us, despite the sanctions.
      Secondly, we can provide the Roof to any state that is afraid of the United States and most importantly, Americans are afraid to even breathe on our roof. These states can buy our goods from us and we can get rich.
      Thirdly, a new advanced weapon is an impetus for science, which must be used skillfully in civilian industries.
      The superpower and the population sooner or later begins to live SUPER laughing
  • Gennady Fomkin 27 December 2019 19: 27 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Especially for those who hold money and overthrow over the hill, Putin said something we have captains and airmen who will take responsibility in difficult times .. laughing
    1. aftbreeze 27 December 2019 19: 53 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      What language is the comment in? And what about?
  • Shahno 27 December 2019 19: 40 New
    • 2
    • 6
    -4
    Quote: Piramidon
    Quote: Robertocalos
    That is, you assume that the last stage for atmospheric flight with a solid propellant rocket engine was mounted on ICBMs?

    This is what you assume, not me. You have not noticed or do not want to notice that the full name of the hypersonic PLANNING warhead. Or do you think that it is impossible to control a glider without an engine?

    Probably possible. Shuttles were also controlled. Something like that. But there were others like the goal.
    And here, as always, everything is secret. Mysterious supermaterials. Mysterious plasma control, etc. etc.
    No, in the patriotic plan there are no questions ..
  • bars1 27 December 2019 19: 50 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Quote: GibSoN
    The country's security guarantee is perfectly worked out by a triad of nuclear weapons delivery vehicles.

    If you are so concerned about nuclear weapons delivery vehicles, then why are you against Vanguard ?! Missile defense systems are being improved, we must respond.
  • RUSS 27 December 2019 20: 46 New
    • 2
    • 18
    -16
    All these missiles are bullshit, people don’t need rockets, people need work.
    But the Chekist plays everything in the war.
    1. RUSS 27 December 2019 21: 49 New
      • 3
      • 11
      -8
      Quote: RUSS
      All these missiles are bullshit, people don’t need rockets, people need work.
      But the Chekist plays everything in the war.

      Hello Prigogine!
      1. Redline 28 December 2019 17: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Chekist? Do not make laugh my torn galoshes laughing
    2. Alexey G 27 December 2019 23: 09 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Yes!!! Do people also need fetters? Tech then build these missiles already have a job for your information. And those who do not yet have it now have the opportunity to live in peace, under the protection of these missiles!
      Let the Americans work for us, and not we for them with their stinky bucks!
    3. tarakan 27 December 2019 23: 54 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      So go work
      1. Incvizitor 29 December 2019 00: 14 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        He works here laughing
    4. Skarpzd 28 December 2019 02: 14 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      and missile production isn’t work? what a job. requiring the highest qualifications. not ... well, maybe not as high as a toilet paper sales manager, but still ....
  • faterdom 28 December 2019 00: 41 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    there are those who call the adoption of the hypersonic “Vanguard” in Russia “interference in the internal affairs of the United States” ...

    Not even in internal affairs ... In the subtle inner world of every senator and congressman. They have already grown confident that they can do anything and they won’t be anything for it ....
    And now - not everything can be done at all, and the prospects will narrow. Well, as for "there will be nothing" - in general, the assault, as the "allies" from one, let’s say, country says ...
  • aszzz888 28 December 2019 00: 56 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1

    It is additionally noted that in the West many of the statements of the Russian leader were not taken seriously, considering them a bluff. Now these people prefer to be silent.

    Now they stockpile with dry pie, and dig shelters. bully
  • Skarpzd 28 December 2019 02: 07 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Robertocalos
    Thermal protection is the first question.

    on thermal protection there are just no questions. installed air conditioning and that's it. By the way - I mount air conditioners, sleeps systems. bearer of the screenshot of this message - 20 percent discount)))
  • Pavel57 28 December 2019 15: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Moreover, it is stated that the larger the volume of the military budget, the greater the volume of corruption. An example is an attempt to conduct (for the first time in several decades) an audit at the Pentagon.

    Gorgeous.
  • Old26 28 December 2019 17: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: jonht
    From open data, the Vanguard flies in the upper layers of the stratosphere, without space exit.

    And this despite the fact that the end of the active section of the carrier trajectory 15A71 is about 400 km, and the space border is 100 km? Maybe you shouldn’t come up with something that isn’t based only on the writings of journalists.

    Quote: Prjanik
    One thing a warhead falls, albeit with great speed, but along a predictable ballistic trajectory, another thing - it also maneuvers.

    Well, the word maneuvers in relation to both the warhead (guided) and the winged block, the concept is very relative. At such enormous speeds, it will not be as maneuvering as a plane that can disrupt and direct anti-aircraft missile guidance. Here maneuvering is very, very “soft”. If it’s lateral, then the radius of such a maneuver can reach 1000 km or more. Vigorous maneuvering at such speeds will simply “collapse” the winged block. so all this is very arbitrary.
    I can cite as an example the statement that has already become a textbook that the supersonic anti-ship missile system Moskit flies with a sound at the final stage and thereby does not allow itself to be knocked down. The author of such a “beautiful” statement did not even try to calculate the radius of such a “snake”, and if he did, he would find out that with each such evolution the GOS would simply lose its target and the rocket would go into “milk”.
    So with the "Vanguard." Energetic maneuvering can not be expected from him because of the high speed and small supply of the working fluid for maneuvering. And of course, low engine power

    Quote: Robertocalos
    That is, there is a rocket engine on the warhead? Does maneuvering actually go over the target? Then about hypersound it is not clear where it comes from?

    There is an engine on it, but the following is not clear
    1. Type and reserves of the working fluid
    2. Engine power
    Based on this, I think that we can say that there can be no talk of any energetic maneuvering. And it is completely incomprehensible where such maneuvering is possible ...

    Quote: dorz
    Quote: Robertocalos
    Someone can clearly explain how the Vanguard differs from the warheads of
    same Poplars or Clubs? And then already from every iron sounds about hypersound, and yet any ballistic missile is hypersonic in essence.

    Vanguard will reach Washington in 15 minutes.

    Oh really? Only 15 minutes? And why not 3 minutes or 5 minutes, or 1,5 minutes?
    The distance from the PR division from which the Vanguards were launched to Kura is about 6200 km. With the rocket speed at the end of the ATU at about 7,5 km / s (I think that it’s slightly lower, but not the point), a distance of 6200 km will pass the block in almost 14 minutes (13,8 minutes), and a distance of 10-12 thousand kilometers in 15 minutes? Does he have something to fly with the third space ???

    Quote: Robertocalos
    Suspicions that "hypersound" is just a buzzword are very real. Apparently, gas engines were inserted into the warhead, which can work for several seconds and correct the trajectory. And the block falls under the influence of gravity, that is, about Mach 4.

    Hypersound has actually become a buzzword. And essentially you are right. Managed or winged (these are two different) blocks, having a certain type of engine, can slightly adjust its trajectory, which can create interception difficulties in a certain area. But this question is solved very simply. An increase in the "outfit of forces." Where missiles miss 1-2 miss 3-4 miss

    Quote: Robertocalos
    If I am right, then the Vanguard cannot be a miracle weapon. At launch and in space, it is vulnerable to Standards. And only in the final section of the flight can complicate targeting a warhead. That is, in essence, an "improved Mace."

    The issue of vulnerability from the "standard" is very controversial. B-1 “Standards” are not intended to intercept ICBMs or their BG. No, in a certain situation, interception is possible, but for this, in addition to the missiles themselves, powerful enough support tools (radars) are also needed because the “Standards” radar does not have a very large range. In-2 at the start of the “Vanguard” is hardly vulnerable, because the place where the carriers of the “Standards” can be located far enough from the starting point and even with the same target designation, these ships will no longer be able to intercept the “Vanguards” with “standards”, all the more so with
    In space, it is hardly vulnerable in most cases. Separately, this can be disassembled, but I do not think there is a need. Most vulnerable warhead may be at the finish


    Quote: D16
    At launch and in space, it is vulnerable to Standards.

    Excuse me, are you going to launch standards from our territory? There, after all, 100-150 km up and north and that's it. OUT has ended. And then everything.

    AUT of the Avangard carrier will end at an altitude of 400 km and at a distance of approximately 800 km from the starting point. Reach "Standard" SM-3 Block 2A - range 2500 km, height - 1500. But the speed is low compared to the "Vanguard"

    Quote: lucul
    I’m talking about orbital. I’m explaining the flight .. there are no maneuvers and the trajectory is in the palm of your hand. .

    Yes, it does not appear in space, everything is within the atmosphere)))
    The Avangard complex’s GPB is launched by a modernized 15A35 missile (UR-100 N UTTH) to an altitude of approximately 80 km, after which it plans to descend to an altitude of approximately 60 km in a short flight section. in sufficiently dense atmospheric layers at a distance of the order of 60 km at speeds from 10000 to 18 Mach. The final dive site is as short as possible and is about 22 km. The angle of incidence on the target can be calculated by yourself. During the flight, the unit can make up to 100 side maneuvers, avoiding all zones of possible interception "

    Is it not being launched into space? Is this at the end of the altitude of Out at 400 km? How he will behave when using the Senger trajectory is not known at all. For all the tests that passed the "Vanguard" were on a ballistic trajectory. Theoretically, he may be able to use such a principle of flight, but no one has yet verified this ...

    Quote: Robertocalos
    Dealt with this. But it is absolutely not clear how aiming is carried out after “unpredictable jumps”. Here I support the warrior, the CVO will be higher than that of traditional BBs. And that means only semi-merciless targets and no point hits. Not to mention anti-aircraft maneuvers. And the pathos of "hypersound" is of course only pathos.

    "Horse racing" is still "virtual." So far no one has tested such a trajectory
  • Victor March 47 28 December 2019 23: 54 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: MoJloT
    “Many expense items are not subject to audit due to the fact that they are classified”
    Normal practice, normal states. No one has canceled military secrets.

    Tell me, my dear, what is a military secret. If the country's military budget is known to everyone, and, above all, to the enemy. If the military budget items are known, and the amount of funding, too. Then why is budget execution a military secret? Kohl, since finance articles are accepted collectively, then why should the same college not see spending?
  • Ros 56 29 December 2019 09: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Striped fucking corruption with such a debt and its printing press, while. But sooner or later this bomb will explode and tady oh ....
  • djdf.tvtkz 9 January 2020 12: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We have the avant-garde ??, the states are catching up ???, how the propaganda for me was foolish for me .. Read and see Boeing X-43 The hypersonic aircraft X-43A is the fastest aircraft in the world. The drone during the test showed fantastic results, it flew at a speed of 11230 kilometers per hour. This is approximately 9,6 times greater than the speed of sound.

    Next: https://uznayvse.ru/interesting-facts/samyiy-byistryiy-samolet-v-mire.html
    And then think, it’s not even a rocket, but an airplane, flying at the same time, that is, it’s steeper for the entire duration of the flight and its hyper sound ...