Bought and lost! American leadership in hypersound, which was not


The recently appointed deputy chairman of the United States Military Command and Control School (Joint Chiefs of Staff), General John Hayten, speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS, the famous think tank) in Washington, made a number of interesting statements about the so-called hypersonic systems weapons. He also made a number of statements on this subject a few days earlier.


Revelations of General Hayten


Strictly speaking, of course, the conventional warhead (BB) of an ICBM or SLBM, or even an infantry ballistic regiment, is hypersonic, but it’s practically customary to call in this way precisely guided and maneuvering weapons at such speeds — wing-planning units (PKB), guided and maneuvering warheads, hypersonic aeroballistic and cruise missiles.

But back to our sheep, or rather, to our general. Speaking at CSIS, he initially touched on the changes in his fate - after all, it had not been three months before Heiten was promoted, and from the post of commander of STRATKOM (Strategic Command), he became deputy chairman of the OKNS. As he remarked with irony, “I used to command 150000 Americans and was responsible for absolutely every nuclear weapon that we have in the army, and now I am one of the five [members of the OKNS], and I’m not commanding anything and no one I answer, but for some reason my voice and advice are more significant than before: this is a new quality, I'm not used to it yet. " It’s strange, by the way, that he said “five,” because in addition to the chairman of General Milli and himself as deputy to the military command and control department, the chief of staff of the army (Ground Forces), the air force, the commander of naval operations, the commandant of the Marine Corps, chief The Bureau of the National Guard and, more recently, the commander of space operations, because Trump chose the most expensive and most senseless of all the options for creating space troops - he created another type of armed forces instead of creating a separate kind of troops, a separate command, etc. At one time, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation sought, based on American experience, including to reduce the number of types of aircraft, and from the five-service scheme (air force, air force, air defense forces, navy, strategic missile forces), they first switched to a four-service one, pouring air defense into the air force (which, given the hungry 90s, had an extremely negative impact on the situation with the country's air defense), then the Strategic Missile Forces out of sight became a separate branch of the central subordination troops, which, however, had practically no effect on them. And here the Americans are already with a five-species scheme, from which we have left (the National Guard is still not counted, otherwise there will be 6 types in general). But perhaps he just made a reservation.

Then he, among other things (in his speech there was enough "water", note), turned to the topic of hypersonic systems. Hayten again declared America’s grave lag in this matter. True, he said something very streamlined. First he declared that he was behind, then that he was “competing”.

“We need to understand what failure consists in, learn from these failures, learn from the mistakes we made, quickly move away from these mistakes. I look into the past for hypersonic weapons. We are now in serious competition with a number of rivals in the world in the field of hypersonic weapons. "


The dualism of opinions within one general


A few days earlier, in another speech, Heiten announced the threat of a backlog of US forces from Russia and China.

“We need to observe how fast Russia and China are developing, which is moving at incredible speed. So we need to be sure that we are developing at least at the same pace as potential opponents.”

At the same time, according to him, the US Armed Forces "are ahead in most respects, but this advantage will not matter if the enemy moves faster." That is, it seems, they are behind, but it seems that they are not, and even ahead, but they are afraid to be behind? You are already determined there or something, whether you are behind or not!

Moreover, earlier, when he commanded STRATKOM, in his opinions he did not wag like a maritime boat, but honestly and openly said - yes, we have lagged behind, and lagged behind very seriously, and so far we have nothing to answer, and nothing to defend ourselves, and it will take years, to catch up. True, he forgot to say that the years will be very long. After all, our “Vanguard” is not the first generation even of the design bureau, but, as it were, the third, if not the fourth. And to jump over several generations at once, even having some backlog, is almost impossible. But it’s clear that the head of the Strategic Command is allowed, the deputy chairman of the OKNS is not allowed - the status is not the same, the position is high, and for an unrestrained way of thinking you can lose your hope and once hope to rise one more step and take the highest point in the American military hierarchy (Secretary of Defense - not military by post), but even by the post itself. Given the speed with which both Trump advisers and ministers are changing, the danger is real.

Moreover, Trump himself likes to talk about the "dozens" of hypersonic "missiles" that are "being made" and are about to fill up the army with them, because they spend so much money on this all. Well, a person measures everything with money; he cannot understand that it is often impossible to buy competencies and technologies, they need to be developed. Therefore, it will not tolerate a refutation of its words from the lips of such a high-ranking military man. Haiten understands this, and therefore also changed the record on the issue of START-3 — he had previously advocated an unconditional extension, now he started a song about “China’s inclusion” and the like, that the extension simply torpedoes.

Memories of what did not happen


But returning to the speech in CSIS, it can be noted that the general said something else. Here is a quote in particular:

"And ten years ago, we were ahead of everyone in the development of hypersonic weapons. We had two programs - HTV-1 and HTV-2, under the auspices of DARPA. They did not work as they should. What did we do after they failed? We started years of research into these failures and then closed the programs. They’re not accelerating like that! ”

And further:

“Every time we have a failure at launch, we stop for years to recover. This is crucial when it comes to people's lives, as, for example, in the case of the tragedies of the Challenger and Columbia shuttles. However, if it’s not if we are talking about preserving human life, we need to understand how to move fast, how to adapt, how to learn, how to quickly launch. We must do this in the scale of all our activities. But we do not! Therefore, we need to return speed to our processes Therefore we need to know to take risks. "


The first thing you want to do is refresh the general’s memory. The fact is that, 10 years ago, the Americans didn’t have any leadership in the field of creating hypersonic missile defense systems, nor in the field of creating guided and maneuvering BBs (UBB and MBB), nor in the field of creating PKB.

It is worth remembering what is HTV. These are programs for creating PCB technology demonstrators, and not even prototypes. That is, in our opinion, this is research, and not the “coolest" research. They were created during the DARPA FALCON program - Force Application and Launch from Continental United States, that is, "Use of force and launch from the continental United States." It had 4 components. The first is the X-41 Common Aero Vehicle, a common air platform for military and civilian hypersonic loads, both for ICBMs and for the Kyrgyz Republic - something like a reusable hypersonic planning carrier container for about half a ton of cargo that could be dumped. What happened to her? Nothing - there were no tests, and such an ambitious and all-encompassing and unrealizable undertaking was quietly covered up and the funds, of course, were mastered. The second is HTV-1, a technology demonstrator that they wanted to launch in 2007, but didn't launch anything and quietly covered it.

The third is HTV-2, the same demonstrator, but looking different. Two test launches were made using a Minotaur-4 Lite space rocket (ILV), created on the basis of stages and nodes, which had recently been rested in the Bose MBR MX. The first launch was on April 22, 2010, the device separated from the ILV by 160 km and began to decline into the atmosphere. There was no plan to maneuver (yes, he probably couldn’t), a 30-minute flight at a speed of 20M above the ocean was planned. But in less than 9 minutes, the connection was interrupted - the apparatus began to vibrate and attempted to enter rotation and “the flight was interrupted”. The second launch took place a year later, on August 11, 2011, and was also unsuccessful, because the device again fell apart. There were no more launches, and it was not planned, although they considered such an option after the failure of the first two launches. But HTB-3X Blackswift launches were planned, but the program was also quietly covered. But there was no “stop for years” - they opened a new program, which they also covered later without testing, having opened several new ones at once relatively recently.

It is strange that Haiten recalled this particular program, because there were others. For example, AHW (Advanced Hypersonic Weapon) - there were 2 launches, in 2011, November 17, the demonstrator quite successfully separated from the carrier and was able to fly 3700 km, planning, but not being controlled. The speed, however, was slow: according to some sources, it was 7M, according to others - 5M. With such a speed, there will be no “gliding” in the atmosphere and rebound planning. The second launch took place in 2014 and lasted 4 seconds - the rocket exploded. There was nothing else under this program either.

Russia's leadership in the "hypersonic issue" is not accidental


In general, with such baggage, talking about some kind of leadership is simply stupid. In Russia, 10 years ago, it completed quite successful tests of the second-generation PCB at least 15Y70, which began flight tests in 2004 with success during the Defense 2004 exercises and was replaced by the current 2011Y15 in 71, and not because bad, but because the new option was more promising. Now it has been adopted by the Avangard complex with ICBMs 15A35-71. This is not to mention other programs, such as the “Dagger” and “Zircon” - work on them was already underway.

Like him, the US leadership in hypersound was not even 20 years ago, because the ancestor of 15Y70 and 15Y71, "Albatross", flew as early as the sunset of the USSR. And even 30 years ago there was no American hypersonic leadership. Because in the 80s, work was underway on UBB, for example, for the R-36M2 Voevoda, as well as for SLBMs. Almost three dozen launches were made only under the UBB program for SLBMs, and as a result, reliability and accuracy were brought to very high levels. But the deployment of this UBB did not follow then. In general, our current leadership is not accidental and has evolved over decades. Although it was precisely in the 80s that the USSR and the USA were still in approximately similar starting conditions on this issue - the Americans then also carried out various theoretical and experimental works in the field of MBB and UBB, although not so large-scale. The USSR, and then the Russian Federation, consistently, despite the difficult situation, stepped up efforts on the topic and they gave a logical result. There is no chance leadership on such a question - no one seems to have found treasures with alien technology and other “grand pianos in the bushes”.

For some reason, it seems that General Hayten, being a fairly sensible military leader. he knows all this. But by post he is not supposed to tell the truth. He outlined the main thing - that the Americans are lagging behind, and lagging behind seriously, and so far nothing has been done to narrow the gap. Along the way, of course, he is trying to get more funds for these programs, although he realizes that at least 10 times increase funding, but a miracle will not happen, because competencies and technologies are not enough. And how much money you want litter - will not help. It’s like with pregnancy - for any money and an increase in the number of participants, the gestation period cannot be reduced.

This is not to say that the Americans are not doing anything. They do. So, for example, the other day, successful fire tests of rocket engines for a hypersonic experimental rocket launched from an aircraft, the X-60A, took place. This is not a combat platform, but purely experimental, with the speed of the “lower bar”, which makes it possible to consider it hypersonic - in the region of 5M, possibly more. It is intended for testing various, including maneuvering loads. But, of course, the number of fire tests of even an engine must be measured in dozens before proceeding to the next stage. In general, work there is no end. Other work is underway, but there is almost no practical way out. Let's see what happens next.

In addition, Russia is not going to stop there. Tests of a new type of PKB, Anchar-RV, are underway. Recently, a launch, obviously, under this program, along the southern test track, took place. It was announced that for Sarmat ICBMs 15A28, in particular, hypersonic planning blocks of a “fundamentally new design” are being created. It is very likely that both they and Anchar will be representatives of the so-called "motor" hypersound - the "Vanguard", as far as is known, does not have its own engines, and these are likely to be, which will increase their maneuverability and other capabilities even more. So, most likely, "they will not catch up with us."

doubting Thomas


However, General Heiten in this case seems to be the pinnacle of adequacy in comparison with his counterpart in the OKNS, army chief of staff General McConville. Speaking to the Atlantic Council the other day, he said that the deployment of the Avangard complex "does not affect the balance" between the superpowers. Of course, the deployment of the first UKP regiment and the first section with 2 silos of ICBMs does not affect the balance of forces, but in the future, taking into account the potential capabilities of this complex, it will, and even very. It’s hard to say why they asked such questions to the general general at all, because this is not his area of ​​competence. Perhaps, in order for him to “give birth” to a magnificent explanation, why, in his opinion, “Vanguard” does not affect anything.

Here it is:
"I didn’t see them actually hit any target using this system. I know in which direction our technologies are developing and at what speed they are developing, so I don’t think that this fundamentally changes the situation."


Let us leave alone US technology, which is constantly developing somewhere there and overtaking everyone, but then does not allow to close the gap. But the general passage about the fact that he “did not see” how the “Vanguard” actually hit the target is simply beautiful! What is it like? Intelligence did not report to him that the PKB had successfully and with a given accuracy hit the “peg” in Kamchatka, what should the American means of technical control fix? We are talking about launching, for example, at the end of 2018, when launching was carried out from the Dombarovsky Kura position area (Americans do not observe the results of launches along Sary-Shagan). Is this intelligence to blame or the general did not read? Or does he need 15Y71 to hit a real target, say, with a thermonuclear charge of high power? Or at least ordinary? Sometimes it's better to chew than talk, Mr. General! And then, God forbid, the wish will come true.
Author:
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (video frame)
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Star Destroyer 21 January 2020 10: 12 New
    • 3
    • 31
    -28
    Just in case, I want to remind.
    The only hypersonic aircraft with a propulsion engine that confirmed their real existence by anything other than pouting officials is the American x-51 and the American x-43. All. No others.
    Does it make sense to talk about “leadership” once again comparing cartoons?
    1. dvina71 21 January 2020 10: 39 New
      • 9
      • 1
      +8
      Quote: Star Destroyer
      Does it make sense to talk about “leadership” once again comparing cartoons?

      Really..
      On 1 May 2013, the final flight of the X-51A Waverider test program was accomplished over the Pacific Ocean. The final flight saw the remaining test vehicle reaching Mach 5.1 and traveling more than 230 nautical miles in just over 6 minutes over the Point Mugu Naval Air Warfare Center Sea Range, California. This was the longest of the 4 X-51A test flights and the longest air-breathing hypersonic flight ever at that time. The vehicle was released at approximately 50,000 feet and accelerated to Mach 4.8 in approximately 26 seconds powered by a solid rocket booster. After separating from the booster, the cruiser's supersonic combustion ramjet, or scramjet, engine then lit and accelerated the aircraft to Mach 5.1 at 60,000 feet. After exhausting its 240-second fuel supply, the vehicle continued to send back telemetry data until it splashed down into the ocean and was destroyed as designed. At impact, 370 seconds of data were collected from the experiment. The vehicle was the last of 4 test vehicles originally conceived when the $ 300 million technology demonstration program began in 2004. The program objective was to prove the viability of air-breathing, high-speed scramjet propulsion. As a technology demonstration program, there was no immediate successor to the X-51A program. However, the Air Force would continue hypersonic research and the successes of the X-51A were expected to pay dividends to the High Speed ​​Strike Weapon program then in its early formation phase with Air Force Research Laboratory.

      Translate?
      In short .. x-51 test aircraft ... the same as the "Cold" and "Needle" .. Only 4 flights .. Final recognized successful .., but the characteristics for practical use are not all ..
      And now the question .. The United States adopted its planning GZ block for service?
    2. KCA
      KCA 21 January 2020 10: 41 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      How not? I’ll call at least one - GELA, the X-90 prototype, the program, it seems, was covered, or covered from prying eyes, but in general the tests of air traffic control devices and products with it started back in the 50s, since then they have not stopped, they have slowed down, it’s yes, but they continued, but no one will tell us about them, during the great licking of the West, in 1994, even joint research with the Germans was carried out, dispersed the X-22 to 8MAX
    3. wayden 21 January 2020 10: 53 New
      • 11
      • 1
      +10
      That is, an uncontrollable device created for demonstration without any purpose according to a long-closed program is a success, and a ready-made weapon put into service and having passed all the tests is a myth. Well, OK.
    4. stalki 21 January 2020 11: 17 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Just in case, I want to remind.
      The only hypersonic aircraft with a propulsion engine that confirmed their real existence by anything other than pouting officials is the American x-51 and the American x-43. All. No others.
      Does it make sense to talk about “leadership” once again comparing cartoons?
      Why then do you reason and remind everyone? laughing
    5. Astronaut 21 January 2020 11: 53 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Read at least Google, the direct-flow WFD exists only in experiments, but he didn’t even work on the X-51, because the organization of fuel combustion in a supersonic flow is one of the main problems in creating a hypersonic ramjet, so for a hypersonic weapon, the current delivery vehicle is only a rocket engine. And the definition of hypersonic weapons implies not the use of hypersonic ramjets, but the control of aircraft at hypersonic speeds, as described above.
      1. Mityay65 22 January 2020 07: 36 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Astronaut
        ramjet propulsive wing propulsion exists only in experiments, but he didn’t even work on the X-51, because the organization of fuel combustion in a supersonic flow is one of the main problems in creating a hypersonic ramjet, so for a hypersonic weapon, the current delivery vehicle is only a rocket engine.

        You are right, therefore, if it is the scramjet engine that is used at Zircon, then this is a successful solution to the most difficult scientific and technical problem. Which promises us a lot of interesting things in the future, and not only in the military sphere.
        In fairness, it must be said that the GLA (hypersonic aircraft) may have a dvigun not only the scramjet, but also something else. For example, a hybrid liquid propellant rocket engine, which at one time was proposed for the Ajax GLA, which the Leninets concern had once been involved in. This is the concept of the so-called “external combustion” - hydrocarbon fuel in a mixture with water is passed through tubes along the GLA sheathing, primarily along the edges of the wing, frontal fairing, interceptors, etc., where the maximum heating of the structure. Fuel cools the elements of the GLA design, removes heat and, in turn, undergoes conversion - breaks up under the influence of temperature on methane, hydrogen, water vapor, carbon dioxide, etc. All this is divided and separately enters the combustion chamber and further into the nozzle.
        It may well turn out that the Zircon does not have a scramjet, but something more original and simple to implement.
  2. Yrec 21 January 2020 10: 19 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    What is surprising, the United States - the "kingdom of lies." Lies are their basic “democratic value," which they defend with arms in their hands around the world. And if at some stage in such a world you can live “in garlic” (many, most likely, live like that), then reaching certain heights - this is already impossible to do. Truth and objective reality become the lot of marginals.
  3. businessv 21 January 2020 10: 22 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Thanks to the author for the great analytical work and interesting information! hi
  4. Amateur 21 January 2020 10: 24 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The general should come to the military unit with the inspection. As it should be grass and rockets painted in green, stars in red, etc. The work is completed by morning and in a hurry they forget the paint bucket, smeared in different colors, attached to the last missile warhead. The general immediately truncated it and asked: "What is this?" The young flyer was not taken aback and says: "tashgenrazrdol is SYNCHROPHASATRON!" "I myself see that this is a synchrophasotron, why is it not painted?"
    So all the generals are the same
  5. Ross xnumx 21 January 2020 11: 16 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Leave alone US technology, which is constantly developing somewhere there and overtaking everyone, but then does not allow to close the gap. But the general passage about the fact that he “did not see” how the “Vanguard” actually hit the target is simply beautiful! What is it like? Intelligence did not report to him that the PKB had successfully and with predetermined accuracy hit the “peg” in Kamchatka, what should the American means of technical control fix?


    And what about the "lunar program",
    Hubble Flights and to Mars.
    Let them tell you honestly, directly,
    What causes this farce?

    Idols praised
    Invisibility F-35?
    Really these turns
    Did they hang us noodles again?

    And then suddenly a general
    American "hypersound"
    Was called almost a failure.
    And it was designated as a "bunch" ...
    repeat
  6. Usher 21 January 2020 11: 17 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    "Vanguard", as far as is known, has no engines
    And in the "Internet" it says that it has. Where is the truth?
  7. Operator 21 January 2020 11: 36 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    By a "strange" coincidence in 2010, at the Russian scientific-practical conference "Comprehensive solution of the problems of creating precision-guided weapon systems", the Soviet experience of the end of the 1980s in the creation and full-scale tests of guided combat was announced in the report of the General Director of the Greyeyev State Military Center named after Makeev K-65M-R blocks for ICBMs and SLBMs.

    As a result, a biconical UBB form, a sublimation coating with predicted mass loss, a gas-jet rudder based on a liquid-propellant rocket engine with an NGMD + AT fuel pair, and a method (not disclosed in the report) of overcoming the UBB plasma envelope for multi-beam radar scanning of the terrain and aiming at a target with a CVO were worked out within 10 meters.

    So the United States will have to catch up with the Russian Federation not only in the planning Vanguard-type warheads and motor hypersound of the KR Zircon type, but also in the UBB with radar guidance to the target without speed reduction to supersonic - with a delay of more than 30 years.
    1. Operator 21 January 2020 11: 58 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Clarification - General Director of the GRC named after Makeev V.G. Degtyar
  8. Freedim 21 January 2020 11: 59 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    I remember the American movie in which their experimental “hyper-rocket” comes off the carrier, turns on the engine, and starts cheerfully spinning the speed counter, reaching 6 max for a couple of minutes. The picture, as always, is blurry, everything is shaking, as if a drunk is shooting on a mobile ... the illusion of credibility is not bad. However, the question immediately arose of what the operator flew in a parallel course, taking off all this circus. Naturally, the video disappeared from the vastness of the network quite quickly, and America added another +1 to the bragging boast.
  9. VladVlad 21 January 2020 12: 03 New
    • 1
    • 8
    -7
    Gentlemen, "military experts"! How are we going to fight such an enemy technology?
    The USA has the aerospace TR-3B (and its modifications and drones, there are already a lot of them) invisible to all radars, has super technologies: controls the force of gravity (moving vertically (and without atmosphere)), controls the force of inertia (the pilot does not feel acceleration) , Controls the flow around (no aerodynamic drag). Acceleration at the start of 5 km per second in square meters, in the atmosphere, after 5 seconds the speed is about 15 km per second. The speed in dense layers of the atmosphere is up to 10 km per second. The speed in space is more than 100 km per second. It can carry several thermonuclear charges at such speeds. They have been flying with impunity over all countries since about 2003, radars do not see them!
    These are the stolen US technology of the 80s. The United States has implemented these technologies, but in Russia they do not want to introduce them. Why?
    1. evgic 21 January 2020 12: 20 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      The use of psychostimulants without a prescription leads to mental inferiority and dependence on this drug. You should urgently contact the relevant medical institution
  10. Old26 21 January 2020 13: 24 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    After all, our “Vanguard” is not the first generation even of the design bureau, but, as it were, the third, if not the fourth.

    A masterpiece. But how many of these PCBs were in service to be considered as generations?
    "Albatross". The EMNIP did not have a single flight test at all. Was it planned that this design bureau would be deployed on a Chelomey solid-fuel rocket, which also did not even go on flight tests? First generation? Nothing that is drawn? Maybe then it’s worth counting the Tupolev and Chelomei battle cosmos for generations, which also did not reach flight tests?
    Product 102sometimes also called 15J70.
    SEVEN FLIGHT TESTS from 1990 to 2011. For 21 years - 7 LI. The product was not put into service. Second generation?
    Product 4202sometimes called 15J71. It is AVANGARD. For 5 years of testing - five flight tests, and one failed. Shooting on the route Yasny-Kura under the close supervision of the Americans. The maximum that this unit was able to do was to make a small lateral maneuver in the middle section of the trajectory. He could not do anything else, because at the same time, all its possibilities would open up. How to count:FIRST GENERATION ON WEAPONS or THIRD FOURas the author writes?

    Quote: dvina71
    And now the question .. The United States adopted its planning GZ block for service?

    Not yet. Our adopted and put on combat duty from a month ago. A total of two regiments on 15A35-71 are going to be put on combat combat duty in 2027. That is, after 7 years, we will be in service with as many as 12 “Vanguards” guaranteed. This is what is called a "bird in the hands." "Crane in the sky" - "Vanguard" on the "Sarmatian" when it appears is still unknown.
    I'm afraid of something to vang, but in 6 years the Americans will bring and put into service their own design bureau

    Quote: KCA
    How not? I’ll call at least one - GELA, the X-90 prototype, the program, as it were, was covered, or covered from prying eyes

    The funniest thing about GEL / X-90 publications is that GEL is an experimental apparatus HAVE NEVER FLYED AT HYPERSONIC SPEED. A purely exhibition sample that has passed true casting tests. And the name X-90 is generally beyond understanding and is exclusively a journalistic fake. For this "machine" has no index of ordering management, and even more so the name itself X-digit given only on the adoption of equipment for service. The program was closed, before it had practically begun - for BI (throw tests) were not LI (flight tests), and especially not GLI (state flight tests) preceding adoption.

    Quote: KCA
    in general, tests of air-traffic control devices and products with it began back in the 50s, since then they have not stopped, they have slowed down, yes, but they continued

    Tests of experimental hypersonic ramjets were actually carried out in the 50-60s of the last century. BUT exclusively on earth. In this case, no products with such engines were then tested. At that time, they did not yet grow up to aircraft with a gas scramjet engine. Both technically and technologically.

    Quote: KCA
    1994, even joint research with the Germans was carried out, dispersed the X-22 to 8MAX

    How interesting. That is, a rocket is taken that is capable of accelerating at high altitudes to a speed of 3,2 M and, with the wave of a magic wand, accelerates to three times speed without changes in aerodynamics and engine ??? Even open publications say that there were plans to modernize this rocket to give it a speed of 4,2M. But still, this is supersonic speed, and you even got it up to 8M. Your deeds are wonderful, Lord!

    Quote: Astronaut
    Read at least Google, the direct-flow WFD exists only in experiments, but he didn’t even work on the X-51, because the organization of fuel combustion in a supersonic flow is one of the main problems in creating a hypersonic ramjet, so for a hypersonic weapon, the current delivery vehicle is only a rocket engine. And the definition of hypersonic weapons implies not the use of hypersonic ramjets, but the control of aircraft at hypersonic speeds, as described above.

    So to speak. It has already left the stage of experiments, although it has not yet been brought to a working state. This also explains the failures of the X-43 and X-51 programs. YES and only talk about the tests of Zircon without presenting at least one, albeit taken from afar, muddy photograph also suggests that things are not going smoothly there, but with problems.
    The definition of hypersonic weapons now has more political than physical (technical) background. Now we have a hypersonic weapon based on the so-called NON-MOTOR HYPERSONIC. That is, the product is accelerated to hypersonic speed by means of a rocket engine and flies further for some time in hypersound, but "by inertia" ("Vanguard", "Dagger").
    A full-fledged hypersonic weapon will only be in a situation where it will MOTOR HYPERSONICthat is, a hypersonic ramjet engine will be used

    Quote: Usher
    "Vanguard", as far as is known, has no engines
    And in the "Internet" it says that it has. Where is the truth?

    Well, on the Internet, as well as on the fence, you can write a lot. Think for yourself. The fairing 15A35-71 has a diameter of about 2 ,, - 2,2 meters. 5 meters long, no more. Now imagine the device in the form of a "spear tip" or "triangle" inscribed in this dimension. What engines can stand there? Maximum orientation engines with a thrust of several kilograms (tens of kilograms). No powerful engines capable of carrying out "sharp" evolution, capable of disrupting missile defense guidance. Ordinary smooth evolutions in the form of a lateral or vertical maneuver

    Quote: VladVlad
    Gentlemen, "military experts"! How are we going to fight such an enemy technology?
    The USA has the aerospace TR-3B (and its modifications and drones, there are already a lot of them) invisible to all radars, has super technologies: controls the force of gravity (moving vertically (and without atmosphere)), controls the force of inertia (the pilot does not feel acceleration) , Controls the flow around (no aerodynamic drag). Acceleration at the start of 5 km per second in square meters, in the atmosphere, after 5 seconds the speed is about 15 km per second. The speed in dense layers of the atmosphere is up to 10 km per second. The speed in space is more than 100 km per second. It can carry several thermonuclear charges at such speeds. They have been flying with impunity over all countries since about 2003, radars do not see them!
    These are the stolen US technology of the 80s. The United States has implemented these technologies, but in Russia they do not want to introduce them. Why?

    Are you a proponent of alien theory? Do you yourself believe in the nonsense that you write? The speed in dense layers of the atmosphere of 10 km / s is almost 30M. Despite the fact that at a speed of 10M te6, the surface temperature will already be sunny, that is, about 6000 degrees. Can't see the radars? Radars may not see in any one wavelength range. For example, they do not see millimeter radars, but there are radars in the centimeter range, meter, decameter. And they don’t see everyone? Do you see optics, including the human eye, plasma arising from such a flight in the dense layers of the atmosphere?
    The possession of such technologies implies the highest level of industry. Materials science, engine theory, new fuel formulations, and therefore chemistry, the nuclear industry. At the same time, due to problems with hypersonic combustion, the Americans cannot yet bring their hypersonic cruise missiles to the series, and problems with the nuclear complex will not allow them to produce new nuclear warheads for another 6-7 years. And at the same time you have this technique with the Americans and the unsolved problems in hypersonic flight and the creation of nuclear weapons.
    This is the same as believing that a tribe on the islands of the Indian or Pacific Ocean and located at the Stone Age level is capable of producing airplanes and machine guns, but is not capable of producing anything else, from frying pans to computers.
    1. Thrifty 21 January 2020 17: 54 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Thread Tools Old 26 hi - at a speed of 30 mahs, the apparatus, if it does not burn in the dense layers of the atmosphere, must ricochet from the atmosphere into outer space!
    2. Mityay65 22 January 2020 00: 26 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      A masterpiece.

      Your post is also a masterpiece. It can be copied and pasted into each topic about "Russian hypersound." Everything here is with facts and comments.
      Quote: Old26
      Maybe then it’s worth counting the Tupolev and Chelomei battle cosmos for generations, which also did not reach flight tests?

      The author probably meant not generations, and the stages of development: the product of the 1st Jetap, 2nd, etc.
      Quote: Old26
      Shooting on the route Yasny-Kura under the close supervision of the Americans. The maximum that this unit was able to do was to make a small lateral maneuver in the middle section of the trajectory. He could not do anything else, because at the same time, all its possibilities would open up.

      Does this mean that the Vanguard was adopted without LI and GSI? This could not be, since this is a very specific crime and criminal case.
      Quote: Old26
      I'm afraid of something to vang, but in 6 years the Americans will bring and put into service their own design bureau

      They do not need him. PKB is designed to break through missile defense. Our missile defense is not even in the project yet, and IMHO, it is not particularly needed and will not be. Expensive and stupid. There are places to spend funds without it. The darkest one was broadcasting about it. PCB is a cheap way to level out an expensive missile defense system.
      So, it may turn out that the Yankees will not have a PCB soon. This contraption does not fit into their doctrine. Well, unless you cut some money ... The only exception may be for non-strategic PKB.
      Quote: Old26
      The funniest thing in publications about GEL / X-90 is that GEL - an experimental apparatus has never flown at a hypersonic speed. A purely exhibition sample that has passed true casting tests.

      On the Internet a lot of information on the GEL. Proet closed 30 years ago. What is there to argue about? GELA is a device, according to various sources, designed to fly in the atmosphere from 3,5 - 4, 5 M. But the device had an engine, it provided overclocking to such speeds, the index is on the Internet. Here The engine has been tested. The main thing is the engine, not the device itself.
      Please note that this is less than 5M, respectively GEL it's still supersonic fellow
      However, GELA gave a large firing range, and accordingly, this is no longer a banal anti-ship missile with a range of 300 km, as probably the Zircon, but quite a medium-range missile.
      Quote: Old26
      It has already left the stage of experiments, although it has not yet been brought to a working state. This also explains the failures of the X-43 and X-51 programs. YES and only talk about the tests of Zircon without presenting at least one, albeit taken from afar, muddy photograph also suggests that things are not going smoothly there, but with problems.

      Do Yankees need hypersonic CR? Analogue of "Zircon"? I doubt it very much. If they noticed, they did perfectly well without supersonic CDs, Granite analogues, for several decades and did not blow into their mustache. They didn't give a damn. recourse They have a different doctrine. Relatively weak fleets of the Russian Federation and China, they are going to sink differently. No need for supersonic anti-ship missiles, only recently they have begun to take something into service. Accordingly, they look at hypersound, especially anti-ship, as a pleasant addition, and not as something absolutely necessary.
      It seems reasonable to me. In general, neither the avant-garde glider nor the hypersonic analog of Zircon to striped swindlers are needed - not their doctrine fellow
      But to make a hype, screaming, screaming "We are betrayed! Atas, Sputnik! Give me money!" - they are the masters ... They are doing this. Well done. And I think that they will continue to monitor the successes of the PRC and the Russian Federation in the field of hypersound.
      1. Hermit21 22 January 2020 10: 20 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Range 3M22 - "over a thousand kilometers." And "from above" is a very loose concept
        1. Mityay65 22 January 2020 10: 50 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Hermit21
          Range 3M22 - "over a thousand kilometers."

          Perhaps this range under ideal conditions - a flight at an altitude of 40 km.
          In real life, the KR will have a combined trajectory profile, I think. Those. flight at a height to a range, descent to the surface, rise for the onboard radar to operate, pressing to the surface and maximum acceleration. And all this in compliance with swarm tactics. What will be the range with such a flight profile, we have not yet been announced.
  11. Old26 21 January 2020 18: 27 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: Thrifty
    Old 26 hi - at a speed of 30 mahs, if the apparatus does not burn in the dense layers of the atmosphere, it must ricochet from the atmosphere into outer space!

    Well, the author of this nonsense claims that he will fly at such a speed. Alternative story buff seems
    1. Thrifty 21 January 2020 19: 11 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Old 26 - if in outer space, at heights of hundreds of kilometers from the surface of the Earth, then he is right lol
  12. Old26 21 January 2020 19: 42 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I will quote the words of the author of this conspiracy theological theory.
    Quote: VladVlad
    Speed ​​in dense atmospheric layers up to 10 km per second. The speed in space is more than 100 km per second.
    1. Mityay65 21 January 2020 23: 25 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      I will quote the words of the author of this conspiracy theological theory.

      Competent, this is a Troll, the most ordinary. lol
      Can't you really distinguish them from normal sabzhs? He would only blurt out something ...
      Do not be so upset for humanity!
  13. Old26 22 January 2020 14: 00 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Mityai65
    The author probably did not mean generations, but the stages of development: the product of the first jet, the second, etc.

    In this situation, it would be legitimate to say, since Albatros, 15Yu70, and 15Yu71 are all products of NPO Mashinostroyeniya and the development of the next was based on the achievements of the previous

    Quote: Mityai65
    Does this mean that the Vanguard was adopted without LI and GSI? This could not be, since this is a very specific crime and criminal case.

    What are you, Dmitry! Of course there were gas, but that's how much in full. The device flies to fly, it lands at the aiming point, but whether it is capable of performing the maneuvers declared for it is a big question. According to the mind, such tests are carried out on the internal route (Kapyar - Sary-Shagan), but there exclusively “Topol-E” flies there, and its IMHO carrying capacity is small for the “Vanguard”. The “Vanguard” also did not fly to the maximum range, so it is not possible to say whether it can fly along the Senger trajectory or not. Performing maneuver cycles in full view of the American radar is also not the case. So it's hard to say. Gos were, but how full - I do not know

    Quote: Mityai65
    They do not need him. PKB is designed to break through missile defense. Our missile defense is not even in the project yet, and IMHO, it is not particularly needed and will not be. Expensive and stupid. There are places to spend funds without it. The darkest one was broadcasting about it.

    ABM exists both with us and with us. The question is different. No missile defense system in the world is capable of intercepting a massive raid.
    After all, the PKB can be used not only to attack Russia. You can attack a country that has a rather weak missile defense.
    Well, the fact that building a missile defense system is a very expensive affair - no one argues here. After all, the Americans planned, after leaving the missile defense system, to deploy three positional areas over the course of about 5 years. This is originally EMNIP Alaska, California and a small positional area in Poland. On the American continent, it was planned to deploy 100 interceptors plus 10 interceptors in Poland in positional areas.
    About 10 years after the withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, they planned to deploy another, fourth position area on the East Coast. Also with 100 interceptors. And what is the result. EMNIP 40 or 44 interceptors in Alaska, 4 interceptors in California. They decided not to deploy the Polish positional area. East - it seems, too. As a result, instead of having a missile defense system consisting of 2012 interceptors in the United States and 2014 interceptors in Poland around 300-10, now they have only 44-48 interceptors

    Quote: Mityai65
    PCB is a cheap way to level out an expensive missile defense system. So, it may turn out that the Yankees will not have a PCB soon. This contraption does not fit into their doctrine. Well, unless you cut some money ... The only exception may be for non-strategic PCBs.

    I would not be so categorical. They had the now closed Falcon program with such blocks (sorry, I don’t remember their indexes, but to climb into the Internet and search is laziness). Tested. In range they did not reach, as far as I remember, they got a maximum of about 3,5 thousand kilometers. The program was either frozen or closed. But there are achievements. And the doctrine just fits. More precisely in the concept of "Fast global strike." And the whole point is that we have a clear idea that whatever the Americans would do, they are "cutting grandmothers." Such a condescendingly ironic look at the enemy is fraught with the fact that we can "overlook" something very dangerous for ourselves, thinking that "ah, this is another drink." Of course, the cost of equipment from them is sometimes very high. But do not forget that those who do this technique also get quite a decent salary.
    As an example. One of my classmate has been living in Canada for 25 years. That year, in 2005, he came to the anniversary of the death of his father. The three of us gathered. He, our second classmate and I. The positions held were:
    I am the head of the department, the second classmate is the deputy director, and he, the “Canadian”, works as an ordinary hard worker at a company that produces plastic products for cars. At that time I had a salary of 8 thousand rubles, a comrade who was either 10 or 12. The “Canadian” received 5 thousand Canadian dollars, which were approximately equal to the US then, plus another 2 thousand the owner paid him for extended amount of work. In total, he got 7. EMNIP dollar was then in the region of 27 rubles. Canadian - about 25. That is, he then received 125 without an expanded volume of work, and 175 thousand with our expanded money. Of course, the cost of any product they have will be much more expensive in dollar terms.

    Quote: Mityai65
    On the Internet a lot of information on the GEL. Proet closed 30 years ago. What is there to argue about? GELA is a device, according to various sources, designed to fly in the atmosphere from 3,5 - 4, 5 M. But the device had an engine, it provided acceleration to the device at such speeds, the index is on the Internet. Here the engine has been tested. The main thing is the engine, not the device itself.
    I draw your attention to the fact that this is less than 5M, so GEL is still fellow supersonic
    However, GELA gave a large firing range, and accordingly, this is no longer a banal anti-ship missile with a range of 300 km, as probably the Zircon, but quite a medium-range missile.

    Now TTX already I do not remember her, but the fact that she did not fly and it was just a layout - I remember for sure. Although she impressed me at MAX. But this is not even about that. Now it is regularly repeated that the GEL and the X-90 hypersonic missile are “twin brothers”. But THERE WERE NO SUCH ROCKET - X-90, with the X index always given only after entering service. It was in this regard that my post about GEL and X-90 was

    Quote: Mityai65
    Do Yankees need hypersonic CR? Analogue of "Zircon"? I doubt it very much. If they noticed, they did perfectly well without supersonic CDs, Granite analogues, for several decades and did not blow into their mustache. They didn't give a damn. recourse They have a different doctrine.

    Do Americans Need a Hypersonic Rocket? Of course yes. For the development of military equipment cannot be stopped. And as before the Second World War there was a phrase regarding aviation - “Faster, further, higher,” and now. There was a period when ICBMs had relatively low accuracy characteristics and the Americans compensated for this with their supersonic air-to-ground missiles. The accuracy has increased - such CRs are not very necessary. They relied on an accurate subsonic missile with a fairly large number on the plane. Their fleet and aviation are strong and massive enough not to rely on supersonic missiles. Managed without them. But everything flows, everything changes, and doctrines too. Now they have returned to what took place in the 50s, but at a new technological level. This work is similar to the “Dagger”, and to the analogue of “Vanguard”, and to the analogue of “Zircon”. Do not have such weapon systems when the enemy has them - put yourself in a losing position in advance
  14. shinobi 26 January 2020 09: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There was no lag behind us. The tricky part was that the missile programs of the United States and the USSR, with similar goals, went different ways, so the decisions were different. In the 70s, the United States relied on solid fuel systems, the USSR on liquid systems. I mean, the military, I mean. And if the USSR, having understood the prospects, made up for the lag in solid fuels, the Americans have to start again. That's why they really have an advantage in electronics. But yes, thanks to the Chinese comrades, the gap has narrowed. weapons are all very, very controversial.