Hypersonic advantage of Russia over the USA compared with the launch of the first Earth satellite


The United States is forced to actively engage in the development of its own hypersonic weapons, as Russia's successes in this area have already caused changes in the space in which hostilities are being conducted. This opinion was expressed by Acting Secretary of the American Navy Thomas Modley in a note addressed to the troops of this kind of troops.


The situation resembles the situation in the middle of the 20th century, when the USSR launched the first Earth satellite. Then the Americans also had to urgently catch up.

Today, to narrow the gap, the US Department of Defense will begin testing the first prototypes in the field of hypersound already in 2020. It will be very difficult to catch up with Russia, since Russian-made Zircon hypersonic missiles will enter the army within the next few years.

Modley called on the Pentagon to take Russian supremacy in hypersound seriously:

In fact, the possible ways of using hypersonic technologies have already changed the space of warfare, just as it was with nuclear technology in the last century. Therefore we, when it comes to hypersonic weapons, must announce the general command "Forward!"
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. KAVBER 3 February 2020 09: 31 New
    • 7
    • 5
    +2
    Yes, yes, yes, tear yourself up already catching up, only forward, full forward
    1. smart ass 3 February 2020 10: 23 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      Passed already in the USSR caught up navel tore
    2. Thrifty 3 February 2020 11: 29 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Come on, laughing what other hypersound recourse , here on the site many are sure that these are all fairy tales for adults negative The spears break in a serious argument, and the truth does not want to be born crying lol
      1. Chaldon48 3 February 2020 12: 24 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        However, it should be noted that the Zircon has not yet been adopted, something serious can be said only when the first carrier with these missiles appears. It would not be bad to try a couple of rockets on barmaley.
        1. neri73-r 3 February 2020 14: 34 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: Chaldon48
          It would not be bad to try a couple of rockets on barmaley.

          Wow, nail gold nails .......
  2. bessmertniy 3 February 2020 09: 34 New
    • 6
    • 15
    -9
    Late, gentlemen, click with your beak. : tongue You can’t catch up with us in this.
  3. cniza 3 February 2020 09: 37 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    It will be very difficult to catch up with Russia, since Russian-made Zircon hypersonic missiles will enter the army within the next few years.


    They vibrated, but the impression is that under these screams, they really want to knock out more money.
    1. rocket757 3 February 2020 09: 45 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Hi soldier
      Other times, other Wishlist. In principle, hyper weapons did not change the fundamental balance of power - we all also have the opportunity to smash each other in the trash! It was yesterday that something fundamentally changed.
      There are different plans, doctrines, because on paper it can be “beautiful” in kind, no one dared to check it would ever. So sho "full speed ahead" will not fundamentally change anything, at least outside, but internal, their layouts, we understand not everything and not always.
      1. cniza 3 February 2020 09: 49 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        So it’s clear that it’s stupid to compete on the principle: - "we can destroy the earth 10 times, and you only three ..."
        1. rocket757 3 February 2020 10: 00 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Everything is correct. And not many people survive the first time ... but those who survived may well regret, afterwards, that they survived the first time.
        2. orionvitt 3 February 2020 10: 36 New
          • 8
          • 4
          +4
          Quote: cniza
          we can destroy the earth 10 times, and you only three ...

          North Korea, generally with a pair of warheads (and it is unknown), bolted the bolts at all and sent them away. And a ride. The US has worn off and rolled away. True Trump called it a victory. laughing
          1. cniza 3 February 2020 10: 45 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            So it became clear to everyone how to send the USA ... yes
        3. smart ass 3 February 2020 12: 46 New
          • 2
          • 6
          -4
          You can generally lay the most powerful hydrogen bomb in the mine, where is the thread in Siberia. If something happens, blow up the planet into dust, don’t get to anyone !!
          1. Grim Reaper 3 February 2020 15: 07 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            fool
            Is your cuckoo completely ripping off?
          2. yustas 3 February 2020 18: 38 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Laid for yourself there, global warming didn’t come with us, again, someone stole along the way ( wassat
      2. bouncyhunter 3 February 2020 09: 58 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Victor, hi! soldier
        Quote: rocket757
        Other times, other Wishlist

        How not to recall "O tempora, o mores!" . yes
        Quote: rocket757
        internal, their, layouts we understand not everything and not always

        In principle, it is impossible to understand the spiders in the bank. Only the goal is clear: gobble up! negative
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Cowbra 3 February 2020 09: 57 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2

    Royal Orchestra of Norway.
  7. aszzz888 3 February 2020 09: 57 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    If they hadn’t crawled for decades, thanks to)) the mediocre, criminal leaders of the state, the mericatos would not have acted like they are now.
    1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 10: 13 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      If they hadn’t crawled for decades, thanks to)) the mediocre, criminal leaders of the state, the mericatos would not have acted like they are now.

      Are you talking about which country are you writing about? Half a ball fits this description.
      1. aszzz888 3 February 2020 11: 42 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Gray Brother (Sergey) Today, 10: 13
        +1
        Quote: aszzz888
        If they hadn’t crawled for decades, thanks to)) the mediocre, criminal leaders of the state, the mericatos would not have acted like they are now.

        It is you about which country he writesis it?

        Definitely not about mumbo-jumbo.
        Half ball fits this description

        And the "half" is completely without interest to me.
        1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 44 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: aszzz888
          Definitely not about mumbo-jumbo.

          There is no such country.
          Quote: aszzz888
          And the "half" is completely without interest to me.

          But in vain. And the "globe of Ukraine" can be likened.
  8. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 14 New
    • 21
    • 7
    +14
    How we love to brag about what is not yet. We do not have Zircon in service, no! And it is not known when it will appear and whether it will appear at all. And its performance characteristics are reliably unknown. But already ahead of the rest! Everyone is afraid and envious!
    1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 10: 19 New
      • 6
      • 4
      +2
      Quote: rudolff
      Everyone is afraid and envious!

      Well, not that afraid, but fit tantrum. “Zircon” is not yet available, but “Dagger” and “Vanguard” are already there.
      And no one will tell you the actual performance characteristics anyway - military secret.
      1. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 29 New
        • 14
        • 3
        +11
        Vanguard, this is an ICBM. All ICBM and SLBM warheads have initially hypersonic speed.
        A dagger, an air-based ballistic missile, only briefly reaching hypersonic speed. On approaching the target, this is supersonic at best.
        The main performance characteristics of Zircon are impossible to hide, as it is impossible to secretly conduct LTI.
        1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 10: 36 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: rudolff
          The main performance characteristics of Zircon is impossible to hide

          Perhaps - why not? Radars are not always available, and the “window” satellites have weather conditions.
          1. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 51 New
            • 9
            • 0
            +9
            There are dozens and dozens of launches within the framework of the LTI. Well, it’s not possible to hide them. Yes and no, since the president personally announced.
            1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 10: 55 New
              • 2
              • 3
              -1
              Quote: rudolff
              There are dozens and dozens of launches within the framework of the LTI.

              Well, not yet at the limit of performance.
        2. Gray brother 3 February 2020 10: 42 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Quote: rudolff
          Vanguard, this is an ICBM. All ICBM and SLBM warheads have initially hypersonic speed.

          Vanguard is a maneuvering combat unit, not an ICBM.
          Quote: rudolff
          Dagger, an air-based ballistic missile only briefly reaching hypersonic speed

          But reaching the same - a couple of thousand kilometers passes in ten minutes, not for long, yes)))
          1. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 54 New
            • 10
            • 3
            +7
            Vanguard, a missile system, which includes an ICBM with maneuvering BB. And on one hundred square meters, he is alone, instead of several. Here, by the way, the question is, which is better, one maneuvering or six ordinary ones?
            1. rudolff 3 February 2020 10: 57 New
              • 7
              • 1
              +6
              A dagger would be interesting in the quality of anti-ship weapons. But is he capable of working on a moving target?
              1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 11 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Quote: rudolff
                A dagger would be interesting in the quality of anti-ship weapons. But is he capable of working on a moving target?

                Nothing interferes, especially if it is not hypersonic suitable for the target - the plasma then does not form when interacting with the atmosphere and, therefore, radio waves are not shielded.
            2. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 02 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Quote: rudolff
              Here, by the way, the question is, which is better, one maneuvering or six ordinary ones?

              When hitting key NORAD targets, it is better to maneuver in order to for sure, and then to splash apart.
            3. Operator 3 February 2020 11: 58 New
              • 7
              • 1
              +6
              Officially, "Vanguard" is the PKB (planning winged block).
          2. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 00 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Quote: Gray Brother
            Vanguard is a maneuvering combat unit, not an ICBM.

            It is put on the ICBM, and it accelerates to "hypersounds".

            Quote: Gray Brother
            But reaching the same - a couple of thousand kilometers passes in ten minutes, not for long, yes)))

            Tank OBPS also, in fact, accelerates to hypersound, but, for some reason, "does not count". Some models of missiles, too (both ours and "ikhovye").

            Somehow, according to tradition, products that are capable of maintaining a specified speed for a long time, and not just accelerate and fly by inertia, are considered truly hypersonic. For “them” this product is the X-51 (it flew 5M back in 2010), we have a hypothetical “Zircon” (whether it flew or not - it’s not known exactly).
            1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 11: 10 New
              • 3
              • 5
              -2
              traditionally truly hypersonic

              by what kind of tradition? Who established it and how much can a “tradition” be a basis for definition?
              capable of maintaining a specified speed for a long time

              how long is it? half an hour, an hour, a day?
              ... it is, it is not ... all these fabrications are from the evil one. In fact, any object moving with hypersonic speed is hypersonic. From the point of view of physics in the first place. And you can call him anything you like.
              This issue has already been discussed more than once at VO.
              1. rudolff 3 February 2020 11: 19 New
                • 11
                • 0
                +11
                You can accept this definition. But then it must be said that this hypersonic weapon in bulk in dozens of countries and at least half a century.
                1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 12: 36 New
                  • 1
                  • 3
                  -2
                  You can say anything. But let's be honest: if it's green, croaks and lives in a swamp - it's a frog, not a Beloruss tractor)) It was written above about BOPS: BOPS flies at a speed of 5-6M. And the railgun blank flies at a speed of 6M. They are distinguished only by the physics of the acceleration process. Everything else is similar. But at the same time, no one calls BOPS hypersonic weapons, in contrast to the railgun. Which is often called hypersonic electromagnetic weapons.
                  The same thing with the concept of "supersonic." The same hash of speculation
                2. malyvalv 3 February 2020 15: 29 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  What the argument is unclear. Putin himself has long explained what hypersonic means. This is what flies at hypersonic speed and is controlled at the same time. ICBMs and other BOPs have nothing to do with this.
              2. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 20 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Quote: Ka-52
                by what kind of tradition? Who established it and how much can a “tradition” be a basis for definition?

                Unspoken :) "Hypersonic weapons" is, in fact, a more marketing term, a kind of conditional characteristic designed to prove that A is better B. If we approach the issue strictly, then the Germans still had hypersonic weapons in World War II: they were there with conical trunks experiments set. If less strictly, then everyone in this category is trying to put what he has and does not have a competitor. Marketing of pure water (approximately as with 5th generation fighters, nanotechnology and others).
                1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 12: 40 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Unspoken :) "Hypersonic weapons" is, in fact, a more marketing term, a kind of conditional characteristic designed to prove that A is better B. If we approach the issue strictly, then the Germans still had hypersonic weapons in World War II: they were there with conical trunks experiments set.

                  Of course, the term "hypersonic weapons" is a purely marketing product. After all, "supersonic weapons" sounds much more beautiful. But no one calls a simple Mosin rifle a supersonic weapon, although the bullet’s flight speed is almost 3M laughing But I repeat, any object with hypersonic speed is a hypersonic object. This is physics. And as you call it by "tradition" - your own business))
                  1. Kalmar 3 February 2020 13: 22 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    Quote: Ka-52
                    any object with hypersonic speed is a hypersonic object. This is physics. And as you call it by "tradition" - your own business))

                    When I call - personal, of course. And when the Supreme is already public. So I want to understand if the difference between the two theses: "Russia has hypersonic weapons!" и "Russian BRs are as fast as everyone else.
                    1. Ka-52 3 February 2020 13: 58 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      And when the Supreme is already public.

                      heh, well, we must understand that such statements by the Dark One are primarily a message to frighten the horns and calm the electorate, and not technical advice at the Rosvooruzhenie stand)) so I can still understand.
                  2. Grim Reaper 3 February 2020 15: 15 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1

                    Of course, the term "hypersonic weapons" is a purely marketing product. After all, "supersonic weapons" sounds much more beautiful.

                    -I have a 25cm dick
                    -Ha, I have a quarter meter!
                    - This is the same.
                    Yes, but it sounds!
            2. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 15 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: Kalmar
              Tank OBPS also, in fact, accelerates to hypersound,

              And the ISS flies in orbit at a speed of almost 28 thousand km / h - this is finally.
              1. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 16 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Quote: Gray Brother
                And the ISS flies in orbit at a speed of almost 28 thousand km / h - this is finally.

                It does not count: in orbit there is no intelligible atmosphere and, accordingly, sound))
                1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 20 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Quote: Kalmar
                  It does not count: in orbit there is no intelligible atmosphere and, accordingly, sound))

                  Sooner or later she will have to enter the atmosphere anyway. Warheads are also flying in space for a while.
                  1. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 22 New
                    • 3
                    • 1
                    +2
                    Quote: Gray Brother
                    Sooner or later she will have to enter the atmosphere anyway. Warheads are also flying in space for a while.

                    Such an approach multiplies by zero the whole idea of ​​the superiority of the Russian Federation in this area: it is “hypersonic” to tumble back into the dense layers of the atmosphere of “them” and our BB ICBs were able even 50 years ago.
                    1. Gray brother 3 February 2020 11: 35 New
                      • 0
                      • 2
                      -2
                      Quote: Kalmar
                      "them" and our BB ICBMs were able even 50 years ago.

                      On a ballistic trajectory, unlike.
        3. Sidor Amenpodestovich 3 February 2020 10: 49 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Which specific performance characteristics? Speed, range, weight of the warhead?
          It always seemed to me that the most interesting thing about a rocket was its guidance system, engine and fuel.
          1. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 01 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Sydor Amenpospestovich
            Which specific performance characteristics? Speed, range, weight of the warhead?
            It always seemed to me that the most interesting thing about a rocket was its guidance system, engine and fuel.

            It seems to me that the "receiving" side of the speed / range / warhead is still more interesting. When a rocket flies to your side, the design features of its engine will be of least interest))
          2. rudolff 3 February 2020 11: 02 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            The engine and fuel eventually turn into speed, range, warhead weight. But the guidance system, yes, there is something to hide.
            1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 3 February 2020 11: 42 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              With identical dimensions, that rocket, whose engine and fuel are more energy efficient, will fly further.
            2. bouncyhunter 3 February 2020 12: 21 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Rudolph, my respect! hi
              Quote: rudolff
              The engine and fuel eventually turn into speed, range, warhead weight.

              Maneuverability too. soldier
              1. rudolff 3 February 2020 12: 30 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Yes, I agree!
                drinks
                1. bouncyhunter 3 February 2020 12: 34 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Let someone disguise himself about hypersound, but we understand who is "ahead of the rest." bully
  9. Adam Khomich 3 February 2020 10: 17 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: rocket757
    It was yesterday that something fundamentally changed.

    Destruction Speed! Yesterday it took several hours, and today, even half an hour is enough!
  10. Sidor Amenpodestovich 3 February 2020 10: 25 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    The Americans do not want to fight with Russia, but endlessly prepare for war with it. And endless preparation involves endless financing. Which goal, in fact, is being pursued.
  11. Vasyan1971 3 February 2020 10: 41 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It will be very difficult to catch up with Russia, since Russian-made Zircon hypersonic missiles will enter the army within the next few years.

    Come on! Nevertheless, they know that this is just - not very high-quality cartoons! wassat
  12. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 10: 49 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Yes, we have the coolest weapons today, we’ll get anyone anywhere in the world ..... Only the US is afraid of everything, but nobody is Russia. Only the lazy have not kicked the Russians. Everything, from the Turks to the Baltic states, is laid down on Russian weapons and the armed forces.
    1. _Ugene_ 3 February 2020 11: 01 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      in the modern world you cannot rely solely on armaments, you need a strong economy and economic ties with other countries, we have problems with this, and the United States is still the first economy on the planet
      1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 11: 05 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        Well, we will mean speaking at the Olympics under the neutral flag, they will kill our ambassadors, shoot down planes with impunity, steal people, deport, plant and so on ... Even Lukashenko is already yelling at Putin and crawling under the United States, I generally keep quiet about Ukraine. ... In fact, the connections are very fast, if desired ...
        1. _Ugene_ 3 February 2020 11: 07 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          your posts are like ordinary provocations, you take apart each case individually and suggest what, in your opinion, needed to be done
          1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 11: 13 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Funny ..... Case one! They don’t put us in anything regardless of whether we have a gipper sound or not.
            1. _Ugene_ 3 February 2020 11: 34 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              They don’t put us in anything
              too general phrase, nothing to discuss
            2. Leon68 3 February 2020 12: 30 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I'm wildly sorry! And who are you, Ukraine?
              1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 15: 02 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Us, this is Transnistria, us, this is Donbass, us is Lugansk, and so on ..... More than 25 years ago, we, in Transnistria, held a referendum for reunification with Russia and broke away from Moldova. Until today, since then, we hang like eggs over a hollow, not Moldova and not Russia, although most of our population has Russian citizenship. I have already raised a daughter on this reservation, my son is already 7. Wages are beggarly, on the one hand, Ukraine, on the other, Moldova are screwing us ..... Are we the only ones with whom Russia has no borders? Donbass has a border with the Russian Federation, so what? They have been killed by Ukraine for more than 5 years ..... Is this normal? Crimea was needed, they took it in one night, and that’s all ... For the rest of the Russians, there’s no money, not that moment, and so on .... And all because, despite all kinds of breakthrough weapons, nobody and Russia doesn’t put a penny on it and it’s all because of a loyal policy ...... You have to be brutal! Otherwise, a serious conflict cannot be avoided! Countries should see that jokes are bad with Russia ..... Cartoons about some kind of missiles, some kind of power, don't talk about anything
                The policy needs to be changed.
    2. Kalmar 3 February 2020 11: 05 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: Chingachguk
      Only the lazy haven't kicked the Russians yet

      Because the demonstration of "the coolest weapons" in dull cartoons alone is somehow unconvincing. Armament will scare if it:
      1. Has the characteristics confirmed by tests.
      2. Serially produced and available in the troops in a sufficiently large number and on a sufficiently large number of carriers.
      1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 11: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        And here I agree !!!!! It’s time to already show how it works, to make the cartoon a reality .....
    3. Prjanik 3 February 2020 12: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Nothing that amers kick everything from Iran to Venezuela, and the floor of South America screams at them all their lives, and what is the conclusion?
  13. 32363 3 February 2020 11: 02 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    On October 3, 1942, the Germans were the first in the world to launch a rocket into space to an altitude of more than 100 km.
  14. EXPrompt 3 February 2020 11: 11 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    And why are they surprised, the United States has been in the technological pit for a long time. And smart people there understand this well.

    YOU even call one successful over-project of the USA successfully executed for the last 2-3 decades.
    Developed a new tank to replace Abrache Obama closed the gap, for 35 years, the Boeing ran with Vairuner generally zilch. They could not make nuclear centrifuges for enrichment, they could not make mox fuel.
    Every U.S. aircraft carrier is even worse off, the Aviation, although numerous, but the old fleet will soon buy the F15X again, in general, all stealths failed both in technology and in cost. Where are the stripes successes, in what?

    The most for the United States, and their howl will be no worse than the tantrum arr. 1961 according to Gagarin, should happen by 2025 there should already be the first test samples of a nuclear plane in Russia, and by 2030 when they plan to build and a possible flight to the asteroid belt.
    In Russia, this program is moving by leaps and bounds, they also called it Jimo and also successfully cover it for the commonplace reason of US technological insolvency.
    1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 11: 17 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      I know one project is super successful !!!! The United States rule the world still without a hyper sound, being in a pit or somewhere else ..... And we just substitute our cheeks! wink
      1. EXPrompt 3 February 2020 11: 20 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        You didn’t notice how this super-successful project collapses into a tube, and then this tube will proceed to a famous place of Uncle SAMA ..
        Straight from 2007 and Putin’s Munich speech and began to cover up.
        And what the Iranians do with attacks on the hegemonic bases is precisely an element of dominance, only whom is this a question.

        Where does Russia turn its cheeks, what is it expressed in?
        We took Crimea, made a base out of it, and sent the USA and the EU in a certain direction when they stood up for the integrity of the Banderastan.
        1. Chingachguk 3 February 2020 11: 29 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          I was probably distracted by the neutral flags of our athletes at the Olympiads, by the Muskalyak rivulet, by Lukashenko about the fact that Belarus had been sold in the Great Patriotic War because of Russia, what Erdogan is doing in Syria, our plane shot down by the Turks, to kill our diplomat in Turkey, to rewrite the history of the Great Patriotic Poland, to continue? But about the "tube", I somehow did not think ..... Thank you for saying .... laughing one question of all - do these countries barge on their own, or because NATO, the USA are behind them?
          1. EXPrompt 3 February 2020 11: 49 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            You have trash in your head. This is all that you listed demonstration actions. In no way do they work to maintain US hegemony.
            Lukashenko - stupidly bargaining, he is a great master in this ..

            All garbage .. Except SU24 and the ambassador to Turkey.
            And then, you yourself estimate that now 5 years after the downed plane, it’s happening with Turkey’s NATO ally.
            We are building nuclear power plants for them, and we made gas hubs of them, and they didn’t have a whirlpool about the American forces, and they buy C400 from us. Here is a clear weakening of US influence visible to the naked eye, even at this point.


            All that an adult in the USA has been able to do lately is to cancer Europe and impose sanctions on them for SP-2, which slowed down the development of the project. Moreover, I emphasize that the EU imposes sanctions on EU firms, and not on Gazprom.
  15. Operator 3 February 2020 12: 05 New
    • 6
    • 4
    +2
    The Americans have in mind the tactical (“Dagger” and “Zircon”) and strategic (“Vanguard”) RF hypersonic weapons flying outside the range of Western air defense / missile defense.

    And do not remind them of the sad (ICBM "Sarmat" and the BRDS "Frontier") bully
  16. The Siberian barber 3 February 2020 12: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    That's when they officially announce that the Zircon has been put into service, then we can seriously talk about it. And so, all the talk: "on the mound, with seeds"))
  17. Hog
    Hog 3 February 2020 13: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What kind of delusional comparisons?
  18. Old26 3 February 2020 16: 08 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Quote: Gray Brother

    Quote: rudolff
    Dagger, an air-based ballistic missile only briefly reaching hypersonic speed

    But reaching the same - a couple of thousand kilometers passes in ten minutes, not for long, yes)))

    Well, 2000 km it takes 30 minutes, no less. There was somehow a network in the network, a carrier plane passes through a subsonic section in 8 minutes (125 km), and a supersonic section in 15 minutes (575 km). Then the launch of the "Dagger", which flies 1300 km (9 minutes). In total 2000 km and 32 minutes ...

    Quote: Gray Brother
    Nothing interferes, especially if it is not hypersonic suitable for the target - the plasma then does not form when interacting with the atmosphere and, therefore, radio waves are not shielded.

    You are right, Sergey, nothing prevents. But a supersonic target can be brought down by the same anti-aircraft missiles. Nothing bothers either.

    Quote: Gray Brother
    When hitting key NORAD targets, it is better to maneuver in order to for sure, and then to splash apart.

    NORAD objects are much more than can be maneuvering. There will be 12 deployed on Sotki N UTX. In the future, 2-3 Avangard can be deployed on Sarmatians. How many Sarmatians will be allocated for this? Most likely also 12, hardly 18. The result is 36-48 “Vanguards” (maximum 48-66). Some of these will be shot down. How many? Third? Or half? So there may not be enough for all NORAD objects ...

    Quote: Kalmar
    For “them,” this product is the X-51 (it flew 5M back in 2010), we have a hypothetical “Zircon” (whether it flew or not - it’s not known exactly).

    They still had the X-43, which flew EMNIP in 2000-2002 ...

    Quote: Ka-52
    traditionally truly hypersonic

    by what kind of tradition? Who established it and how much can a “tradition” be a basis for definition?
    capable of maintaining a specified speed for a long time

    how long is it? half an hour, an hour, a day?
    ... it is, it is not ... all these fabrications are from the evil one. In fact, any object moving with hypersonic speed is hypersonic. From the point of view of physics in the first place. And you can call him anything you like.
    This issue has already been discussed more than once at VO.

    By what tradition? At least by analogy with supersonic weapons. We do not call a machine gun or machine gun a supersonic weapon, only because the bullet accelerates to supersonic speed. But the cruise missile, which not only accelerates to supersonic speed but also supports it thanks to the engine, we call supersonic weapons.
    Now everyone is "crazy" in the term "hypersonic weapons." Even now, two terms have appeared - "engineless hypersound" - this refers to ballistic missiles. and "motor hypersound" - this refers to cruise missiles, which in essence are hypersonic weapons that can go on hypersound for a while, supporting it with their own engine, and carry out both lateral and vertical maneuvers. Here they are essentially hypersonic weapons. But it is not in service yet.
    If we insist that such products as the Vanguard or Dagger are full-fledged hypersonic weapons, then why talk about the United States decades behind us ??? They have intercontinental missiles, and they tested the planning blocks under the Falcon program.
    If we consider hypersonic weapons and ballistic missiles, then we have to consider then hypersonic weapons and artillery shells. And if we "cut off" artillery shells and consider only missiles, then the undisputed leader in the "hypersonic race" is .... Nazi Germany. For the speed of the V-2 was at the end of the AUT 2,3 km / s ...
  19. Old26 3 February 2020 16: 08 New
    • 5
    • 4
    +1
    Quote: EXPrompt
    Developed a new tank to replace Abrache Obama closed the gap, for 35 years, the Boeing ran with Vairuner generally zilch. They could not make nuclear centrifuges for enrichment, they could not make mox fuel.
    Every U.S. aircraft carrier is even worse off, the Aviation, although numerous, but the old fleet will soon buy the F15X again, in general, all stealths failed both in technology and in cost. Where are the stripes successes, in what?

    To kick “striped” is not to feed us with bread. We all remember them, all closed projects. True, sometimes we do not force ourselves to think about why certain projects were closed. The main thing is to expose Americans to stupid ...
    Well, let's take a look.
    Quote: EXPrompt
    Developed a new tank to replace Abrache Obama closed the failure

    Closed But is it a failure? All countries had similar, sometimes widely publicized, projects that were closed, often due to high cost. Announced the "supertank of the future" "Black Eagle"? Announced. And where is he? The program is closed. They announced the next “supertank of the future", called the T-95 - the project was closed. And as Shoigu said, they shut down because of the high cost.

    Quote: EXPrompt
    They tried to make nuclear centrifuges for enrichment,

    The US enrichment industry was built on the gas diffusion enrichment method, as a simpler and more reliable method. And those more than 600 tons of weapons-grade uranium that they have been obtained using this method. The American company USEC built a demonstration cascade of gas centrifuges (for commercial operation) in Picketon. The peculiarity of this plant was that centrifuges are used there very "high", up to 10 meters. However, everything new is all expensive. And the lack of funding (in 2009 the Ministry of Energy did not provide a loan guarantee of $ 2 billion) led to the curtailment of the project. But a demonstration plant nonetheless exists and works. And they buy uranium for stations abroad, all the more well knowing that no one will ever impose any sanctions against them. Why spend money when it’s cheaper to buy?

    Quote: EXPrompt
    could not make mox fuel.

    Here I agree with you. Failed. Moreover, they do not have reactors for it yet.

    Quote: EXPrompt
    Every U.S. carrier is worse than being decommissioned,

    You need to understand that the head Nimitz was worse than Kitty Hawks and Forrestols, and the current Ford head is worse than the Enterprise. Of course, there are already 8 reactors on the Enterprise that had to be restarted every 10-15 years , and on the Ford there’s only one with the time of service equal to the service of the ship.
    Electromagnetic catapults are probably worse than steam. Yes, now they have problems including and with catapults, but if electromagnetic ones are worse, then what do the same Chinese work on similar ones?

    Quote: EXPrompt
    Although the aircraft are numerous, the fleet of old ones will soon be bought again by the F15X,

    And we probably have solid news? Mig-29 and Su-27 are almost the same age with the same F-15. We consider it quite natural to buy the SU-30 and SU-35, which in essence are a deep modernization of the SU-27, but at the same time we mock the staff that are going to buy the F-15X

    Quote: EXPrompt
    in general, all stealth failed both in technology and in cost.

    Definitely failing. Here are the dumb Americans. Okay, there F-117s made only 64, it was the first pancake, okay, 20 pieces were made by V-2. But these stupid ones made 195 F-22s and on 2.01.2020 491 F-35s (including a bunch for sale). And all the failures .. Or since we still do not have this machine in the series - does the concept itself and its implementation fail?
    If the stealth technology itself is a failure, then why the hell have we been dealing with the same topic since the mid-80s. In 2000 was the first flight of the Mig-1.44, which was created as a counterweight to the American F-22. We have been engaged in this aircraft since the defense of the advance project for 28 years, and in 2015 they closed it. Why are we doing the SU-57 then? Or do you think that it will be the same price as the Su-27 ??? And operational difficulties are not yet predictable. We have no experience of operating it in the troops.

    By the way, you forgot to mention the United States Zumvolt. and for some reason they did not mention the “disastrous” “Arly Burke” and “Virginia” ...

    Quote: EXPrompt
    The most for the United States, and their howl will be no worse than the tantrum arr. 1961 according to Gagarin, should happen by 2025 there should already be the first test samples of a nuclear plane in Russia, and by 2030 when they plan to build and a possible flight to the asteroid belt.
    In Russia, this program is moving by leaps and bounds, they also called it Jimo and also successfully cover it for the commonplace reason of US technological insolvency.

    Is it already possible to fade? From the mid-90s to 2020, we can’t bring the Angara to operation. There are so many names of promising carriers that you can get confused in them. And Don and Irtysh, and Amur and Soyuz-5 and Soyuz-7. And already in 2025 are you planning a test flight of a nuclear planet, the development of which is taking leaps and bounds, in contrast to the failed American program? the same leaps and bounds as the construction of the "East", the serial production of "Armat" and Su-57 ???
    Yes, my friend. Hurray-patriotism you rushing out of all holes and its level rolls over ... Take off your pink glasses and look at the world with normal vision ...

    Quote: Operator
    and BRDS "Rubezh"

    So we still violated the INF Treaty?
  20. shura7782 3 February 2020 16: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The advantage of Russia over the United States in hypersound ......
    I personally care how we do it advantage will we use at the moment? What does this time period give us? When will it appear in the troops? It must be understood that until now the stripes have not recorded our hypersonic speeds on their radar screens. Therefore, while they consider this news "fake". If they had this weapon, it would certainly be demonstrated along our borders.
  21. Zoro 3 February 2020 17: 24 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    I remember here on the site I was directly frankly hungry over Russia, like nonsense and cartoons showed ....
    And the “Vanguards” are already on duty, well, there are “Poseidons” like, etc.
    Ura shout of course it’s too early, but still .. Something calmer in my soul .. And then tired of these cries and noisy "everything is gone, it’s better to give up and eat hot dogs with Coke. America is not defeated." etc.
  22. Old26 3 February 2020 18: 49 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    Quote: Zoro
    And the “Vanguards” are already on duty, well, there are “Poseidons” like, etc.

    "Vanguards" are worth as much as TWO pieces. Poseidon in 2019 was supposed to go to the test (running) but the grave silence ...
  23. lvov_aleksey 3 February 2020 22: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Hurrah!!! they are ripe cowards.