Passion around Mace
For a long time I thought about writing or not about the defense industry. Here it is, on the one hand, everyone knows that we produce quite good weapon, they buy it from us, and this is something that we can really be proud of. On the other hand, emo-patriots will have a lot of reasons to go by themselves, that is, to diminish the merits of their country, defame it and humiliate it. Their arguments are known. 1. All the weapons we got from the USSR, we have not developed anything new.
2. All the same, the army is destroyed, and what is produced is exported. We ourselves fly on rusty airplanes and float on troughs.
3. The mace still does not fly.
Well, and so on. But I think these are the main points. And what is interesting, all of them, in fact, apart from the emotional coloring inherent in emo patriots, are true. Well, who will argue with them, after all, the truth is that the lion's share of development started back in the USSR, and either completed there or performed on their basis. Even the concept of a fifth-generation fighter began to be worked out in the USSR.
Nobody will argue the same way with the fact that not a lot of new equipment is going to the army now, that much more went to the USSR, that the US Army is stronger than ours. And you can’t argue with the fact that the basis of both the fleet and the navy is based on combat units built back in the USSR. It is a fact.
Well, on the third point, there is nothing to say, 5 regarding successful launches from 12, is an obvious failure.
With all I agree with you, gentlemen emo patriots. But because of the usual lack of reason you don’t understand one thing - a statement of fact is only the beginning of the thinking process, its very top, and below there is the whole essence, the whole meaning. Your thinking is built on the simplest principle, and runs at the level of reflexes that are accessible even to the ciliate shoe. The algorithm is simple - we formulate a negative thesis, for example, “The mace does not fly,” and we draw a conclusion, usually reduced to “fucking as it rolls away”. Well, how else?
Let's start with the first item. For a start, I want to say that there is nothing bad in the fact that Russia uses the best practices of the USSR. Moreover, many admit that NTP has slowed down dramatically, and we have come to the end of a new round, caused by a breakthrough in nuclear physics and semiconductor electronics. But the Soviet Union gathered all the cream, being on the crest of technology, when the prospects were enormous, but there was still not much time to invent. Actually, under the same conditions and the United States, they, too, have almost never seen anything new in the last 20 years, and this is taking into account their capabilities. Well, yes, there is the Raptor F-22, but is it innovative? Technology "Stealth" has long been known, aircraft with cruising supersonic speeds have existed for a long time, rockets hidden in the belly, eka nevydal. But the B-60s created back in 52's are still in service, and instead of abandoning this junk, the United States is going to modernize them. So why should we invent something of our own when there is an excellent base left by the Union?
However, just “Bulava” is the very thing that was developed in Russia. I hear jokes of emo patriots, such as "well, only we can make a non-flying rocket". Well, not only, Topol-M and Sinev, I am silent about the newest Yar complex, they were created in Russia, and they fly very well. The fact that a little did not go with the Bulava is rather an exception, and not a pattern. The main thing is that no one doubts that, according to its characteristics, the Mace corresponds to what the main enemy of the United States has (again I remind you of the budget). Just do not hear criticism and about its design. Problems in the quality of production, but forgive me, the fact that we can make a rocket, which even 5 times their 12 but still reaches where it should be, is a miracle, since a lot of production capacity, personnel, knowledge, remained abroad, and how we in 90 -e saved that allows us to make a rocket, it is a mystery, it is a miracle. So it is not surprising that the rocket flies badly, but the fact that it does fly at all.
The rocket will fly, but then what? And then, lo and behold, our government, for some reason, it does not cut the latest nuclear submarines, but on the contrary, it builds them. One has already been tested, two to a large degree of readiness, and one more laid. Yes, gentlemen, emo patriots, this is the case when the weapon is not intended for export, but for us. Moreover, the work on the rearmament of our strategic underwater fleet goes in many directions, while not forgetting about current security.
1. Testing the new Bulava rocket
2. The Akula nuclear submarines are being modernized for a ready-made rocket, until the submarines of the Borey project were ready.
3. Construction submarine project "Borey"
3. So far the rocket is not ready to be upgraded by the submarine of the Dolphin project and not the oldest Sinev rocket is put on them either.
See how everything is thought out, how everything is big and clear. If the authorities didn't give a damn about our security, our army, why was it necessary to hastily rebuild the 6 submarines of the old project. Well, no one threatens us yet, it would be possible to live without submarines. Moreover, there is also the submarine of the Squid project, there are land missiles. But they are preserved, modernized. And not to the west, but for us, for the security of our Motherland. Well, it could be limited to modernization, because “Sineva” is a good rocket, and the boats are not bad either. All the more “Sharks”, well, they would all be re-equipped, and they would be fine. So no, we are also building the newest submarines of the Borey project, and even 4 right away!And let's think about this, just for an example of a normal thinking style, broader. How many countries have at their disposal a rocket, according to the characteristics close to the Bulava? ONE country! And this is the United States, whose military budget, 10 times our size. No country in the world has such a rocket anymore. Yes, France since the beginning of 90-x has been developing the M51 rocket, developing a similar rocket, but has already reduced its characteristics several times, revised the project, and as a result, planning to adopt it on the 2008 year, the rocket was not accepted for service ( ). So in the development involved several countries (a consortium of EADS Space Transportation), members of NATO, and therefore to some extent used the technology of the alliance, that is, the United States. At the same time, new warheads for this missile have not yet been developed, and are expected in 2015, but for now there will be old warheads.
The Chinese JL-2 is inferior to the Bulava, at least in the number of warheads. So, it turns out that Russia is among such strong players as the European Union, and is ahead of China. The United States stands alone, which is not surprising, given the size of the budget. By the way, many impute to our designers the rejection of certain stages of testing, and their replacement by computer simulation. So the same thing happens with the M51 rocket
According to the statements of the responsible persons of this project, in the course of the work, the methods of mathematical and computer modeling were applied much more widely than before, ensuring the choice of a number of optimal solutions and significant cost savings. It is assumed, for example, that the use of modern design technologies will reduce the amount of joint flight tests by at least three times.
This, it turns out, is world practice, and we keep up with the times. By the way, it is likely that changing the old test procedure really caused some problems, but you need to understand that you learn from mistakes, and if you don’t start learning now, then it may be too late, other countries will overtake us, and we will continue to use grandfathers , albeit reliable, but more expensive and long methods. So the designers did not invent anything, they just caught the global trend associated with the development of computational tools.
So, does not fly Mace? Yes, it does not fly. But there is a flying counterpart only in the United States, and there is an unadopted counterpart in Europe. What did you want? What would Russia, after having done with it in 90, be ahead of the rest of the world, so that having a much lower defense budget, it would overtake not the most backward countries of Europe, not to mention the United States? Yes, it is already excellent that we are not lagging far behind, and even the question is, is it lagging because the missile characteristics are classified information, and it’s not at all the fact that M51 trimmed down several times is actually a competitor of our Bulava and its warheads old ones And we also have “Sinev”.
As you see, it turned out a little longer than the conclusions of emo emo patriots are usually obtained. But it turns out that Russia is not going anywhere, but quite the opposite, it is creating a rocket that no other country in the world, except the United States, can create. And it turns out that not only Russia has problems with adopting a rocket for armament, it turns out that a consortium of European countries is dragging Murka right from 1993 to the present day, it has already been making 17 for years for a rocket, and even without warheads, while 12 years.
By the way, unlike Europe, which still stuffed a new missile into the old submarines, Russia is building a new missile and a new submarine. One has already completed the test, as I said. Well, emo patriots of course smirk, such as a boat there, but there are no missiles. Let me remind you that in the USSR there was a case when three boats were already afloat, and all the missiles were not. So then in the USSR, with its capabilities!
This week promise the next test Bulava. Cross your fingers.
Information