The timelines for adopting the Zircon hypersonic missile became known

The latest Russian hypersonic missile Zircon will go into service in 2022. This was reported by TASS with reference to a source in the military-industrial complex.

According to the source, the ship complex with the Zircon hypersonic missile is scheduled to be adopted by 2022. In 2020, missile tests with launches from a surface ship will continue, their completion is scheduled for the end of the year. It is planned to carry out firing at both coastal targets and targets representing ships. The frigate of the project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov, which is currently undergoing routine maintenance and modernization, will take part in the tests.

According to the plan, the ship complex with the Zircon rocket should be put into service in 2022

- the agency leads the words of the source.

In 2021, tests of the Zircon will continue from the side of the submarine. The first launch of the rocket will be carried out from the surface, the second - from underwater. The test will involve a multipurpose submarine of project 885 (code "Ash") "Severodvinsk", and not "Kazan", as previously planned.

Further plans for testing the Zircon hypersonic rocket were not announced, the rocket developer - NPO Mashinostroyeniya - declined to comment on this information.

The Ministry of Defense first announced the development of the Zircon hypersonic missile in 2011, and tests began in 2015. The first launch from the ship (frigate Admiral Gorshkov) took place in early January 2020 or at the end of December 2019, a rocket hit a ground target at a distance of more than 500 km.

Comments

[Thrifty]

Maybe you need to jump first and then say "hop" ???

[Michael67]

Good luck to everyone on the test. We will succeed.
There will be an impressive argument for the exceptional.
They are already actively reflecting on Zircon.

[Sergey S.]

Quote: Thrifty

Maybe you need to jump first and then say "hop" ???

I am always in a pronounced patriotic position.
But here I fully support the above highlighted thesis.

For I do not understand why, ahead of time, we are voiced by certain parameters (properties, terms ...) of the most modern weapons.
In my understanding of the reasons, there may be two:
1. To mislead the enemy.
2. Calm your own people.
Both reasons are not very successful.
The enemy’s technical intelligence largely overlaps the first point.
A large proportion of working citizens work on defense topics, and you cannot fool it.

It would be more correct. if it is necessary to scare the adversary, after adopting the armament, conduct tests in the presence of the military attachés of the enemies ... Let them be scared in real time.
And before this time - not a word.

[flicker]

why ahead of time we have voiced certain parameters (properties, terms ...) of the most modern weapons.
In my understanding of the reasons, there may be two:
1. To mislead the enemy.
2. Calm your own people.

3. Cool the hot western heads, so that they do not harbor illusions about their military superiority, and on this basis they would not break firewood now.
In other words, to have peaceful ideas, not military

[Sergey S.]

Quote: flicker

... Cool the hot western heads so that they do not nourish the illusions ...

You are greatly cooled by the sanctions, scarecrows, statements, even trials of ... Western "partners" that are constantly pouring on our heads. trump and other various pompeos ...

The longer the threat is not executed, the more senseless it was voiced.

[flicker]

You are greatly cooled by the sanctions, scarecrows, statements, even trials of ... Western "partners" that are constantly pouring on our heads. trump and other various pompeos ...

Well cool something overheated.
If "something" is not overheated, then it is not necessary to cool it.
An overheated head is a head that generates overly sharp, aggressive designs. Cool the head - make it abandon aggressive designs.
How?
To convince of hopelessness and inevitable painful consequences for this head.

You are greatly cooled by the sanctions, scarecrows, statements, even trials that constantly pour on our heads.

No, because I do not bear aggressive intentions. Moreover, these threats only increase (force the preparation of retaliatory aggressive measures) the intensity of plans.
Ie is forced to respond to these sanctions: through the creation of Zircons and other means of admonishing aggressive goals.

The longer the threat is not executed, the more senseless it was voiced.

This is not a threat, it is a gentle admonition.
In total, it was reported that tentatively Zircon will be adopted by 2022.
A threat is if we were to conduct indicative trials of Zircon off the coast of the United States, and just a press release.

[Sergey S.]

Quote: flicker

In total, it was reported that tentatively Zircon will be adopted by 2022.

1. Let's talk about this in 2023.
2. For the rest. The leaders of the United States are not fooled by our newspaper reports. Moreover, what has been happening recently has again inflamed the ideas of the possibility of military pressure on Russia in their crazy heads.
Read the news impartially.

I am trying to explain that during the Soviet period they were able to use the factor of new weapons much more efficiently.
For example:
1970 - Maneuvers "Ocean", by the way, they are 50 years old this year, - we demonstrated an intercontinental ballistic missile for submarines - for the first time in the world.
Again, by the way, from that moment on, our fleet was recognized as an ocean fleet.

To do this, conducted open-fire training with cruise missiles ... they drowned so many famous ships ... it was a pity they were, but the power of the Motherland was demonstrated.

So it would have to be done now.
Prepare a rocket, organize tests somewhere in a crowded place, and shoot so that it responds to half-Europe ....
Then there would be no one to discuss, and nothing ...

[flicker]

Prepare a rocket, organize tests somewhere in a crowded place, and shoot so that it responds to half-Europe ....

This is if the goal is to intimidate.
And if the goal is to bang, then intimidation on the contrary will be harmful, as it mobilizes the enemy.

[venik]

Quote: Sergey S.

The longer the threat is not executed, the more senseless it was voiced.

==========
Rather, on the contrary! "Delayed execution"- much worse quick execution of the "sentence"!

[Sergey S.]

Quote: venik

"Delayed execution" is much worse than a quick execution of the "sentence"!

This is for the hanged man.
And for an official, viewer or ordinary layman, only quick painful effects are of maximum educational value.

[flicker]

A delayed execution "is much worse than a quick execution"!

The inevitability of punishment is a powerful deterrent.
(Let's say they can put in jail)
As soon as the punishment was executed (sent to prison) - that punishment (prison) ceases to be a deterrent.
***
Execution is a very powerful deterrent (for the living )

[kutuz]

“For I don’t understand why they are voicing it ahead of time” - a banal PR for the patriots, “Schaub were proud”.

[KCA]

In the leadership of Russia, it has somehow been accepted in recent times, then gop without races, then gop, with races, but in vain, I think the commander-in-chief is aware of all the statements, I hope to see "Zircon" by the end of the year, and not just hear about it

[codetalker]

Where are you going to see him? Going to take in 2022.

[venik]

Quote: codetalker

Where are you going to see him? Going to take in 2022.

=========
SO WHAT??? "Nightmare! Nightmare! Nightmare !, Everything is gone! The plaster is being removed! The client is leaving!"

You actually UNDERSTAND that it’s not just a fundamentally new weapon, but also a terribly expensive weapon!
Adopt a raw but expensive weapon: Sorry! We - not "states" - dollars "how much you need" - DO NOT PRINT! And in this way, only ONE option is acceptable: "Measure seven times - cut once!"
It is necessary to test 2 years more - it means NEEDED! There are also no nerds sitting there! About all problems, including and with SERIAL production - neither you nor I know ANYTHING!
It also seems to me that TWO years - too long.... But, to UNDERSTAND whether this is so - you need to own ALL the information!

[codetalker]

Why are you explaining this to me?)
A person can’t live there until he sees Zircon ... Apparently, they must personally show him)

[Mebius]

Quote: Thrifty

Maybe you need to jump first and then say "hop" ???

Or maybe they are already in service))))) And this is an article for protesters, etc. ..? Remember "Putin's cartoons" ..

[antique]

Quote: Mobius

Or maybe they are already in service))))) And this is an article for protestors, etc. ..? Remember "Putin's cartoons" ..

Something similar happens with the AWACS A 100 aircraft.
Sources of RIA Novosti in the military-industrial complex report that the supply of the AWACS A-100 Premier aircraft to the airborne forces will begin in 2024. And that the work on its testing continues on schedule. And that this aircraft in its class belongs to a new generation. And that everything is supremely beautiful.

We heard exactly the same thing 2,5 years ago, in November 2017. And not from some sources there, but personally from the Minister of Defense Sergey Shoigu. True, then it was not about the 2024th, but about the 2020th, that is, the current year.
Total, what do we have in the balance? They promised to start production in 2020, the work went on schedule. Now the work is on schedule again, the series is being postponed to 2024. Will not be outdated by this time?
An article about a super duper Putin’s new submarine has just passed. Husky-Arrow-Laika. Which is also PROMISED to run in a series. Americans, as befitting cowardly and stupid enemies, are no longer sleeping. So activists think along with adjoining groups of pensioners. It’s time for everyone to understand nothing. In addition to the empty and deceitful promises of the main baboon hiding in the bunker.

[venik]

Quote: Mobius

Remember "Putin's cartoons" ..

===========
Yes, we remember! How many yells there were (mostly from the "liberal-dermocratic soros": "Yes, these are all" cartoons "! This CANNOT BE! Just because this can NEVER be! Russia is a backward country, and without" states "no matter what Not capable! "Especially" defecated "-" grant eaters "!
SO WHAT? "Peresvet" - stood on alert, "Vanguard" - too! "Dagger" has long been in experimental military operation. Now "Zircon" is on its way!
-----
PS And now - let them "throw slippers". They have already thrown into you .... Well, as the gypsies say: "Let's divide the whip into two backs"! And they will throw slippers - well, God be with them - we also know how to throw!

[Mebius]

Quote: venik

Yes, we remember! How many yells there were (mostly from the "liberal-dermocratic soros": "Yes, these are all" cartoons "! This CANNOT BE! Just because this can NEVER be! Russia is a backward country, and without" states "no matter what Not capable! "Especially" defecated "-" grant eaters "!

I remember remember, I even believed them a little .. And then the hop and Avnvgardy are already on duty, the hop "Sarmatians" are installed in the mines .. well there "Poseidons", etc. And the West calmed down and these, too, bit their tongues and only whimpered ..

[antique]

Quote: Thrifty

Maybe you need to jump first and then say "hop" ???

Now it’s not accepted. First, the chief baboon hits his chest, then the choir of monkeys begins to squeal joyfully. When another failure comes, he is declared a colossal victory over the enemies.
In difficult times, all world leaders with their people. Trump is still holding meetings in the Oval Office and categorically refuses the mask, Merkel goes to the store, Boris Johnson fell ill and is in the hospital, Macron is still active.
The Chinese automobile company BYD, having assembled 3000 engineers, designed and built the LARGEST factory in the world for the production of protective masks in one week.
The main baboon, who destroyed the scientific and industrial potential of his tribe, deprived even the approximate opportunity to create a national automatic line for the production of protective equipment, proudly hid in the bunker.
And for the packs of hungry Banderlog, good news has been sent <I will be soon

we will definitely launch ...

[Doccor18]

These weapons must have greatly changed the strategy of warfare at sea.

[Pavel57]

The strategy is always the same - the first saw, the first hit. There is an air defense and electronic warfare umbrella - well done, no - get it.

[Michael67]

An air defense umbrella is unlikely to help. There are also doubts about EW.

[Pavel57]

In the EW match against anti-ship missiles, the score is in favor of EW.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

In an EW match against anti-ship missiles, an account in favor of EW

can you give statistics?
And how will EW and air defense against a hypersonic missile help you?

[Pavel57]

There are no statistics at hand. But there are not so many episodes.
1 Falklands EW + Air Defense, score 4-3.
2. The use of Egypt P-15. Score
in favor of electronic warfare 5-1 (offhand).
3. The use of P-15 against eastern Pakistan. EW was not, therefore, it is difficult to speak.
4 Iranian Exozet against the American destroyer. Air defense was in peacetime, ignored the threat.
5. Naval battle with Georgia in 2008 Georgians did not have electronic warfare and air defense.

Maybe someone else will remember.

And what protection does hypersonic provide from electronic warfare? CSG emits. EW interferes with guidance.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

Maybe someone else will remember.

Stark was on alert, the rocket was detected in advance.

MRK Monsoon, 1987. The defeat of the target missile. The ship fired on a missile from an air defense system and a missile defense system, but could not bring down

Israeli corvette "Hanit", 2006. Hit of a Chinese-made anti-ship missile launched by Hezbollah militants

frigate "Entrim" (USS Antrim FFG-20), 1983, firing practice at a target missile. The missile hit the superstructure of the ship.

[Avior]

MRK Monsoon, 1987. The defeat of the target missile. The ship fired on a missile from an air defense system and a missile defense system, but could not bring down

no RP was used; the seeker was turned off

Israeli corvette "Hanit", 2006. Hit of a Chinese-made anti-ship missile launched by Hezbollah militants

no RP was used, the corvette was standing near the coast in a sky-ready state

Stark was on alert, the rocket was detected in advance.

Air defense and warfare were not used due to the negligence of the frigate commander
attacking Iraqi plane at that time was considered an ally of the United States

[Grigory_45]

in none of the examples cited by me were electronic warfare agents used. Only air defense systems. And they alone were powerless

[Avior]

6. Doomsday War, 1973
Arab P-15 Termite of our production against Israeli electronic warfare
score 54: 0
4 only Iraqi, not Iranian

[Pavel57]

Avior, I expected you to correct me with the P-15. )))
The final score is 54-1.
There was also the use of missiles on ground targets with the Tu-16, but also not very effective.

Iraqi essno.

[Avior]

And what is 1?
Could not fix it, saturday, barbecue

[Pavel57]

1 - destroyer Eilat, although this is 1967.

[Avior]

Eilat could not use rab, the Israelis did not have it yet, although they already knew about the threat of RCC, Eilat had no chance
By the Day of Doomsday, they already had a reb, quite seriously done, although due to sanctions the traps were a remake of rescue signal cartridges

[Doccor18]

The entire air defense umbrella will have to be revised.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Pavel57

There is an umbrella air defense and electronic warfare

Do modern air defense and electronic warfare systems somehow protect against hypersonic missiles?

[Pavel57]

I will not say air defense, but it is also an electronic warfare for hypersound. Therefore, Zircon for striking ground targets is precisely effective; you do not need to have a radio contact with a target.

[lucul]

These weapons must have greatly changed the strategy of warfare at sea.

This is a checkmate to American aircraft carriers))))

[Pavel57]

The check is for sure, but it’s difficult to say regarding mat.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Not. We already had a similar advantage when we received supersonic anti-ship missiles in the 80s - the Americans learned to destroy them only at the beginning of the 20s. Now we are renewing this advantage, but ...
Hypersonic anti-ship missiles are a very serious deterrent and I am extremely glad that we will have them. But they will not change the strategy of war at sea

[Vladimir_2U]

It’s just that the distant frontiers of the AUG defense will have to be protected.

[mvg]

We already had a similar advantage when we received supersonic anti-ship missiles in the 80s

The advantage is imaginary. Still needed TSU for 500 km. Yes, and they went astray, with the same bunch of F-14 + Phoenix. What did we have? 1 side 1144.2 and 3 sides 1164. I am not talking about 949 and 1143, as well as for 956 with 120 km Mosquito. Even my cap-cap specifically evaluated this miracle weapon. A miracle had to happen to fire. And all this against 150+ destroyers and 20+ cruisers.
PS: In a real war, it was not that club, it was rather for a Falkland level conflict.

[Sky strike fighter]

And they shot down a lot?

Yes, and they went astray, with the same bunch of F-14 + Phoenix.

[mvg]

And they shot down a lot?

5 out of 6, by one plane. Targets mimicked the X-22 launched from the Tu-22. These are analogues of our granites, basalts, volcanoes. The same pillar-shaped 7 tons of rockets from Chalome.
Old themselves, not difficult.

[Sky strike fighter]

5 out of 6, by one plane.

Aha one plane the whole salvo. Well, do not tell the "analogs" of Granites, Basalts, Volcanoes in the form of targets with incomprehensible performance characteristics.

[mvg]

one airplane the whole salvo

Those. search too lazy

[Sky strike fighter]

No, I was not too lazy. But the target speeds are clearly not the same as those of the X-22.

In mid-December 1972, the first simultaneous launch of two Phoenix missiles was carried out on two targets simulating the Soviet X-22 anti-ship missiles. One rocket hit the target, the second went off the trajectory due to a failure on-board equipment. On December 20, one “Tomcat” reflected the “raid” of two MiG-21 fighters and three anti-ship missiles. Unmanned targets of the BQM-34 acted as MiGs, and QT-33 targets acted as RCC. Targets flew at altitudes of 6-7,5 km at a speed of M = 0,6. The interception was carried out from the Tomcat flying with an excess at an altitude of 9600 m at a speed of M = 0,7. The interceptor operator spotted targets at a distance of 110 km, at a distance of 92 km the radar switched to auto-tracking mode, and the first Phoenix was launched from a distance of 56 km, followed by three more with an interval of 45 s. One QT-33 target was hit by a direct hit, three other missiles passed from the targets at a distance that ensured their destruction when the Phoenix head was detonated. In the future, missile launches were developed for targets using radio interference and simulating another Soviet threat - the Tu-22M bomber, no less famous in the West than the MiG-25. So, in April 1973, the Tomcat crew was able to detect the BQM-34 target simulating the Backfire at a range of 245 km and destroy it at a distance of 134 km from the launch point of the Phoenix UR. Finally, in November 1973, a crew of pilots John Wilson and weapons operator Jack Hover carried out a unique interception of six targets at once. The American press dubbed this episode of the Tomcat / Phoenix weapon system test a record. Within 37-38 seconds, six Phoenix missiles were launched from F-14 for six targets (two BQM-34A and four QT-33), located at a distance of 80-115 km. Four missiles hit the target, one missile went off the trajectory due to equipment failure and one launch was considered unsuccessful due to a malfunction of the target. During the tests, the UR “Phoenix” was launched from all suspension units at speeds from minimum to 1,6M and with overload up to 6,5G. Suspension 6 UR AIM-54 F-14 (long-range interception)
The “proprietary” test phase of the Phoenix UR was completed in November 1973. At the same time, 14 missiles were launched from the F-17 fighter, 88% of the launches were considered successful.

https://testpilot.ru/usa/hughes/aim/54/

[mvg]

banned. the answer was written

[mvg]

No, not too lazy

Maybe the site is buggy.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mvg

The advantage is imaginary.

Absolutely real. It was not absolute, and did not give us dominance at sea, but it was possible to realize it

Quote: mvg

Still needed TSU for 500 km.

In the USSR it was possible - we had a system of marine reconnaissance and target designation. Not without flaws - but it was.

Quote: mvg

Yes, and they went astray, with the same bunch of F-14 + Phoenix.

You were so impressed by the circus when 5 missiles out of 6 were shot down? In vain. Phoenixes were so expensive that they were not given to combat pilots - they had only theoretical knowledge of how to use these missiles.

Quote: mvg

What did we have? 1 side 1144.2 and 3 sides 1164.

Do not understand. 4 TARKR, 4 TAVKR, 3 RKR

Quote: mvg

About 949 and 1143 I'm not talking

And in vain. I won’t know what you do not like 1143 in the middle earth, holding the 6th US fleet on the fly. And 949 were not a child prodigy, but they could well use their anti-ship missiles.

Quote: mvg

Even my cap-cap specifically evaluated this miracle weapon.

There are other ratings from naval officers.

Quote: mvg

And all this against 150+ destroyers and 20+ cruisers.

Yeah. Plus several missile carrier air divisions with the same X-22

Quote: mvg

In a real war, it was not that club, but rather for a Falkland level conflict.

On the Falklands, a very modest Exoset became a club.

[Pavel57]

Look at the statistics of the use of Exozet. Hit only those goals that were without covering air defense and electronic warfare equipment.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Pavel57

Look at the statistics of the use of Exozet.

You can do it yourself - for example, in my article series on Falklands

Quote: Pavel57

Hit only those goals that were without covering air defense and electronic warfare equipment.

Incorrect answer. Air defense in general did not affect the effectiveness of the Exocets. For example, the Exocet that hit the Sheffield was discovered from another British destroyer, and they tried to use the Sea Dart on it, but to no avail - the radar was unable to capture the target.
Exosets hit only those targets that did not have EW and LOC protection

[Pavel57]

As far as I remember, one Sea Dart hit. The rest was done by jamming. There was already a detailed analysis of how many, how many by. It is necessary to search for a branch.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Pavel57

As far as I remember one Sea Wolf hit.

Not. Only in trials after the war

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

Look at the statistics of the use of Exozet. Hit only those goals that were without cover air defense and electronic warfare

air defense systems shot down only one missile (on May 30, 1982, by fire from a 114-mm gun from the destroyer Exeter). The rest of the missiles that did not hit the target were taken away by electronic warfare

[Pavel57]

The gun is also air defense)))

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

The gun is also air defense)))

of course) I wrote about that
In general, the British Air Defense at the Falklands did not cope with its task at all.
However, in the confrontation, the anti-aircraft missile is still the last to come. You can recall the American frigate Stark, and the Soviet MRK Monsoon ...

[Pavel57]

With RTOs it was anecdotal if not for the victims. About Stark, I mentioned - the air defense was not brought into battle.
I know examples when a missile with missed missile shot down complex targets. The probability is not zero.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Gregory_45

only one missile was shot down by air defense systems (on May 30, 1982, by fire from a 114-mm gun from the destroyer Exeter).

There is such an opinion, but the British commander did not think so

[mvg]

On the Falklands, a very modest Exoset became a club.

banned, admin admin vkavirus

[Boa kaa]

Quote: mvg

Even my cap-cap specifically evaluated this miracle weapon.

Maxim, no one is forbidden to have their own opinion ... But "your drops" apparently did not have information about flight characteristics and tactics of using Basalt and Granite.
Yes, they went high when they shot at "far." But after they left at the peak, they could no longer be caught. The central office was given to them by (then still acting) Liana and space (rights for the business center). So, for their time they were "very much even nothing". In addition, they had an onboard computer in their heads. (Oh how!)
And the anti-ship missile 3M80 Mosquito had a slightly different range than what you and the open seal indicate. 2,35M speed and unpredictable flight path. "Incurable hemorrhoid" for the one for whom the tracking of the weapon was established.
So, not all square need to be rolled!
AHA.

[mvg]

Here are just "your drops" apparently did not have information about LTH and tactics of using Basalt and Granite.

Alex, I have a very low opinion of military aikyu on average, but my cap three and cap cap were from a different test. They knew their weapons on the spot, I take off my hat. And the tactics of application. Better many, many.
I have a good idea of ​​the performance characteristics and mosquito and granite, and the flight path. Both single and group.
And our Liana did not cover everything, not all satellites entered the calculated orbit, and then the life cycle turned out to be lower, and the Union was already at its peak. The project was stillborn right away.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: mvg

my cap three and cap-cap were from another test. They knew their weapons on the spot, I take off my hat.

I believe, and also

Quote: mvg

The project was stillborn right away.

Do not tell me, in the year 74 I heard, but in 77 I was already stabbing targets at 105 stance.
Alley-2M was also an oasis in the darkness of radio exchange, when all the central offices left with a smear of shovels. For its time, it was something, then something, and then something turned into nothing. Dialectics, damn it!
And how do you feel about Tselin?

[mvg]

And how do you feel about Tselin?

Now, how to plant potatoes in it. Gonna do it tomorrow ...
How to say, 2020 is in the yard, and still it is a big problem, and then, it's 94 years (for me). I think, too, not everything is good. I can’t say anything clever. Kaptsov wrote something in VO.
Alex, I really think, then, this task was unsolvable. In the sense of technically. And Success, and Legend and All are all. Then computers were like Spectrum 8086 and 286. Communication with space was through time. And there, I understand, planes and ships and space were used. Failure in one circuit and you are blind. As usual, the Russian Federation seized on no taxes. In my understanding, with this money you could make a bunch of Tu-142/95 MRTs, placing them in Vietnam, China, Cuba and at home. This money is a dash of knowledge, would not be lost. And now we would have flown E-3D Sentry, of Russian production, and not 8 pieces of A-50 and one mythical A-100.
I’m used to soberly evaluate strength, money, work, and not to download the research institutes of Keldysh, Chalomei, etc. frivolous nonsense .. Project Buran, etc. Legend .. folk money (((

[Avior]

Since supersonic anti-ship missiles have never been used in real conditions, as well as over-the-horizon launches, it certainly cannot be said that statistics are needed
And the teachings are the teachings

[Pavel57]

In the 90s, Americans trained to shoot down high-speed targets based on the X-31 missile. Not very successful. But that was 25 years ago.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Pavel57

But that was 25 years ago.

Then they did it - with ESSM, but this is EMNIP 2004

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

But they will not change the strategy of war at sea

Andrew,
The question is, of course, interesting! (with)
But, in order:
1. With the advent of new weapons, as a rule, the tactics of using forces and combat use of weapons are changing. -- I agree?
2. Tactics significantly affect operational art (organization of preparation and conduct of operations - several formations, types of forces, troops) - agree?
3. The OI influences the views on the use of forces at sea, and this is reflected in the revision of the concept of the use of forces and means in armed struggle at the M / O theater. - here’s your strategy.
So does the appearance of a new type of weapon affect the war at sea?
If not on the line, then indirectly - exactly, it affects.
But.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

1. With the advent of new weapons, as a rule, the tactics of using forces and combat use of weapons are changing. -- I agree?
2. Tactics significantly affect operational art (organization of preparation and conduct of operations - several formations, types of forces, troops) - agree?

No, I do not agree. Because this does not happen in all cases. Let’s take the appearance of machine guns - they strongly influenced tactical art, and through it - operational. But the appearance of the soldier’s helmets showed little at the tactical level and in no way at the operational level.
Or take, for example, such a new weapon as a guided projectile. New? New. Changes the tactics of the fleet? A bit - now you can quickly hit point-based coastal targets, provided that there is adequate illumination. Changes this operational art? No, it does not, the fundamentally amphibious operations remained the same as they were.

Quote: BoA KAA

The OI has an influence on the views of the use of forces at sea, and this is reflected in the revision of the concept of the use of forces and means in armed struggle on the M / O theater of operations. - here’s your strategy.

So, my opinion is that the appearance of hypersonic anti-ship missiles will affect tactics and operational art, but will lead to a revision of the concept.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

No, I do not agree.

1. A helmet is not a weapon, but a means of passive protection.
2. Guided missile - a means of destruction, not a weapon. Weapons - AU! Barrel artillery. But even the means of destruction (from your words, by the way!) Already changes the tactics of warfare, allowing you to hit point targets, eliminating the need to plow hectares of the battlefield.
3. In my opinion, it is incorrect to compare the Shell and OI. Don't you find?
And then, for example, the emergence of the UDC (weapon complex, since the ship!) Changed the tactics of conducting the WMDO, and the OI with over-the-horizon landing and "air (vertical) coverage" along with "frog jumps".
4. Andrey, of course I respect you, but how to understand your conclusion - I can't put my mind to it, because the conclusion contradicts the evidence base. Aren't you "tired" after yesterday?

the appearance of hypersonic anti-ship missiles will affect tactics and operational art, but will lead to a revision of the concept.

The concept is part of the STRATEGY. More precisely - its rationale, "philosophical basis" so to speak.
Sincerely, Boa.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

In my opinion, it is incorrect to compare the Shell and the OI. Don't you find?

No problems. Take a weapon like a submachine gun. On the tactical - it affected, on the operational art - practically none. Jet aircraft. The same thing - "the same plane, only faster." Medium-range airborne missile system for aviation. The tactics of air combat were changed, strategically everything remained as it is. The tank had a major impact on the strategy, but the SPG did not. "Katyusha", finally. In general, I can continue for a very, very long time.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Andrei, I certainly respect you, but I don’t know how to understand your conclusion, because the conclusion contradicts the evidence base.

And in my opinion, the evidence base is on my side :)))) You can discuss the issue of hypersonic anti-ship missiles, their specific impact on the strategy (if any), but theoretically there are a lot of new weapons that have no noticeable effect on the strategy

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Sincerely, Boa.

And I respectfully!

[voyaka uh]

"Hypersonic anti-ship missiles are a very serious deterrent"
----
Do you believe that you can hit a moving target at hypersonic speed?
in a dense atmosphere?
Maybe you mean that the speed in the middle section is hypersonic?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: voyaka uh

Do you believe that you can hit a moving target at hypersonic speed?
in a dense atmosphere?
Maybe you mean that the speed in the middle section is hypersonic?

I mean exactly what I wrote. Regardless of the flight profile of hypersonic anti-ship missiles, it is an extremely difficult target, almost beyond the boundaries of modern air defense.
And I have repeatedly written about the REAL effectiveness of air defense. The British air defense system Sivulf successfully intercepted and shot down 114-mm artillery shells during tests. In a real database, two raids of subsonic attack aircraft missed. Although it’s completely automated, it doesn’t refer to the human factor

[voyaka uh]

I did not write about air defense at all. Let's say the ship has no air defense.
Let's say it's a moving barge at 25-30 knots and a maneuvering target barge
with remote control.
I doubt that the hyperspeed rocket will simply hit this target.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: voyaka uh

I doubt that the hyperspeed rocket will simply hit this target.

X-22 hit, and her speed reached 4,6 M

[voyaka uh]

ABOUT! Thanks.
Finally, it becomes clear what Zircon is.
This is a converted X-32 cruise missile.
A booster was added to her to throw into the stratosphere from the ship.
And then it goes like a classic CD with high supersonic.
Approximate guidance on Glonass, and then on the active radar in the GOS.
Well, an EW jammer was probably added.
It all fits together. Both in size and in range. Thanks for the "tip" from the X-22

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: voyaka uh

ABOUT! Thanks. good
Finally, it becomes clear what Zircon is.

Well, if you want to take guesses for the truth - your right :))) By the way, about the X-32 you are not that deep, you are VERY deeply mistaken. Suggest why? :))) Actually, the answer is on the surface, but ...
Personally, I do not know what Zircon is. And I can only assume that he is.

[voyaka uh]

Please tell me what I was wrong about the X-32?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

This is a liquid rocket :)))) And on ships, especially on submarines, they would put anti-ship missiles with solid propellant rocket engines

[voyaka uh]

So what? The liquid engine will only start
in the stratosphere. A solid rocket will push a rocket there
booster.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: voyaka uh

So what? The liquid engine will only start
in the stratosphere. A solid rocket will push a rocket there
booster.

This is fantastic :))) In fact, the X-22 is a very problematic missile due to the complexity of its refueling. Its record-breaking performance characteristics were obtained through the use of liquid fuel, but it is so malicious that the rocket refuel only before launch. In general, no one will ever drag such a ship

[voyaka uh]

But if on foggy Zircon a ramjet engine
(which I doubt very much), it is also liquid.
In any case, it turns out that the engine is liquid.
If only Zircon, not a ballistic missile with a glider,
like the Vanguard (in the tactical version).
But such a BR is difficult to cram on a ship.
The option that Zircon is a redesigned X-32 looks realistic.
Then it’s clear why Americans are so indifferent to
to these tests. About X-32 (Kh-32 Kitchen according to their classification)
they know, and apparently she doesn’t really bother them.

[Lozovik]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

X-22 hit, and her speed reached 4,6 M

On the upper trajectory, M = 3,44. When entering into a dive, the engine is turned off to prevent exceeding the design speed of 2500 km / h.

[voyaka uh]

Clear. Otherwise, it will overheat on the descent, and the radar in the bow will melt.

[Lozovik]

Quote: voyaka uh

Clear. Otherwise, it will overheat on the descent, and the radar in the bow will melt.

To melt fiberglass, you need to really try! At high instrument speeds, the housing collapses under the influence of high-speed pressure.

[Avior]

The likelihood of RCC hitting the target obeys the same laws; on the training ground, one thing, in real life, another

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Avior

The likelihood of RCC hitting the target obeys the same laws; on the training ground, one thing, in real life, another

Yes. Volley launch perfectly solves this problem :)

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Not. We already had a similar advantage when we received supersonic anti-ship missiles in the 80s - the Americans learned to destroy them only at the beginning of the 20s. Now we are renewing this advantage, but ...
Hypersonic anti-ship missiles are a very serious deterrent and I am extremely glad that we will have them. But they will not change the strategy of war at sea

Once again, what do the high altitude supersonic huge RCCs provide, provided that there was no correction of target designation on them?
The legend did not have communication systems for transmitting signals to the ultimate weapon.

Why seek protection from a crumbling and fully managed fleet?
When the fleet got a little stronger and the total control of the Americans over our fleet sank into oblivion - then after that they did everything very quickly. Learned quickly.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: SovAr238A

Once again, what do the high altitude supersonic huge RCCs provide, provided that there was no correction of target designation on them?

Why do they need target designation correction? :))) For the same "Granit", the flight time is less than 12 minutes to the maximum range during this time, the target will shift by no more than 30-11 km even by 12 knots. And the range of the AGSN missile is about 80 km. In general, one of the advantages of supersonic missiles is precisely the fact that they do not need to be guided in flight.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: SovAr238A

Once again, what do the high altitude supersonic huge RCCs provide, provided that there was no correction of target designation on them?

Why do they need target designation correction? :))) For the same "Granit", the flight time is less than 12 minutes to the maximum range during this time, the target will shift by no more than 30-11 km even by 12 knots. And the range of the AGSN missile is about 80 km. In general, one of the advantages of supersonic missiles is precisely the fact that they do not need to be guided in flight.

Well, to be precise, then not 12, but 18 ...
And all 18 minutes a rocket under the gun of all means of air defense and electronic warfare.

And the effect of electronic warfare on supersonic missiles has a much stronger significance than on subsonic ones.
It is extremely difficult to guarantee target selection against the background of the powerful action of electronic warfare, electronic warfare, passive dipole fields, because the separation of the dipole cloud as a target, from the ship as a target, is possible only by relative displacement from each other, and for this you just need time for the cloud to settle partially, to change the speed of both goals, to change the location, to change the EPR.

All this leads to the fact that most of the missiles were subsonic, you know or not?
And at supersonic, in 2,5M? And there work only in ideal conditions.

Therefore, no one at the time was afraid of our supersonic rockets.
Beware, for the chance, even at 1%, is a chance for the death of the ship, but were not afraid.

The only reliable system for using these missiles was low-altitude flight.
He was deadly to amers.
But alas. 120-130 km.
For the 7 ton colossus ...
And at such a launch distance - AUG and KUG simply will not give a chance to go on the attack in real combat conditions.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: SovAr238A

Well, to be precise, then not 12, but 18 ...

To be precise, then Mach 2,5 (approximately 1062 km / h) is 2655 km / h.
500 km / 2655 km / h = 0,188 hours or 11,29 minutes

Quote: SovAr238A

And all 18 minutes a rocket under the gun of all means of air defense and electronic warfare.

Sorry, but this is absolutely fantastic. "All air defense" - a pair of Tomkats if they are in the air and accidentally find themselves in the right place. And if they manage to use Phoenixes, which were not given to combat pilots at all, because they are very expensive. In general, the accuracy of the URVV fire without practice will be ... not too high. Especially in a difficult jamming environment (and the anti-ship missiles were able to do this).
Further - these are "standards", which in the 80s and 90s had a range of 167 km and only by 1998 received 240 km. It is almost unrealistic to ensure the detection of targets, their illumination, and even manage to apply the Standards in a couple of minutes, and the chances of hitting targets (covered, again, electronic warfare) are minuscule. After going to lows, the Americans had nothing to hit the anti-ship missiles - the sparrow could only hit by accident, the phalanx did not solve anything.
EW remained.

Quote: SovAr238A

And the effect of electronic warfare on supersonic missiles has a much stronger significance than on subsonic ones.

You are mistaken a little more than completely. The effectiveness of electronic warfare generally does not depend much on the speed of the rocket, unless in the sense that they often simply did not have time to use them.

Quote: SovAr238A

It is extremely difficult to guarantee target selection against the background of the powerful action of electronic warfare, electronic warfare, passive dipole fields, because the separation of the dipole cloud as a target, from the ship as a target, is possible only by relative displacement from each other, and for this you just need time for the cloud to settle partially, to change the speed of both goals, to change the location, to change the EPR.

All this leads to the fact that most of the missiles were subsonic, you know or not?

This is wrong even in theory, since GOS RCCs could determine the speed of the target. Such selection takes a minimum of time.

Quote: SovAr238A

And at supersonic, in 2,5M? And there work only in ideal conditions.

And supersonic 2,5M - on the marching section, when the use of dipoles is generally meaningless. After the rocket goes down, it’s 1,5M. Taking into account the fact that the flight time (leaving the radio horizon — hitting the target) took about one and a half minutes, target selection is more than possible.

Quote: SovAr238A

And at such a launch distance - AUG and KUG simply will not give a chance to go on the attack in real combat conditions.

Taking into account the fact that they managed to miss the British destroyer during the exercises, which managed to unidentified approach the EMNIP "Midway" at a distance of visual visibility? :)))
Real combat conditions are not when a range is taken for the Americans, but for us a real battle. This is a real fight for everyone. But in reality, the same British surface ships at the Falklands could do almost nothing subsonic attack aircraft with free-falling bombs. Supersonic RCC - an order of magnitude more complex goal

[SovAr238A]

Andrei, what do you think, in what part of the horizon dipole reflectors shoot out, and how does the ship's course change after the shooting?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: SovAr238A

Andrei, what do you think, in what part of the horizon dipole reflectors shoot out, and how does the ship's course change after the shooting?

Al, what's the difference? :)))))

[Observer2014]

Quote: Doccor18

These weapons must have greatly changed the strategy of warfare at sea.

Yes. Instead of conventional warheads, the adversary will supply low-power nuclear warheads. And literally everything will be cut out by them and everything that will threaten him in case of invasion. The only thing that saves us. This is SYAS. God bless you guys. And all who are involved in this.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: Doccor18

These weapons must have greatly changed the strategy of warfare at sea.

Hypersonic anti-ship missiles are obliged to change not only the strategy of war at sea, but also, being practically unbreakable, affect the balance of power and reduce to zero the importance of aircraft carriers as mobile bridgeheads to ensure superiority in aggression against "obstinate" countries.
And with the absence of the threat of destruction (causing irreparable damage to the enemy), political forces will cease to be afraid of the overseas fist.
As our strategists calculated, 2-4 hits will be enough to incapacitate an aircraft carrier. Other escort ships “kill” one or two.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: ROSS 42

Hypersonic anti-ship missiles MUST

They do not owe you anything :))))

[mark1]

That is, to the final result, to us as to Beijing in the pose of the ranger. And there everyone else will catch up ...

[lucul]

That is, to the final result, to us as to Beijing in the pose of the ranger. And there, and everyone else will catch up ...

The goals are astounding, flying ....
They want to fully verify the operability from different carriers and fill out statistics.
And so, if necessary, will be adopted even tomorrow. It is enough to recall how La-5 was adopted during the war .....

[mark1]

Quote: lucul

will be adopted even tomorrow.

Well, if even tomorrow, then this is a completely different matter! ...

[Boa kaa]

Quote: lucul

They want to fully verify the operability from different carriers and fill out statistics.

About carriers. Kazan apparently got ready to "take a long time" if she was appointed, but she was not ready ... I am extremely worried about her "health", because The "Emov" project is essentially "lessons and conclusions" from the foundation, which, after a certain stage of operation, is ruled and set on the right path.
Either the crew is still unfinished, so they decided to use Severodvinsk, and Kazan to start working out the course and go look at the pastures of Elk and Gadgets to confirm the potential laid down in it.
We won’t guess, we’ll see.
IMHO.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: BoA KAA

Quote: lucul

They want to fully verify the operability from different carriers and fill out statistics.

About carriers. Kazan apparently got ready to "take a long time" if she was appointed, but she was not ready ... I am extremely worried about her "health", because The "Emov" project is essentially "lessons and conclusions" from the foundation, which, after a certain stage of operation, is ruled and set on the right path.
Either the crew is still unfinished, so they decided to use Severodvinsk, and Kazan to start working out the course and go look at the pastures of Elk and Gadgets to confirm the potential laid down in it.
We won’t guess, we’ll see.
IMHO.

I think that you are a little wrong.
Severodvinsk is a project based on available components.
Almost everything for Severodvinsk was available.

For Kazan, they did everything from scratch.
.
Remember the news.
According to data from April 2015, the Russian Navy intended to get 2023 Ash-tree and 1 Ash-M by 6.

16 May 2019, 19: 17
In the submarine project "Ash-M" found "design flaws"
Last year, tests of one of the submarines of this project - "Kazan" - were disrupted. Now they are "not easy," the head of the USC admitted. “Testing the boat is not easy. First of all, we are talking about developing control systems that are used for the first time on this submarine. In addition, I will not hide, a number of design flaws were revealed, ”he said.
and a month later, bonnets flew again ...
Wacky Wacky ..
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY SALON - 201910 JUL 2019, 10:24
The Russian Navy will receive several submarines of the Yasen-M and Borey-A projects in 2020

In fact, Kazan will enter the fleet no earlier than 2022, and Novosibirsk in 2023-2024.
it is not known that the designers were so hard on them, maybe a reduction in the length of the hull by 10 meters completely nullified the entire potential of the boat. Maybe something else.
But they did a lot ... And most importantly, there is no one to punish ... Tens and hundreds of billions of money in losses due to "every mistake has a specific name" - and there is no one to punish ...
And most importantly - if the problem is really with the hulls of the boats - then ... all the first 6 hulls are already either made or in operation.
And what do you know?
That series will definitely fail.
And with the right shift of the first two boats for 4-5 years - we get a full shift of this project until 2032-2033.
Our economy and our military-industrial complex - previously clearly stated that at the same time as Yasen-M and Laiku / Husky - it will not pull. There is no way to work in parallel. And that was said at a good time.
Now there is such a systemic crisis throughout the global economy that it is just right to howl for the next 10-15 years.
And there will be no money for the military-industrial complex in such quantities.
Respectively Laika / Husky - by the end of 30 codes. Alas, before.

[3danimal]

He asked: “tomorrow” they have been waiting for the adoption of Zircon since 2011. Faith and patience are valuable qualities.

[Tusv]

Quote: mark1

That is, to the final result, to us as to Beijing in the pose of the ranger. And there everyone else will catch up ...

If the Americans had an analogue of Zircon in the same degree of readiness for the current test program, then the Yankees have already boasted for six months that their product has reached the initial combat readiness. Why,? Because the tests are in full swing already on carriers and relatively new ships are already wrapping up for modernization.

[mark1]

Yes, I am also for Soviet power, but after all, as in real life - "Armata" (yo-ya-ya! I personally yelled), Su-57, S-500 (how happy I was), everything seems to be "even tomorrow" .. But !!! they say we need to wait a little, otherwise they have pulled out too far ahead

[Tusv]

Quote: mark1

But!!! they say you have to wait a bit, otherwise you’ve taken too far ahead

And why are we sanctioned by sanctions? Think to tear the economy to shreds and isolate the global power nafig? Not fools zhezh. The element base is South Korean (s-350, S-500), Japanese composites (Su-57), French thermal imagers (Armata) German engines (frigates of the ocean admiral series). In general, they didn’t rip it off, but slowed it down. Otherwise, the imperialists would become completely sour. And in rocket science we have everything of our own. You won't slow it down

[mark1]

Quote: Tusv

The element base is South Korean (s-350, S-500), Japanese composites (Su-57), French thermal imagers (Armata) German engines (frigates of the ocean admiral series).

Yeah! Trouble came from where they did not wait! Why didn’t they wait? Someone receives a small salary for this! (at least they wouldn’t be in a hurry to beat drums and timpani - not decently)

[Tusv]

Quote: mark1

At least they wouldn’t be in a hurry to beat drums and timpani - not decently

Well, according to the Zircons, the American press reported the successful tests, and not Our media. They didn’t want, but I had to

[sanik2020]

Here it’s better not to rush, the rocket is not a plane or a tank, you can’t bring it to mind in the army.
It just has to fly away and is guaranteed to hit.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: sanik2020

Here it’s better not to rush, the rocket is not a plane or a tank, you can’t bring it to mind in the army.
It just has to fly away and is guaranteed to hit.

You know, among the users of the site there are many people who have spent part of their lives (in uniform) not in the House of Friendship, or in some other DOSA, DO, DOF, etc. Most of them even know that in a rocket, unlike an airplane or a tank, no crew. It's just that they, who served a country that “made galoshes for African countries), are surprised by the haste with which priority state (priority) orders are carried out.
How was it in the USSR?

The OKB order to begin work on the creation of the MiG-25 aircraft (item 84, theme E-155) was issued on March 10, 1961. Factory tests of the experimental machine E-155R-1 began on March 6, 1964, the machine E-155P-1 September 9, 1964 ....
In 1969, at the Gorky aircraft plant, the serial production of MiG-25P fighters began, which were officially adopted by the air defense aviation in 1970.

And, mind you, no one shouted about the presence of the aircraft, nor about its performance characteristics.
What we have with Zircon:

RIA Novosti announced the beginning of the tests of Zircon on March 17, 2016 with reference to an unnamed "high-ranking representative of the military-industrial complex" ...
On February 19, 2016, plans were announced for deploying Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missiles on the Peter the Great heavy nuclear missile cruiser
According to the head of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security Viktor Bondarev, Zircon rocket is already part of the Arsenal and its deployment is planned under the new state weapons program for 2018-2027

And here is the article again:

The timelines for adopting the Zircon hypersonic missile became known

Here, involuntarily, different thoughts come to mind about RCC and about a cross with shorts ...
So, the rocket flew away and really struck our imagination ...

[Shahno]

Of course, I may be somewhat incredulous. From my point of view, applications for adoption by a certain date are ... well, you know it yourself, you can write 22,23 any year ... Not 20

[lucul]

Of course, I may be somewhat incredulous. From my point of view, applications for adoption by a certain date are ...

And how do you make the calculations? If everything is calculated correctly, then there will be a result. And then, you can take it into service on a "beautiful" date ...

[Grigory_45]

Quote: lucul

Of course, I may be somewhat incredulous. From my point of view, applications for adoption by a certain date are ...

And how do the designer do the calculations? If everything is calculated correctly, then there will be a result.

tests - an unpredictable thing. In the process of their implementation, anything can happen. Moreover, a hypersonic missile is also a new thing. Therefore, to call ahead of time a specific date of adoption for service is like a finger in the sky.

[Maas]

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?
Thanks so much if you give the link.

[Sky strike fighter]

Well, unless if only the test of Moscow missile defense in slow motion.

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Maas

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?

Well, what will you see?
There are no such cameras to capture the flight at such speeds

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Lipchanin

There are no such cameras to capture the flight at such speeds

where did they go? Firstly, there is accelerated shooting, and secondly, the point is the angle and distance. Do you think meteorites have ever been shot? And they have hypersonic speed

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Gregory_45

Firstly, there is accelerated shooting, and secondly, the point is the angle and distance.

You can’t throw off a link to such a video?

[Grigory_45]

look for a video with the fall of the "Chelyabinsk meteorite"

I myself watched him when he passed over our area, very high in the atmosphere. Only a relatively fast moving point and an inverse trace were visible.

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Gregory_45

look for a video with the fall of the "Chelyabinsk meteorite"

Should I search?
Why such a fright?
And the conversation is not about a meteorite but

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?
Thanks so much if you give the link.

Well, where is the reference?

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Lipchanin

Should I search?
Why such a fright?

it was interesting for you to see an object flying in hypersound) And you didn’t believe that such an object could be shot on camera. So you are interested in watching, or are you just arguing for the sake of argument?

If anything, then Zircon was not shown to any of the uninitiated. Even the layout. And photo. And you wanted the video) Yeah ..)

Quote: Lipchanin

And the conversation is not about a meteorite but

and a hypersonic meteorite. Tea flew in from space, coming at almost the same speed as a nuclear warhead.

By the way, modern BOPs leave the gun barrel in hypersound, they can also be seen with the naked eye, they are captured on photo and video cameras.

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Gregory_45

it was interesting to you to see an object flying in hypersound)

Well, firstly, in confirmation of their words, you should find it and give me a link to the video. I am not going to seek confirmation of your words.
This is at least stupid.
Secondly, the conversation was not about an abstract object, but about a very real one.
Once again I will quote the phrase with which the conversation began

You can watch the video somewhere where is the rocket flying with hypersonic speed?
Thanks so much if you give the link.

Well, where is the meteorite here?
You dragged the meteorite yourself, and even myself to look for it.

If anything, then Zircon was not shown to any of the uninitiated. Even the layout. And photo. And you wanted the video) Yeah ..)

And this is the height of arrogance, it turns out I wanted

and a hypersonic meteorite. Tea flew in from space, coming at almost the same speed as a nuclear warhead.

Yes, even a super duper sound. It was a rocket, and you got a meteorite in your head and you’re pushing it into me

[Grigory_45]

do not be nervous)

Quote: Lipchanin

it turns out i wanted

then who?

Quote: Lipchanin

Quote: Maas
Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?

Well, what will you see?
There are no such cameras to capture the flight at such speeds

What did the meteorite not please you as a hypersonic object? What is the fundamental difference with a rocket?

Quote: Lipchanin

Well, firstly, in confirmation of their words, you should find it and give me a link to the video.

it means, all the same, a dispute for the sake of argument. The community is getting smaller, it is getting smaller .. Usually, when something is interesting, they themselves find it, all the more so what to look for is said
https://youtu.be/KG3mhbUHgUU

If you need a rocket that’s not applicable, then dig in the network, maybe you’ll be lucky, and you will find shots of tests of the American Boeing X-51 rocket or the North Amerikan X-15 rocket plane

[Avior]

Sometimes you can see a space station moving across the sky
It's all about the distance to the observer and the flight path

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: Maas

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?
Thanks so much if you give the link.

Do you doubt that Russian missiles fly at hypersonic speed? There is difficulty in creating materials for the rocket and reliable guidance systems at such a speed ...
We also “believe” that the Americans landed on the moon ...

[Shahno]

Quote: Tusv

Quote: mark1

That is, to the final result, to us as to Beijing in the pose of the ranger. And there everyone else will catch up ...

If the Americans had an analogue of Zircon in the same degree of readiness for the current test program, then the Yankees have already boasted for six months that their product has reached the initial combat readiness. Why,? Because the tests are in full swing already on carriers and relatively new ships are already wrapping up for modernization.

I do not quite understand what the Yankees are here ... If Zircon had a situation like with F 35 .. That is, it is, everyone sees its drawbacks, advantages. You can scold, but he is. Explain to me how you can express an assessment of what is only in projects and layouts



.

[Tusv]

Quote: Shahno

I do not quite understand, where does the Yankees

What is the current state of Zircon? The Yankees is the initial combat readiness. We have no such concept. Just a test phase.

Explain to me how you can express an assessment of what is only in projects and layouts

Wow mockup with proven features by the Americans themselves. Or do you still believe that Zircon is a cartoon?

[askort154]

Further plans for testing the Zircon hypersonic rocket were not announced, the rocket developer - NPO Mashinostroyeniya - declined to comment on this information.

This is the whole point. It used to be intelligence bread. Now the media is doing it - Means Massive Information. And modern intelligence widely uses the media in the direction it needs, taking into account the interests of its states. True secrets in the media do not "leak", except for special stuffing as bait, or advertising
for their defense industry.

[Shahno]

Quote: Lipchanin

Quote: Maas

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?

Well, what will you see?
There are no such cameras to capture the flight at such speeds

That is, there is no evidence ..

[Shahno]

Quote: askort154

Further plans for testing the Zircon hypersonic rocket were not announced, the rocket developer - NPO Mashinostroyeniya - declined to comment on this information.

This is the whole point. It used to be intelligence bread. Now the media is doing it - Means Massive Information. And modern intelligence widely uses the media in the direction it needs, taking into account the interests of its states. True secrets in the media do not "leak", except for special stuffing as bait, or advertising
for their defense industry.

You really think intelligence isn’t up to date.

[Mentat]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

5 out of 6, by one plane.

Aha one plane the whole salvo. Well, do not tell the "analogs" of Granites, Basalts, Volcanoes in the form of targets with incomprehensible performance characteristics.

This creature, mvg (Maxim), spoils the air here on an ongoing basis, as soon as it comes to even the slightest advance of Russia, or about some achievements. This is his task. Seriously consider his writing is not worth it. He will not provide any real arguments. It is possible and necessary to counterarguise how you are doing so that this information mold does not climb the forum.

[Mentat]

Quote: mvg

And they shot down a lot?

5 out of 6, by one plane. Targets mimicked the X-22 launched from the Tu-22. These are analogues of our granites, basalts, volcanoes. The same pillar-shaped 7 tons of rockets from Chalome.
Old themselves, not difficult.

Allegedly, somewhere serving a miracle of judo, pouring mud at the achievements of his (?) Country, not even a foot about what he is trying to broadcast.
That the targets were not “the same pillar-shaped 7 ton rockets from Chalome”, but this:

The converted antediluvian aircraft, which flew in tests on a completely different profile, had a radically different resistance from Granites to damage by explosive rockets and a different flight speed.

But he needs to blurt out something nasty in the topic about the latest weapons of Russia.

[75 Sergey]

And I thought they’ll already be armed with the Russian Federation

[Old26]

Quote: Sergey S.

For I don’t understand why, ahead of time, we are voiced by certain parameters (properties, terms ...) of the most modern weapons

The speech, Sergei, is not even that certain parameters are voiced. It is very difficult to hide it. The question is different - indicating the date of putting into service. After all, tests are an unpredictable thing. If you look at the tests of the same families P-36 and P-36M, then it was such that the hair stands on end. Okay, obviously the firstborn could walk hard and there were 43 tests. But the subsequent modifications, which were not fundamentally different - on the contrary, 74 tests. Then comes the R-36M family. It seems that the developments on the previous family were used and the difference is only in the method of launch - but the R-36M went into series after 43 tests, the R-36M UTTKh - after 19 and finally the R-36M2 Voevoda - after 26 more tests.

And here a completely new industry (hypersonic controlled flight and guidance in the atmosphere - and they already speak in advance about the date of entry into service

Quote: Sergey S.

In my understanding of the reasons, there may be two:
1. To mislead the enemy.
2. Calm your own people.

It’s very difficult to mislead the adversary, since he tries to track the tests in the first place, and in the second place many things are easily calculated. They have specialists, the physics we have is the same.
But to reassure their people or even cause a state of euphoria among the people - this is what we love. it is enough to recall the speech of the President two years ago. The euphoria is over the top. Whoever has not discussed these weapons systems, even women who are very far from all this. But the effect before the election was undoubted

Quote: Mobius

Or maybe they are already in service

Are you serious? Or maybe we already have bases on the moons of Jupiter, but no one tells us about it? Intelligence does not eat its own bread for nothing, this is the first thing. And secondly, we and the Americans most often go head to head in our developments ... We have been dealing with Zircon for 9 years, but only now have we come to the stage that precedes adoption. The Americans started before us, then they abandoned the topic as an expensive one, now the work has begun.

Quote: Pavel57

In the EW match against anti-ship missiles, the score is in favor of EW.

You will use electronic warfare to knock a rocket off course, including and on the INS or, for example, responding to the radio emission of the ship? And if the GOS is combined? Then only hope for an "air defense umbrella"

[Pavel57]

A missile going only to the ANN will not fall into a moving target, or rather it will fall with a small probability. A missile with a passive CWG will hit. But I'm not sure that it is registered in Zircon. An active CWG is susceptible to interference. This was discussed. Thermal seekers on hypersonic missiles are doubtful. Combined heads are too complex. Do they exist in nature, I do not remember.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

Combined heads are too complex. Do they exist in nature, I do not remember.

combined guidance systems, multi-range seekers are less likely to be affected by electronic warfare. The rocket is also complicated and expensive to save on the guidance system.

Quote: Pavel57

A missile going only to the ANN will not hit the moving target

it all depends on speed. If the anti-ship missile, for example, shoots a hypersonic block 15-20 km from the ship, then, due to its high speed, it will be able to hit the target (it simply will not have time to leave the affected area)

[Pavel57]

The conversation is not about 15-20 km. And about 1000km. And more.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

The conversation is not about 15-20 km. And about 1000km. And more

what prevents a rocket from marching on a supersonic marching section, before attacking a target (for 15-20 km, the range of the GOS capture) firing a hypersonic warhead?

[Pavel57]

Gregory, you offer a scheme that does not apply to hypersonic weapons. Moreover, it is implemented in one of the Club family missiles.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Pavel57

The whiter it is implemented in one of the Club family missiles

in the RCC of the Caliber family, the combat stage is supersonic. But not the point

Quote: Pavel57

offer a scheme that does not apply to hypersonic weapons.

so we don’t know according to what scheme RCC Zircon is implemented. Information is zero.

[Pavel57]

Everything has its time.

[Avior]

Or inertial at such ranges on hypersound fails to precisely withstand the trajectory
There was a case of a non-seeker entering the Monsoon, but this is an accident

[Old26]

Quote: Yuzhmash

The Russian Federation has never been a missile power, unlike Ukraine, and all the developments of the times of the USSR, where they were mainly conducted in Ukraine, they simply use, modernize, but do not produce anything new. Take the same rocket Satan, and then, as Major General Pyotr Garashchuk, the head of the Ukrainian commission under NATO (2008-2011), said, I quote: “We have all the intellectual, organizational, and financial capabilities you can find and release your own nuclear weapons and not only bombs but also missile heads.In the world today there is no such plant for the production of intercontinental ballistic missiles as was in the USSR, and then in Independent Ukraine, in Dnepropetrovsk.Neither the USA, nor China, nor Russia could produce an analogue for Satan-class missiles Launch of the Dnepr conversion launch vehicle (P-36M
according to the classification of the US and NATO Defense Forces - SS-18 Mod.1,2,3 Satan) based on the ICBM 15A18 complex.

Of course not. Only Ukraine. Isn't it funny to write that? This means that about one hundred and fifty Yars are not in service with the Russian Strategic Missile Forces, because Russia did not make them. "Bulava" does not exist either. Not to mention the Iskander ..

As for nuclear weapons, a nuclear weapons complex is needed to create them. And Ukraine does not have it. Only uranium mining and possibly operating GOKs. There is no centrifuge production. No uranium metal production. You have such financial capacities that of all the projects of ballistic missiles (and they will get much less money than the production of nuclear weapons) you have not brought ANY of your ballistic missiles to flight tests. Both "Borisfen" and "Sapsan" remained on paper. Here you are far behind even Iran and North Korea. Maybe there will be intellectual capacities in Ukraine, but organizational, and even more so industrial, are unlikely. Of course, if Ukraine does not dare to make a "dirty" bomb from spent nuclear fuel. But this, sorry, is not a nuclear, but a radiological weapon

Quote: Yuzhmash

The general knows something, once he makes such statements, intelligence works everywhere! After all, statements have been made recently.

Less listen to what the general says there. With us, generals can blurt out that too, that at least stand, even fall. And at the same time they have ranks and high posts

Quote: Yuzhmash

I repeat once again, missiles in Russia are missiles of the USSR, there is nothing new, there is only modernization of the old. An analogue to Iskander in Ukraine is Thunder-2, capable of carrying a nuclear charge, range 500-800 km)

Yars is a completely Russian development, as well as Topol-M, although the first two were made at Yuzhmash, but according to completely different terms of reference. "Rubezh" is a completely Russian development, "Barguzin" - too. "Sarmat" is the brainchild of the Russian State Research and Development Center named after Makeeva. I'm not even talking about Iskander. As for your Thunder-2, as an analogue of the Iskander, first conduct at least throw tests, not to mention flight tests, and then say that there is an analogue. Here you are also behind the DPRK, which was able to do something similar to the Iskander.
Range of 500-800 km ??? Ukraine is among the signatories of the Wassenaar Agreement. This means that it cannot supply missiles with a range of more than 300 km abroad. And "Thunder-2" is being made under a contract with Saudi Arabia and with their money. So you will have to do "Thunder-3", which may even reach a range of 500-800 km.

[Avior]

I think the problem is not in the technical side and not financial
These missiles will not give Ukraine anything without a special warhead, so they are in no hurry to allocate money for them, it makes no sense
With a nuclear charge, the problem is also not primarily technical or financial, as you understand

[Ronald Reagan]

I really hope
that Zircon will come to visit much earlier and my wish in this matter will be taken into account now ...

[shadow]

It is written that everything is going according to plan. Why did you make a fuss? Probably someone is very burnt, that's yelling.

[Angry]

Here we are ... Something we are planning, planning, but our plans may not come true ... Example - ZRAK Pantsir-M .... well, where is he? Shuya, as she was without him, will probably be written off without him ... but for how many years was she kept as a stand? So it is here ... all we have is "the skin of a not killed bear." You will test everything in secret, and then inform the people and take a ride across Red Square ... and so ... Why warn the enemy that we will appear? In order for him to invent an "antidote"? How is it now that there will be Zircon in another three years? And our "opponents" will sit and wait all this time?

[Maks1995]

I did not count and did not track, but it seems, I remember 3 similar articles.

And the timing, too, seems to go farther and farther. And about the amount of silence in general

[huntsman650]

It’s not entirely clear to me what to do when RCC and ORS fly to NK at the same time? It seems only electronic warfare? and MZA sighting column?

[Avior]

If the rap is not able to steal both of them, then the problem

[huntsman650]

https://forum.sevastopol.info/viewtopic.php?t=270240

[Avior]

There is also an automatic optical guidance

[huntsman650]

We have? Where? Speed ​​PRSa 1000m.s.

[Avior]

I basically wrote what happens.
Dagger has, for example.
Active traps that exist in nature exist, such as Nulka among Australians and Americans, and there are passive ones.
In the well-known real combat cases, the real defense of the ship is electronic warfare and trap shots, while the cases when they shot down are not very many.
There was a case, for example, when, in the Iraq war, the British caught up with the Iraqi anti-ship missiles flying to the American battleship.
But in general, for a ship, a theoretically simultaneous mass attack by two types of missiles, or, as an option, part of anti-ship missiles or anti-aircraft guns, which are also used as PKR will be included in passive guidance, is a problem. But, to be honest, I can’t recall such a real case in a combat situation.
In fact, all known cases described are an attack by subsonic anti-ship missiles within the radio horizon.
True, there are also cases of anti-aircraft attacks on ships, as in a battle with Georgians or with the Americans in the operation of the Mantis against the Iranians

[huntsman650]

The speed of the anti-radar missile is 1000 m.s. what method of dealing with them ?. There was a dagger and a dagger, but in the exercises there was always an introductory shot to remove high, when classifying the target as anti-radar?
I am one year younger than the commander of an MRK, who allegedly shot from the air defense system at the Georgians. With a greater degree of probability, they did not shoot the OCO. He himself is silent like a fish, and on one forum in Sevastopol there is a debriefing, with photos, they write that the air defense system was not used, in general, a muddy story.

[Avior]

With that which is not completely clear with the history of the Georgians, I agree
But the Americans on Iranians accurately shot at the operation Mantis
Then finished off with Harpoons
The use of an anti-radar missile or another with a hint at a radiation source is obvious, but in a real combat situation, use- I have never read such
I don’t know why, But, then, There are nuances
Perhaps because the main method of protection is trapped traps, including active ones?

[huntsman650]

Microwaves overboard!)))

[Avior]

And dinner on what to warm then?

The Mk234 Nulka system is the most successful among the active traps of the new generation; more than 1000 shots were delivered. According to the latest reports, by the year 2019 Nulka will go into service with the 166 ships, mainly Australian, Canadian and American fleets. The system is jointly produced by BAE Systems Australia (carrier, ship electronics and launcher) and Lockheed Martin (electronic filling)

There are many others

The standard size C-GEM dipole reflector booster includes a low-power generator and emitters with an effective radiation power that generate a powerful jamming signal. According to Rafael, the main features of C-GEM are the wideband range, increased spatial coverage, active semiconductor antenna and electronic beam control, as well as “shot-forget” and quick response functions.

https://topwar.ru/104087-korabelnye-sistemy-funkcionalnogo-porazheniya-chast-2.html

[huntsman650]

I didn’t know, Yugoslavs used corner reflectors on land. And they covered all the standards for curtailing and changing positions. One case is described when a PRR was aimed at a ploughshare in a field using a reflected signal.

[Avior]

there are links and angles there are shot

The Israeli navy is armed with anti-radar false target Wizard (Wideband Zapping Anti-Radar Decoy) from Rafael, which was demonstrated to NATO fleets in 2007 year. An uncontrolled feathered rocket Wizard with a solid-fuel engine with a diameter of 115 mm deploys an angle reflector that distracts or lures anti-ship missiles with a radar guidance system, generating a reflected signal similar to the ship's EPR, from 1500 to 4000 square. meters

[Lipchanin]

Quote: Gregory_45

do not be nervous)

And don't dream

then who?

Juggling master
It was about a rocket, but a meteorite came from somewhere, I asked to show a video about a rocket, but it turns out it cannot be seen, but I have to find a video about a meteorite
Masterpiece

What did the meteorite not please you as a hypersonic object? What is the fundamental difference with a rocket?

La me your meteorite was walking through the forest. It was about a rocket and I answered a question about ROCKET
The third time I quote the beginning of the conversation

Can I see a video somewhere where a rocket flies at hypersonic speed?

Where did you see the word METEORITES ????
ROCKET man needs, well, not a meteorite.
You came to the cinema for one movie, and you were shown another
In response to your indignation, they told you, but this is also a movie. Why doesn’t it suit you?
You do not catch the difference between the rocket and the meteorite?
I'll tell you. A meteorite is a celestial body.
Rocket, this is a weapon made by man

Usually, when something is interesting, they themselves find

Firstly, I have already seen these videos
Secondly, I am not interested
Thirdly, why should I seek confirmation of YOUR words?
That you must confirm your words not me.

If you need a rocket that’s not applicable,

-
I do not need
Need a forum member Maas (Ruslan).
But if you tell him this

rummage through the net, maybe you’ll be lucky, and you will find shots of tests of the American Boeing X-51 rocket or the North American X-15 rocket plane

Then he will send you on a long erotic journey.
Pokedova, turn-over master
Well, read the post below.
In this way the person answered and no more questions arose.
This is not meteorites to consider

[lvov_aleksey]

it kills me accuracy, don't write more:
passed at the beginning of January 2020 or at the end of December 2019

[Fizik M]

New samples of hypersonic weapons significantly increase the combat capabilities of the Armed Forces, including the Navy. At the same time, effective application requires not just a good reconnaissance and target designation system on the theater of war, but a real solution to the problems at the required level, otherwise expensive hypersonic ammunition will go into milk. That is today the most difficult technical and organizational problem.
https://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/56044