US Air Force intends to equip B-1B Lancer bombers with hypersonic missiles

US Air Force intends to equip B-1B Lancer bombers with hypersonic missiles

The remaining strategic Rockwell B-1B Lancer bombers, which remain in operation, will be upgraded to equip them with promising hypersonic missiles AGM-183A ARRW (Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon) and a non-nuclear version being developed aviation strategic cruise missile LRSO (Long-Range Stand-Off). It is reported by the US Air Force Strategic Command.


As General Timothy Ray, commander of the US Air Force Strategic Command, explained, there are plans to modernize the remaining B-1B bombers after the reduction. In total, it is planned to write off 17 aircraft, and the remaining 44 will be modernized, which will include the restoration of eight external suspension units dismantled in connection with the Russian-American strategic arms reduction treaties, which provide for the abandonment of the use of B-1B bombers as nuclear carriers weapons.

My goal would be to get at least one squadron (18 aircraft - approx. BO) of B-1B aircraft equipped with external suspension components for carrying the ARRW hypersonic cruise missile

- declared the general.

At the same time, he noted that the modernization of V-1 has not yet been budgeted for the financial year 2021, but he is sure that funds will be allocated for this.

It was previously reported that the US Air Force, together with the Department of Defense Advanced Defense Research Agency (DARPA), is also working on the Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC). As part of this program, it is planned that the B-1B and B-52 bombers will be able to carry hypersonic missiles simultaneously on both the internal and external suspension. Using external pendants and the CSRL fuselage turret launcher, the B-1B could carry 31 hypersonic missiles simultaneously.


Photos used:
Giancarlo Casem / U.S. Air Force
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. Mavrikiy April 12 2020 08: 23 New
    • 13
    • 22
    -9
    US Air Force intends to equip B-1B Lancer bombers with hypersonic missiles
    This USA will not save. Left behind forever. repeat
    1. Tusv April 12 2020 08: 35 New
      • 3
      • 8
      -5
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      This USA will not save. Left behind forever.

      What missiles do they launch their missile targets for missile defense testing? Boeing. They’re a bit of a lift, stuffed into a Lancer and not at all funny
      1. Insurgent April 12 2020 09: 06 New
        • 8
        • 8
        0
        It was previously reported that the US Air Force, together with the Department of Defense Advanced Defense Research Agency (DARPA), is also working on the Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC). As part of this program, it is planned that the B-1B and B-52 bombers will be able to carry hypersonic missiles simultaneously on both the internal and external suspension. Using external pendants and the CSRL fuselage turret launcher, B-1B could simultaneously carry 31 hypersonic missiles.


        Thirty One Rocket... not bad, not bad yes

        But show at least onecapable of fully flying, carrying a combat load, and meeting hypersonic requirements ...

        1. bayard April 12 2020 10: 49 New
          • 5
          • 3
          +2
          Quote: Insurgent
          But, show at least one that is able to fully fly, carry a combat load, and meet hypersonic requirements ...

          In fact, this (airborne hypersonic aeroballistic missile) is not so difficult if you sculpt it on the basis of existing products. For example, based on the engine of an anti-aircraft missile, or anti-aircraft missile, as such. They had experience in creating aeroballistic missiles of this class, and it was precisely the V-1B that was their carrier. Our Tu-22M3 also had its own counterpart - the X-15.
          Our “Dagger!” Is an example of such a solution (aeroballistic from ballistic).
          Here's the funny in another -
          Quote: Insurgent
          Thirty-one rockets.

          THIRTY ONE. fellow
          On the "Lancer". belay
          Which has a maximum bomb load of 32 tons smile .
          Is that for ONE ton per rocket? laughing
          And ONE ton, on TWO launch drums and EIGHT wing pylons? wassat
          lol Do they blind them from cardboard?
          General Timothy Ray has surpassed even the youngest and most enthusiastic cheers of our site. fellow Bravo general! good soldier
          I amorted to fame.

          But I believe that EIGHT of these missiles will fit on its pylons. yes For just 4 tons each (Vanguard, Zircon and Onyx in the same weight category), this is normal.
          The question remains whether the V-1B airframes will put together modernization and such a load - they are old, worn out.
          1. Insurgent April 12 2020 10: 57 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            Quote: bayard
            In fact, this (airborne hypersonic aeroballistic missile) is not so difficult if you sculpt it on the basis of existing products. For example, based on the engine of an anti-aircraft missile, or anti-aircraft missile, as such. They had experience in creating aeroballistic missiles of this class, and it was precisely the V-1B that was their carrier.

            We are talking about real hypersound in M = 10-12, like the “Dagger”, and not about “ersatz”, not experimental prototypes, and “quasi hypersound”, isn't it?
            1. bayard April 12 2020 12: 40 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Quote: Insurgent
              We are talking about real hypersound in M ​​= 10-12, like the "Dagger"

              Says an American general. The fact that the United States will soon have an aeroballistic hypersonic air-based missile. Hypersound starts at 5M. , and I don’t think that the American rocket will far exceed this figure. I admit that the speed will be from 4 to 5M, and it will still be called that.
              There is no doubt that they are capable of making such a missile on the TTD, taking the engine of one of the missiles as the basis - they already had aeroballistic missiles and their speed was about 4,5M. (Range of about 400-500 km.). So there are no technical barriers here.
              But in the declared weight (judging by the declared V-1B ammunition of 31 missiles) this is impossible to achieve. Basically . Because in the rocket, in addition to the engine, there should also be: a warhead of several hundred kg. , AGSN, thermal protection ... all this has its weight in 1 t., Even in 1,5 t. All this does not fit. One and a half tons weighs the banal “Tomahawk” with a warhead of 400 kg. and a range of just over 1500 km.
              But they will be able to make a reduced analogue of our "Dagger". And it was precisely about this type of missiles that the American general spoke.
          2. ancient April 12 2020 12: 19 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: bayard
            Which has a maximum bomb load of 32 tons

            I allow myself to note that you are absolutely right in pointing to this “blunder” or .... as it is now called .. “advertising move” (both they and ours .. everywhere “everything is the same”) .
            Since if you hang a Gmax b / c on a plane, then .. it will be able to fly to ... 4th turn laughing (a joke, of course, but ... with a very large share of truth). soldier
            Therefore, in order to somehow fulfill the BZ, and in connection with the current restrictions, the US Air Force command decided to limit maximum take-off weight up to 145 150 kg, which led to a sharp decrease in the practical range with normal combat load (10 900 kg - eight SD SRAM and eight B61 bombs) up to 5950 km.
            Quote: bayard
            THIRTY ONE

            Well, they got excited ..... on B-1 there are only 3 compartments where 3 drums with 8 AGM-69 SRAM or AGM-158B missiles enter.


            Quote: bayard
            But the fact that EIGHT of these missiles will fit on its pylons, I believe

            And on pylons you can hang only 12 missiles wink


            Quote: bayard
            For just 4 tons each

            What kind of AKP do they have in 4 tons each? belay
            1. bayard April 12 2020 12: 52 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: ancient
              What kind of AKP do they have in 4 tons each?

              Yes, it was I who visually visually estimated the weight of that rocket, that not so long ago they dragged a model on a B-52 - 2,5 - 4 tons. It all depends on what range they want to get. If about 500 km. then it’s enough for them to repeat their
              Quote: ancient
              AGM-69 SRAM or AGM-158B.
              , and if something is more serious, with a range of up to 1000 km, then 2,5-3 tons are already easier. For a range of 1500 km, the starting weight will creep up to 4 tons. This is if we are talking about hypersonic speed at least in the middle section of the flight.
          3. ancient April 12 2020 13: 42 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: bayard
            Our Tu-22M3 also had its own analogue - X-15

            There was, but ... due to design flaws, the rocket was withdrawn from service.
            1.Very small launch range.
            2. "Attachment."
            3. The inability to convert the media to any other options (purely bomber or with the installation of the BD-45F).
            Previously, 3s with X-15 were outwardly distinguished - if “hedgehogs” (MBD-3-U9) hang, since no one canceled the bomber training, then this is from the X-15 .... if there are no hedgehogs, then ... clean with the X-22. Well, post t "hedgehogs" ost soldier wagged on a permanent basis.
            1. bayard April 12 2020 13: 56 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              So now it remains to wait for the Zircon to be air-based, and if 4 to 6 Zircons will be on the external sling, then the internal compartments can be used either to accommodate 2 drums for the X-50 (total 12 pcs.), Or to accommodate additional fuel tank (as is the case with V-1B). Everything will turn out quite harmoniously and completely without “hedgehogs”.
              1. ancient April 12 2020 14: 01 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Quote: bayard
                So now it remains to wait for the Zircon air-based

                Well yes ..... the most is left .. "small" drinks
                But the carrier is only Tu-95MS and Tu-160M ​​and M2 ... Tu-22M3 only if there are 3 missiles, but ... but what about SNiTSU ?.
                Indeed, under the x-32, almost everything is already there, but under the "Zircon" .... also the horse ... did not lie no
                1. bayard April 12 2020 14: 16 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: ancient
                  .Tu-22M3 only if 3 missiles

                  This is if you hang on the pylons from the X-22 one missile, and not two, like the Tu-95MSM, or during the modernization, make two pylons under the fixed part of the wing.
                  Or is the starting weight of the Zircon so large that it caught up with the X-22 \ 32? what
                  Zircon is still positioned as a missile system, and the Tu-22M3 is returned to naval aviation.
                  Quote: ancient
                  but ... but what about SNICU ?.
                  Indeed, under the x-32, almost everything is already there, but under the "Zircon" .... also the horse ... did not lie

                  Since only 30 Tu-22M3 are announced to be upgraded to the level of Tu-22M3M, and the rest will only be repaired and updated, I think that the former will receive the X-32, and the latter will receive the Zircon and X-50.
                  There were rumors about the desire to resume the construction of the Tu-22M3M or another modification from scratch (possibly using the reserve). If true, it would be nice to bring their total number to 100 - 120 units.
                  1. ancient April 12 2020 14: 55 New
                    • 3
                    • 0
                    +3
                    Quote: bayard
                    This is if you hang on the pylons from the X-22 one missile, and not two, like the Tu-95MSM, or during the modernization, make two pylons under the fixed part of the wing.

                    Already answered this question, even illustrated ... this act is not possible a priori wink
                    Quote: bayard
                    Or is the starting weight of the Zircon so large that it caught up with the X-22 \ 32?

                    6 tons at X-22/32.
                    Quote: bayard
                    Zircon is still positioned as a missile system, and the Tu-22M3 is returned to naval aviation

                    And the SUV of the airplane is already ... "ready" under the "Zircon"? ... I deeply doubt recourse
                    Quote: bayard
                    Since only 30 Tu-22M3 modernization is announced to the level of Tu-22M3M, and the rest will only be repaired and updated

                    Well, what and .. "to declare from .. high stands" we still love ... even though the USSR "blurted out" like that and didn’t do it, at least it flew off the post, and now .... well, what wassat
                    Yeah .... X-32 .... still ... "receive" crying
                    Quote: bayard
                    There were rumors about the desire to resume the construction of the Tu-22M3M or another modification from scratch (possibly using the reserve)

                    This complete utopia .. since there is no groundwork, like everything else soldier
                    1. bayard April 12 2020 16: 54 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: ancient
                      6 tons at X-22/32.

                      This figure (6 tons in the X-22) is well known. But the Zircon expected launch weight of the order of 4 - 4,5 tons.
                      Or I'm wrong ?
                      I judge by its dimensions, because it starts from UKKS, so the diameter is 640 - 650 mm. like onyx. And its length is about the same - the size of UKKS is one. The specific gravity cannot differ much, because both ramjet engines have approximately the same warhead. .. So - 4 - 4,5 tons.
                      THREE Zircons are TWO X-22 in weight.
                      Therefore, the task is facilitated precisely in the case of the Zircon - less weight, more fuel, more radius, less load on the glider.
                      In my opinion, all in one cash desk. request and 3 missiles on suspensions (Zircon) will give the line of destruction of targets from the take-off point of 2500 - 3000 km. (3000 km. in the case of the use of an additional intrafuselage tank of about 10 tons). With refueling and even more.
                      12 tons for a glider is not at all an overload, but a classic norm (50% of max.).
                      1. ancient April 13 2020 10: 22 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Quote: bayard
                        12 tons for a glider is not at all an overload, but a classic norm (50% of max.).

                        Confuse "soft" with warm " wink - Of course, 12 tonnes of b / c is not an overload, that's just the goal, well, or the launch line should be ... "not far away" bully or you will need to relocate to .. "the very shore of the sea .." laughing", which is fraught with receiving ..." across the proletarian face "than anything from under the water wink
                        you don’t think the probable opponent is really quite .. "stupid" and he. the opponent will humbly sit and wait while you deign to prepare to fill him .. "face"? wink
                        You already decide ... or BC or fuel (tactical range) wink a .. "rubber tank" wassat ..... and where are the maximum take-off weight ... where are you? wink
                        Quote: bayard
                        THREE “Zircons” are equal in weight to TWO X-22

                        Well, I heard a little about other "weights" winkbut even with your weights it’s 1,5-2 tons more.
                        And there is still such a “thing” as CLS ... very much affects the specific fuel consumption crying
                        They paid attention, and with what “wing” did they fly to Syria? wink That's right ... absolutely " bully smooth "
                      2. bayard April 13 2020 13: 59 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: ancient
                        You confuse the "soft" with the warm "- 12 tonnes of b / c certainly is not overload, that's just the goal, well, or the launch line should be ..." not far away "or you will need to relocate to .." the very shore of the sea .. "okiyana"

                        If, with such a combat mission, there are 500 km. to fly over the native expanses, then it’s not a sin to refuel at the coastline, since the refueling rods are already starting to return where you want. yes
                        But even without it, even when starting from the turn of 500 km. from the native coast, the range of defeat will be up to 2000 km. , and this is quite a lot.
                        ... And I wouldn’t really want to get in the face, and even from under the water no , although the "face" of the native Fatherland is now difficult to call proletarian ... I even find it difficult to classify this phenomenon ... repeat but with PLO we really have so far no Not really .

                        Quote: ancient
                        You already decide ... or BC or fuel (tactical range) a .. "rubber tank" ..... and where are the maximum take-off weight ... where will you "get"?

                        You want to say that 24 tons of maximum load is achieved only with underfilling of fuel by half the weight of the load? what This changes a lot ... I thought, if max. load 24 tons, and BC only 12 - 14 tons, then the remaining reserve can be used for additional fuel in the bomb bay. And, by the way, in the V-1B add. the fuel tank is half the bomb bay, and it’s not rubber at all, but quite dural, just 10-12 tons (I don’t remember exactly now).
                        This is the combination I had in mind.
                        But if 24 tons of load, this is minus 12 tons of fuel. what request , I just have no words ... Only two missiles, especially if they are almost like an X-22 weighing ... which was somewhat surprising, based on the dimensions.
                        Quote: ancient
                        And there is still such a “thing” as CLS ... very much affects the specific fuel consumption

                        This is just understandable, but the Zircon has no wings, only stabilizers, but the pylons remain ... but the range increased by 2 - 2,5 times ... for the rocket.
                        Nothing, and did not cope with such problems fellow :
                        - Pechenegs were defeated ... smile
                        - And Polovtsy? belay
                        - And Polovtsy! yes bully
                      3. ancient April 13 2020 15: 07 New
                        • 4
                        • 0
                        +4
                        Quote: bayard
                        You want to say that 24 tons of maximum load is achieved only with underfilling of fuel by half the weight of the load?

                        Here the only way and no other way -70 is empty, 52 fuel ... NK can also be accelerators, then 124 then. and all ... no more drops.
                        There were cases in order to increase the tactical radius "refuel" already at the preliminary start (inspection and refueling) (after all, at the start, warm-up, control check, taxiing, too .. you burn fuel wink )
                        So the BD-45K also doesn’t have “wings” (some of the blades have small sticks) and then ... they eat a lot recourse
                      4. bayard April 13 2020 15: 29 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: ancient
                        Here the only way and no other way -70 is empty, 52 fuel ... NK can also be accelerators, then 124 then. and all ... no more drops.

                        Oo-yo-yo-yo belay recourse .
                        And with such initial capabilities, they also removed the fuel rod ... angry And I thought that at one time, when describing future modernization, they constantly said about increasing the wing area ... now everything is clear ... Maybe in a new modification - with a new (larger area) wing and new, more powerful engines (like NK -32M2 promise to give a couple of tons more afterburner traction) and at the same time more economical ... yes with a cab for two ... This will be a good idea for MPA ...
                        Or will not work ...
                        But then all hope for the Su-34 and PAK YES. what
                      5. ancient April 13 2020 15: 46 New
                        • 5
                        • 0
                        +5
                        Quote: bayard
                        But then all hope for the Su-34

                        The thrust will be the same ... specific consumption ... yes it will be a little more economical (I will not voice specific costs bully ) but they are quite .. "not bad," especially on the MFR.
                        To the cab for two on this type, we still ... "did not mature" on ... "stuffing", unfortunately.
                        I am for the Su-34 (when it was the Su-32FM) good
                      6. bayard April 13 2020 17: 04 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: ancient
                        I am for the Su-34 (when it was the Su-32FM)

                        I also ! good drinks As well as Klimov, who advocates for this.
                        I think that in the new modification, which seems to be actively conjured, with the AL-41F and the new avionics, reinforced with a pylon under the belly ... it will be a little ball MPA. Although with half the BC (one missile defense instead of two) and slightly shorter range, but without problems with refueling ... mechanization of the rotary wing and other problems of the Tu-22M3. In addition, they are in serial production and were produced by the plant up to 16 - 18 pcs. annually. A good pace in our time.
                        He (Su-34) has a comfortable cabin, and with refueling, he can be on duty for quite some time ... And he needs an airfield as usual, as for other Su-30 \ 35 \ 27. And his price (at least for the first modification) is quite comfortable ...
                        And anyway - I like him.
                        Yes, and the pilots that fly on them, as I heard - too.
                        So let's drink for the bright future of MRA and its pilots !!! drinks For the growth of its number, ramification, equipment and power! fellow
                        And for the air defense covering it! bully
  • ancient April 12 2020 13: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: bayard
    Our “Dagger!” Is an example of such a solution (aeroballistic from ballistic).

    Well let's say ... yes wink but here’s how the “carrier” of the Tu-22M3 ... well, the 1st, well, in extreme cases, there can be 2 missiles (if the goal is not far), but as the media say - 4th belay ... this is utopia soldier
    1. bayard April 12 2020 14: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Two “Daggers” for the Tu-22M3 are not at all a question - for pylons instead of X-22 \ 32, but for four, it is either remodeled and reinforced into T-pylons, like the Tu-96MSM, or put two pylons under each wing (in the fixed part), or, as at maximum load with the X-22 - two under the wings and a third under the belly.
      Weight "Dagger" declared in 4 tons, so that the load - 4 pcs. pulls easily (16 tons at 24 tons of maximum load). But you have to conjure with the suspension.
      1. ancient April 12 2020 14: 38 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: bayard
        it’s either remodeling and reinforcing the pylons into T-shaped ones, like the Tu-96MSM

        Neither paired nor “t” shaped can be structurally impossible:
        1.

        2. Well, about the "T" - shaped pylons ..... the height is not enough from .... concrete wink
        Quote: bayard
        as at maximum load with the X-22 - two under the wings and a third under the belly.

        Well yes .. hung, flew and ....... B / W is canceled ... then what do we do? We go into the zone in ... accidentally drop military missiles on ... scrap metal? wink (After all, do you need to somehow sit down? And the RLE says something about this ...... what is the maximum G max. pos allowed?) wink
        On a bucket of kerosene, of course, you can try, but with 3 ... it's ...... crying
        1. bayard April 12 2020 15: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: ancient
          Quote: bayard
          as at maximum load with the X-22 - two under the wings and a third under the belly.

          Well, yes .. hung, flew and ....... B / W is canceled ... then what do we do? We go into the zone in ... accidentally drop military missiles on ... scrap metal? (After all, do you need to somehow sit down? And the RLE says something about this ...... what is the maximum G max. pos allowed?)
          On a bucket of kerosene, of course, you can try, but with 3 ... it's ......

          But you do consider the weight of 3 X-22s (6 tons each), and in our case there will be quite Zircons (4 tons each). As a result, the weight of 3 "Zircons" will come out like that of 2 X-22 \ 32 - that is, about 12 tons. And it is quite possible to sit down with three.
          If I am mistaken in the weight parameters of the Zircon, then correct me, but based on the dimensions (diameter \ long like Onyx because of one UKKS), the starting mass, even with a land / sea launch, will not exceed 4 - 4,5 t .
          1. ancient April 13 2020 11: 05 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: bayard
            But you do consider the weight of 3 X-22 (6 tons each), and in our case there will be quite Zircons (4 tons each)

            But let's still count for the "Zircons" (3 full-weight) all the same 14 tons. wink
            Normal landing G settlement = 78-88 tons. (empty weight 70, fuel as a rule at the first approach 10-12 (4th turn) is calculated taking into account the departure to the alternate aerodrome ... (but ... often much less wink)
            G max. 96 tons, but such landings should be no more than 2% of the total number (number) of landings. And after such a landing, a TEC, tragus, leveling is mandatory. KB commission and conclusion ......
            Quote: bayard
            And it’s quite possible to sit down with three

            So the term "completely" ... completely removed.
            From practice: it is possible to land also with 3, but .. empty (i.e., on landing, the cargo B / C is 4,5-5,4) soldier Or one (full).
            Very rarely .... with 2 (full-weight), but ... this is to your airfield and good weather, then leave the rest for landing 6-8 tons wink
            1. bayard April 13 2020 14: 59 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Sorry ... repeat
              And so it all started well ... what
              It remains to wish increased wing area in the new version yes as promised in the past ... for the M3M. crying And happiness was so close ... repeat
              drinks
      2. ancient April 12 2020 14: 46 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: bayard
        (16 tons at 24 tons of maximum load)

        In this case, the tactical radius will be ....... "few hundred kilometers" wassat
        1. They flew to Syria, what weight was b / c?. And the tactical radius was so .... normal for this type of device (but landing ....... only once wink )
        2. They flew to Afghanistan what weight was b / c (so everything was close at hand, even back to .. "whistled" enough ") wink
        Quote: bayard
        as at maximum load with the X-22 - two under the wings and a third under the belly.

        I already wrote earlier - this is at the "window dressing" or only in the transport version, but the missiles are "empty" (1,5 each) soldier
        1. bayard April 12 2020 16: 15 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: ancient
          Quote: bayard
          (16 tons at 24 tons of maximum load)

          In this case, the tactical radius will be ....... "few hundred kilometers"

          If we consider the Tu-22M3 \ M3M with Zircons on board (3 pcs.), Then the load will be 12 - 13 tons - half of the maximum, and this is good.
          But let's say even with such a load, the Tu-22M3 flies by "few hundred kilometers." But we have suspended hypersonic anti-ship missiles with a range of up to 1500 km. Even having a combat radius of 500 km (which I doubt, but suppose air resistance), we are able to hit sea targets at a distance of up to 2000 km. from the coast. The real radius of the aircraft will be at least 1000 km. and it’s possible to refuel in the air (as long as 30 Tu-22M3s are upgraded in M3M, you see the tankers will arrive in aviation), and we don’t forget that it is technically possible to place an additional fuel tank (like V-1B) for 10 - 12 tons of kerosene.
          Moreover, in a real combat situation, if a powerful enemy grouping with KR carriers is coming to the shores, it is extremely important to stop it before the turn of their launch - say, at a distance of 2000 km. , which means you need to take off with maximum load, because the second attempt at time may not become.
          Therefore, the ability to take on board 3 Zircons is even more comfortable than in the case of X-22 \ 32 - 12 tons instead of 18. And with two X-22 Tu-22M3 they always flew without any special problems.
          It seems to me .
          I didn’t serve in aviation, but I served at the RIC of the air defense unit, that is, as my friend says, “I’ve fought with her all my life” (in my case, not all, but happened), and we also had our own fighter aircraft. And you look like them (Tu-22M3) and flew \ fly? drinks
          1. ancient April 13 2020 10: 33 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: bayard
            But we have hypersonic anti-ship missiles with a range of up to 1500 km

            If you have such missiles, but then why bother to "fence" a garden with airborne carriers?. The radius of the ACG action on ground targets is 1100-1200.
            "Bury" them permanently in the fort. areas or put on the "wheels" making BPRK and all business ... "shoot" as in a dash wink
            Or it will be necessary to accelerate on the media to the number M much> than 1 wink ? Well, by analogy with the "Dagger"? .... Then in general .... this is not for .. Tu-22M soldier

            Quote: bayard
            The real radius of the aircraft will be at least 1000 km.

            Close to the truth and even a little more, but for 2 AKP wink But .... only in the most advantageous flight mode ... but do you want to "secretly" want to ...? That is, go to the frontier of launching at the WWII, then we cut the MPF, a sharp dial, "jump out" to the border start and ... forward ... then it will be much .. less crying
            About refueling ... forget now and later soldier
            About the tank is the same. drinks
            1. bayard April 13 2020 14: 43 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              drinks Yesterday was a feast of the military branch - Air Defense Day, remembered the service ...
              Quote: ancient
              If you have such missiles, but then why bother with a garden with air

              Quote: ancient
              "Bury" them permanently in the fort. areas or put on the "wheels" making BPRK and all business ... "shoot" as in a dash

              It looks like it will be - the decision to create a land mobile version of Zircon was announced a year ago and to have such missiles as part of the coastal SCRC is quite logical. But their range will be slightly less than with an air launch. Say - 1200 km.
              But along the whole coast you won’t find such SCRCs, and the line of attack of coastal targets for the AOG using a new missile defense (930 km. Range) will be about 1750 km. That is, we no longer get it and we have to react with aviation at the turn of just 2000 km. That is the line that I wrote about before.
              To ensure such a deterrent, you can use not only Tu-22M3 \ M3M with Zircon or X-32, but also a Dagger on the MiG-31, or (in the future) Su-30 or Su-34 with the same Zircon "under the belly (if you can get married). In the case of adaptation of the Su-30 or Su-34 (the latter is more preferable) for wearing the Zircon, the line of defeat \ containment is 2000 km. can be realized even without refueling, provided that actions are taken from coastal airfields.
              The very Klimov just advocates the use of an adapted Su-34 in the MRA, as compensation for the lack of Tu-22M3 \ M3M. And it's hard to disagree with him.
              Quote: ancient

              It’s close to the truth and even a little more, but for 2 AKP But .... only at the most favorable flight mode ... but you really want to “secretly” want to? PMV, then we cut the MPF, a sharp set, "jump out" to the start line and ... forward ... then it will be much .. less

              And why such difficulties with reaching the line of attack / launch?
              If the range of such a launch is up to 1500 km. ?
              What is the point of spreading over the water surface burning precious kerosene? Who will see you at such a distance?
              At ANY height?
              Even the Hokkai flew 300-400 km from the aircraft carrier.
              And if the enemy has powerful and farsighted ZGRLS, then at what height do not steal, they will see your maneuver ... as a beam reflected from the ionosphere. So fly bravely at your echelon, at cruising speed (if time is running out) and launch a volley from a distance absolutely safe for you. The enemy will only be able to see you from outer space. yes
              Quote: ancient
              About refueling ... forget now and later

              I would love to, but still put the bar on the Tu-22M3M ... however, I’ll remember about it when these pepelats arrived in combat units. soldier
              Quote: ancient
              About the tank is the same.

              But what if ? fellow
              Suddenly, as promised, with a new engine (NK-32M2), an extended wing (they promised such a thing), could the updated Tu-22M3M at least two missiles, and tear the tank from the concrete? repeat
              And if they also pile up a new cabin for him - a double, compact one, and instead of the saved volume and weight, add more kerosene ... WOW AND FLY !!! fellow laughing
              Dreaming well ... drinks
  • Victor67 April 12 2020 23: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Even cartoons can’t take off)))
  • ancient April 12 2020 11: 29 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Tusv
    What missiles do they launch their missile targets for missile defense testing? Boeing.

    Absolutely right soldier

  • Lopatov April 12 2020 08: 26 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    which will include the restoration of eight external suspension components dismantled in connection with Russian-American strategic arms reduction treaties

    Then ours must return to the Tu-22 refueling system in the air. In the process of modernization.
    1. Victor_B April 12 2020 08: 29 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Spade
      Then ours must return to the Tu-22 refueling system in the air. In the process of modernization.

      It seems they’ve already returned?
      1. Lopatov April 12 2020 08: 43 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        It seems only on the M3.
        On several M3
        1. Tusv April 12 2020 09: 03 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          It seems only on the M3.

          There is no refueling system on the M3. Only on M3M. Such a small revenge for the US exit from the INF Treaty
      2. venik April 12 2020 09: 56 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Victor_B
        It seems they’ve already returned?

        =======
        And not like, but EXACTLY! On the modernized Tu-22M3M - there is already a "bar";
    2. svp67 April 12 2020 08: 36 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Quote: Spade
      Then ours must return to the Tu-22 refueling system in the air. In the process of modernization.

      Already returned. Other interesting
      The B-1B could carry 31 hypersonic missiles simultaneously.
      What dimensions and characteristics will such missiles have and what will they be intended for? To break through the air defense?
      1. Tusv April 12 2020 08: 51 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: svp67
        What dimensions and characteristics will such missiles have and what will they be intended for? To break through the air defense?

        Lancer himself was originally designed to break through air defense. Not what tribe Tumba Yumba, but ours. Here we are talking about Lancer B, partially subtle, A Lancer A will be written off as not able to deliver a paramilitary headache. Everything is logical
        1. Pete mitchell April 12 2020 09: 50 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: Tusv
          we are talking about Lancer B, partially subtle, A Lancer A ..

          Wildly sorry, only the B-1b is in service. B-1a was not released: they cut the program, then they still looked at the cost ....
      2. Nikolaevich I April 12 2020 09: 21 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        The B-1B could carry 31 hypersonic missiles simultaneously.
        What dimensions and characteristics will such missiles have and what will they be intended for? To break through the air defense?

        Well, about ARRW missiles, for example, they have already managed to write a lot ... and specifications ... and what they are for ... But now I’d like to figure out what Russia will answer! Maybe this option will give a ride ....Another Russian development, designed to operate in conditions of strong enemy air defense, is a new operational tactical hypersonic missile, developed jointly by the parent company Tactical Missile Corporation Corporation in Korolev and GosMKB Raduga in Dubna as part of the Hypersonic program guided missile ”(GZUR). The military designation of this rocket to this day remains unsolved.

        According to reports, GZUR is a missile with a speed of M = 6 and with a flight range of 1500 km when flying along a high-altitude profile. The length of the rocket is 6 m, and the weight is about 1500 kg. As you can understand, the missile has mainly anti-ship assignment. The missile will be equipped with the Item 70 ramjet engine developed by PJSC Soyuz TMKB in Turaevo and will be equipped with a combined active-passive homing radar known as Gran-75, which is being developed by Ural Design Bureau "Detail" in Kamensk-Uralsky; the broadband passive channel (Gran-75PK) for this homing head is being created by the Central Design Bureau of Automation JSC (TsKBA) in Omsk. “Fringe-75” refers to the modification of the homing head “Fragment-K” used in the tactical anti-ship missile X-35U.

        According to sources in Russian industry, by 2020 it is assumed that the GZUR rocket will be mass-produced at a rate of “up to 50 products per year,” which suggests that it is currently being tested.

        Comment by Jane's

        The most complete information about the current Russian program of supersonic aircraft weapons was provided by the former commander in chief of the Russian Air Force, Colonel General Alexander Zelin in a lecture delivered at a conference of representatives of the aviation industry in Moscow in April 2013. According to Colonel General Zelin, a two-stage program for the development of hypersonic missiles is currently being implemented in Russia. The first phase provides for development by 2020 “A compact operational-tactical aviation missile with a flight range of 1500 km and a speed of 6 Machs”; This is the aforementioned HLD. It should be supplemented in the next decade with weapons with a speed of M = 12, suggesting a global range.
        As you know ... in Russia, it is almost a "tradition" to shift the deadlines to the right!
        1. bayard April 12 2020 12: 20 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          “A compact operational-tactical aviation missile with a flight range of 1500 km and a speed of 6 Machs”; This is the aforementioned HLD. It should be supplemented in the next decade with weapons with a speed of M = 12, assuming a global range

          I'm wildly sorry, but what kind of Miracle is this? Our people here are hardly used to the fact that the Zircon with a starting weight of about 4 tons and a warhead of 300 - 400 kg. capable of a range of 1000 km. And here is a HYPERSONIC rocket of 1500 kg starting weight per 1500 km. ? !!!
          And what is her, sorry, warhead? How many kilos?
          And how does it accelerate to cruising speed?
          And how much does the booster block (stage) weigh?
          Does he come in these 1500 kg?
          Or is it just about the Zircon and its weight WITHOUT a booster block?
          Then it may be true, because the overclocking unit in our case must exceed the hypersonic part proper by weight. 2500 kg + 1500 = 4000 kg.
          BUT IT IS 4 kg. starting weight.
          And it was Tu-22M3 in 2012 that was the carrier at the first launch of Zircon. Your quote is from 2013, so it all fits together - it's about Zircon. And one Tu-22M3 will be able to carry from 4 to 6 such missiles. Tu-22M3M. And their range with an air launch can really reach 1500 km. (With a ground - a little less).

          It remains to wait for the “Zircon” in all its modifications in service with both the Navy and the VKS, coastal missile systems and Ground Forces (as a hypersonic medium-range ground-based missile complex). They promised by 2022
          1. ancient April 12 2020 13: 30 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: bayard
            And it was Tu-22M3 in 2012 that was the carrier at the first launch of Zircon

            Let me ask myself ..... maybe all the same with a .. dummy-dump? bully
            1. bayard April 12 2020 13: 42 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Judging by the report to the US Congress from the intelligence community, it was precisely the launch, which was successful. If you are correct in your information (only reset), then there is a jamb of American intelligence. But they started talking seriously about Zircon from that moment.
              1. ancient April 12 2020 13: 52 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: bayard
                If you are correct in your information (reset only)

                Absolutely and .. throwing in 2013. bully
                Previously, "everything" .. "flying air - land" aircraft engines and aircraft models were thrown from the special. Board Tu-16LL wink
                1. bayard April 12 2020 14: 01 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: ancient
                  Quote: bayard
                  If you are correct in your information (reset only)

                  Absolutely and ... throwing in 2013

                  Well, that means that US intelligence added several years of “vigor” to its leadership, because they voiced the information “launch, which was successful.” We can only congratulate our counterintelligence for the successful disinformation. Nevertheless, the Zircons on the Tu-22M3M suspension is a very impressive sight.
                  1. ancient April 12 2020 14: 06 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: bayard
                    Nevertheless, the Zircons on the Tu-22M3M suspension is a very impressive sight

                    Maybe ... did not see bully it's all for .. "a big fence" bully
                    Well, before ... (when the earth was flat and stood on 3 pillars), then during the “work” of such a plan, the Tu-154 first took off and hung from above with an excess of + 300 meters bully
                    With measures on PDITR "there" was before .. very strictly bully
          2. Nikolaevich I April 12 2020 14: 01 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Information about the so-called GZUR appeared some time after reports of the Zircon ... Some media outlets in the GZUR reports "emphasized" that this was an aircraft version of the Zircon ... or the development of an aircraft missile based on the Zircon ... After the news about GZUR “walked” on the Internet for a while, they practically disappeared from the media (in the sense that new messages stopped appearing ...) Having posted a “note” about the GZUR rocket here, I just decided remind the "popular masses" of this: is it a project ... is it a product ...!
            1. bayard April 12 2020 14: 34 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Having posted a “note” about the GZUR missile here, I simply decided to remind the “masses” of this: is it a project ... is it a product ...

              And many thanks to you for this, because from this note we now know that the hypersonic part of the Zircon weighs 1,5 tons, and its range at an air launch is projected at 1500 km.
              And this is very encouraging, in the light of the soon adoption of it into service at once in several forms: sea, air, coastal, land. hi
          3. ancient April 12 2020 14: 15 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: bayard
            And one Tu-22M3 can carry from 4 to 6 such missiles

            No, you’re wrong .... from a technical point of view, it can (hang up for show or in the transport version empty transport).
            But with the practical .... because it is necessary and somewhere to fly? Therefore, the best option is 1 missile (under the belly) .... well, 2nd, under the wing, in case of emergency. but 4-6 ... these then where to cling? request
            1. bayard April 12 2020 15: 02 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              In principle, 3 missiles are also good, especially since their effectiveness is expected to be much higher than the X-22. In addition, if each of them has a starting weight of about 4 tons, and the maximum load of the Tu-22M3 is 24 tons, then there is continuous arithmetic: 4 - in normal load, 6 - in maximum. But they try not to give the maximum load to the airplane, so 3 pcs. This is already very good. 4 - an alteration is already needed - either two pylons instead of one under each wing, or two pylons for suspension under the belly (or a half-recessed type of suspension), but already with the closure of bomb hatches tightly.
              In the latter case, a fair amount of hemorrhoids is obtained, so I agree - it’s still more rational to have two or three “Zircons” on each side. Then the departure of one link is enough for any KMG, and the squadron - for the AUG. With a guarantee. Moreover, these missiles will be very expensive.
              By the way, with the suspension of 2 Zircons, the Tu-22M3M, will be able to take another X-50 drum (6 pcs.) And an additional fuel tank to the bomb bay, increasing the combat radius.
              1. ancient April 12 2020 15: 19 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                Quote: bayard
                By the way, with the suspension of 2 Zircons, the Tu-22M3M, will be able to take another X-50 drum (6 pcs.) And an additional fuel tank to the bomb bay, increasing the combat radius.

                Is it like this, like this, like this? belay
                G \ O suddenly became .... "rubber"? laughing
                Do you want AKU for 6 missiles, and even an additional tank? belay
                Quote: bayard
                Then the departure of one link is enough for any KMG, and the squadron - for the AUG. With a guarantee

                In YES only soldier
                In my time, "3-4" regiment of the drummers "counted on the AUG attack, provision - reconnaissance and, reconnaissance of targets, an EW regiment, two IA regiments to cover UG, a regiment to suppress enemy REO and RTS funds, and MSS.
                And you have .... 9-10 carriers and..AUG no longer ..... great wassat
                1. bayard April 12 2020 18: 09 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: ancient

                  Is it like this, like this, like this?
                  G \ O suddenly became .... "rubber"?
                  Do you want AKU for 6 missiles, and even an additional tank?

                  Pardo, forgotten. soldier By analogy with the performance of the V-1V, I figured it out - it seems like instead of 2 old drums 4 are being made for new missiles, but they are more compact than our X-50 ... Well, again, by analogy with the V-1B, the option is when the fuel tank is on floor compartment, and a drum for aeroballistics ... In our case, either-or.
                  But I leave the option with a drum for 6 X-50 in the anti-ship version and 2 Zircon under the wings for consideration. With their approximate maximum launch range of 1500 km. (the X-50 in the usual version "on the ground" - 2500 km.), it is possible to produce a sequential salvo from one distance. Zircons knock out the main ships of the warrant, and the X-50s come later and finish the job. The total weight of the BC is 6 x 1500 = 9 kg. + 000 (two Zircons) = 8000 - 17 tons. For a serious departure, it seems normal.
                  ... I lost it with the internal volumes - they didn’t publish the X-50 sizes, but the American toy was spinning empirically in my head, and it easily entered the F-35 bomb bay.
                  So again sorry. hi
                  Quote: ancient
                  In YES only

                  I counted on a squadron of 10 to 12 sides. They seem to be larger and will not be - 10 pieces for each fleet of Tu-22M3-x. And the Tu-22M3M still when to wait.
                  So you have to do with what is. It turns out that on 10 sides, the maximum can be calculated for one take-off: 20 Zircons and 60 X-50 in the anti-ship version at the defeat line of 2500 - 3000 km. from the base. If the target designation does not disappoint, then such a volley at the AUG may be enough. In any case, to disrupt their combat mission.
                  The launch line at 1500 km from the target (even 1000 km.) Excludes the possibility of interception by AUG fighters. So far they have nothing to shoot down “Zircons with, and when the X-50 is suitable (in 1,5 - 2 hours), then the main ships of the warrant will most likely be out of order ... But this is if VERY lucky.

                  In addition, I counted only strike aircraft at the turn of 1000 - 1500 km from the base. Without reconnaissance, cover, electronic warfare.
                  However, if the Zircon can be hooked up to the Su-30 or Su-34 as well, theoretically they will also be able to reach such a line, but with refueling.
                  Dreams ... fellow
                  About the beautiful. wink repeat
                  1. ancient April 13 2020 10: 11 New
                    • 4
                    • 0
                    +4
                    Quote: bayard
                    Dreams ...
                    About the beautiful.

                    Here I completely agree drinks
                    As taught at school ... "theory and practice are not compatible things" wassat
                    When there are no carriers, no AKP ... all that remains is ... "sweet dreams" crying
                    Plus, do not forget that, because of the "successful" almost 30-year ... "reign" ... we have a very dead airfield network.
                    Indeed, you must agree that in the threatened period all carriers will be dispersed across operational aerodromes and with such carriers and for such a purpose as AUG, it is desirable that the aircraft be within a maximum of 500-600 km from the coastline wink
                    What "gets" SLCM surface and submarine forces ... at a time.
                    So, having practically nothing but a “special answer”, we can easily “puff out our cheeks” and ..... “dream ... how do we" wink
                    1. bayard April 13 2020 12: 46 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: ancient
                      So having virtually nothing but a “special answer”

                      Such complex processes must be considered in a complex and dynamic. MRA (marine missile-carrying) has not yet revived, but there are Onyx coastal complexes that force the enemy to maintain a distance of approximately 550 - 600 km during the threatened period. from our bases. There are over-the-horizon radar systems capable of opening both the salvo of the Kyrgyz Republic and the deployment of surface forces of the enemy (just compare the data from the ZGRLS with the data from the transponders of civilian ships). ZGRLS "Container" has already been deployed in the western direction, the deployment of yet another in the eastern direction is ending. And this is a completely different quality of lighting of the air and surface conditions.
                      That is, the volley will not be missed (if the duty shift does not sleep smile stop ).
                      There is EW, the means of which can disorient the CD of such a volley.
                      There are means of fighter aviation (in the sea it’s not enough, but it has only just begun to revive and the main problem is personnel / pilots who simply do not exist. Thanks to stool reforms), which are just effective in combating low-altitude subsonic targets.
                      But this is certainly not the Soviet Army and its Navy. request
                      And of course, a nuclear club native to tears of affection, which (native), in any unpleasant case, has a place to be, and the doctrine authorizes the application even in the case of a nuclear-free, but massive attack on our beloved Motherland. yes With a kind word are reproachful. fool smile
                      So the club must be loved, cherished and lubricated. yes
                      And from time to time to remind about her, with a kind smile, throwing his hand from hand to hand. bully
      3. Aaron Zawi April 12 2020 10: 30 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: svp67
        What dimensions and characteristics will such missiles have and what will they be intended for? To break through the air defense?

        Well, not for nuclear war. It is clear that in a direct clash, nuclear countries are trying to enter the periphery of the world. This is primarily due to the fact that all superpowers understand how direct a clash is suicidal for them.
    3. Lipchanin April 12 2020 08: 56 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Spade
      Then ours must return to the Tu-22 refueling system in the air. In the process of modernization.

      Yes, it’s kind of like slowly returning
      After all, we left the contract
    4. ancient April 12 2020 12: 32 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Spade
      Then ours must return to the Tu-22 refueling system in the air.

      And what do you have a lot of "live" Tu-22M3 aircraft? On which do you plan to “install” the SPZ? wink
  • Mytholog April 12 2020 08: 44 New
    • 0
    • 6
    -6
    ... it is planned to write off 17 aircraft ...

    ... the modernization of V-1 has not yet been budgeted for 2021

    What, man, is it a shame to watch how your favorite handsome men are cheated? You also start frantically searching, how to save them?
    Now you have to go through it. Get used to it.
  • Whirlwind April 12 2020 08: 52 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Maybe they will, or maybe not ...
    There is no hypersound.
  • Amateur April 12 2020 08: 54 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    But have they already made a hypersonic rocket or take the example of the “Wishlist” from Roscosmos?
  • Lipchanin April 12 2020 08: 58 New
    • 5
    • 4
    +1
    [quote] However, he noted that the modernization of B-1 has not yet been budgeted for fiscal year 2021, but I’m sure that funds will be allocated for this. [/ Quote]
    Of course there will be
    The printing press operates in three shifts without a break for lunch and weekends
    1. Essex62 April 12 2020 10: 20 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Here, released to frolic, the epidemiological weapon squanders a sufficient number of recipients of benefits, extra mouths. Reduce the burden on the budget and you can think about upgrading B1.
      Very beautiful airplane.
      1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 10: 33 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        Quote: Essex62
        Reduce the burden on the budget and you can think about upgrading B1.

        Yes, they will upgrade it in any way.
        Very beautiful airplane.

        A matter of taste)
        Let me be accused of; fervent patriotism, "but I do not like one American who does not like outwardly.
        I'm not talking about performance characteristics. I'm not talking about this, I'm talking about the "appearance" of the plane
        I have the entire lineup of Su, starting from the Su-27 and ending with the Su-35 is much prettier than the same F-35
        "Clumsy" are they something or something request
        But in "Sushki" you can see the speed, even when it is on the ground
        It seems like it breaks into the sky ..
        1. bars1 April 12 2020 11: 10 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          F-35 is considered to be beautiful, probably, only by American, “patriots of patriots.” Yes, and even then with some tension of will.
          1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 11: 15 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: bars1
            F-35 is considered to be beautiful, probably, only by American, "patriots of praise."

            I wonder how our pilots called him)
            1. bars1 April 12 2020 11: 18 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              On the Russian Internet, the F-35 is called the Penguin, or even more offensive - The Pregnant Penguin. Probably the pilots his name
              1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 11: 22 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: bars1
                On the Russian Internet, the F-35 is called the Penguin, or even more offensive - The Pregnant Penguin. Probably the pilots his name

                The second is more informative laughing
        2. Essex62 April 13 2020 11: 07 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          That you are not comparing. I agree on drying, definitely beautiful. Lancer with our swan, on the contours, is very consonant. Beauties!
  • rocket757 April 12 2020 09: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    All sorts of plans are outlined, all sorts of plans .... fulfilled / not fulfilled! It happens in different ways.
  • sanik2020 April 12 2020 10: 10 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    They will print dollars, we will buy them, that’s the budget for hypersonic equipment.
    Enough for something else and to equip the cornmen.
    1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 10: 34 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: sanik2020
      we will buy them

      Not us, but you will buy
      We don’t need a vegetable for it
  • Thrifty April 12 2020 10: 22 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    And why on top of the wings in a pair on each side of the aircraft do not attach such missiles? It doesn’t matter whether the plane takes off with such a load or not, but it will look “scary” on takeoff! At the sight of it, the US military will require more money for "improvement to improve" !!! lol
  • askort154 April 12 2020 10: 32 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The second time the United States was in the pose of "catching up."
    The first time - 1957-1961 the USSR launched the first "Earth satellite", and the first man into space.
    The second time - 2019 Russia, the first in the world, put on combat duty
    hypersonic weapons - the Avangard complex and the Dagger rocket.
    The first “official” launch of the Avangard (UR-100N) took place on December 26, 2018, from the territory of the Orenburg Region and having developed a speed of 33 thousand km., Successfully hit the target at the Kura training ground. (President Putin personally observed this.)
    The USA is decently behind. Experts believe - for 10 -15 years. And as Putin said, Russia during this time will develop a hypersonic missile defense system.
  • Zaurbek April 12 2020 10: 43 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Is it about an air-launched BR?
  • Operator April 12 2020 10: 51 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Yesterday, Trump approved a request for federal assistance from the last of the 50 US states, as a result of which a massive disaster regime was declared throughout America.

    What, damn it, is there a modernization of the bombers? laughing
    1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 11: 24 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Operator
      What, damn it, is there a modernization of the bombers?

      So also gathered to provide assistance to Spain
      1. Operator April 12 2020 12: 54 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Italy, however - the ancestors of the US Secretary of State from there laughing
        1. Lipchanin April 12 2020 13: 25 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Operator
          Italy,

          Oh how laughing
          I have already confused Austria with Australia. laughing
  • bars1 April 12 2020 11: 04 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    Americans claim for AGM-183A speed M = 20. If so, then our Dagger against its background looks like a miserable misunderstanding ...
  • Aleks1973 April 12 2020 11: 22 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: bars1
    Americans claim for AGM-183A speed M = 20. If so, then our Dagger against its background looks like a miserable misunderstanding ...

    And ours will declare M = 40 and what? We will compete, who will declare more?
    1. Vadim237 April 12 2020 13: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The ability to reduce air resistance by two or more times is left to create high-energy gunpowder for the turbojet engine - since the scramjet engine has a working limit of 3 to 17 M - 40 M, only the turbojet engine and the engine will pull.
  • Chingachguk April 12 2020 14: 38 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Well, why not !!!! It remains only to invent the appropriate rocket !!!!!. I have generally got the impression lately that all sorts of different, important American generals are paid for language trepidation mainly .....
  • Old26 April 12 2020 19: 42 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: bayard
    Here's the funny in another -
    Quote: Insurgent
    Thirty-one rockets.

    THIRTY ONE. fellow
    On the "Lancer". belay
    Which has a maximum bomb load of 32 tons smile.
    Is that for ONE ton per rocket? laughing
    And ONE ton, on TWO launch drums and EIGHT wing pylons? wassat
    lol Do they blind them from cardboard?
    General Timothy Ray has surpassed even the youngest and most enthusiastic cheers of our site fellow Bravo General! good soldier
    I amorted to fame.

    But I believe that EIGHT of these missiles will fit on its pylons. yes For just 4 tons each (Vanguard, Zircon and Onyx in the same weight category), this is normal.
    The question remains whether the V-1B airframes will put together modernization and such a load - they are old, worn out.

    I, too, the number 31 was surprising. True, not for the reasons that you have. And the maximum bomb load of the V-1B is by no means 32 tons, but up to 60 tons. Still depends on the combat radius. And 32 tons, more precisely 34 tons, is the load inside the bomb bay. And according to various sources, from 24 to 26,7 tons on external sling. And one more remark. The B-1B had SIX external suspension components. Why did it suddenly turn out to be EIGHT - you need to ask the author of the article.
    As for the mass and size characteristics of the American hypersonic missile - so far nothing is known about it plainly. Neither the mass nor the exact dimensions, although there was infa that the length is 6 meters. True, then 31 will not work. Even if less than 1 ton (or a little more), then at 6 knots (each is designed for 4 tons), you can hang a maximum of THREE rockets (I’m already fantasizing about this). Three missiles multiplied by 6 knots are 18 missiles. Plus, if the missile is 6 meters high, there’s still another 8. Total 24. But not at all 31
  • Old26 April 13 2020 20: 28 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: bayard
    I'm wildly sorry, but what kind of Miracle is this? Our people here are hardly used to the fact that the Zircon with a starting weight of about 4 tons and a warhead of 300 - 400 kg. capable of a range of 1000 km. And here is a HYPERSONIC rocket of 1500 kg starting weight per 1500 km. ? !!!
    And what is her, sorry, warhead? How many kilos?
    And how does it accelerate to cruising speed?
    And how much does the booster block (stage) weigh?
    Does he come in these 1500 kg?
    Or is it just about the Zircon and its weight WITHOUT a booster block?
    Then it may be true, because the overclocking unit in our case must exceed the hypersonic part proper by weight. 2500 kg + 1500 = 4000 kg.
    BUT IT IS 4 kg. starting weight.
    And it was Tu-22M3 in 2012 that was the carrier at the first launch of Zircon. Your quote is from 2013, so it all fits together - it's about Zircon. And one Tu-22M3 will be able to carry from 4 to 6 such missiles. Tu-22M3M. And their range with an air launch can really reach 1500 km. (With a ground - a little less).

    Actually, we are talking about a missile being created at KTRV, and not at the NPO Mashinostroyeniya (Zircon). In addition, if there is data on the launch weight on the KTRV rocket (it’s bluntly stated that 1,5 tons), then there are no such exact data regarding the Zircon. At least I have not met them.