Military Review

Prospects for the development of ATGM: hypersound or homing?

193

Armored combat vehicles, primarily Tanks, radically changed the face of the battlefield. With their appearance, the war ceased to be positional. The threat of massive use of armored vehicles demanded the creation of new types weapons, capable of effectively destroying enemy tanks. Anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) or anti-tank missile systems (ATGMs) have become one of the most effective examples of anti-tank weapons.


In the process of evolution, ATGMs were continuously improved: the firing range and the power of the warhead (warhead) increased. The main criterion that determines the effectiveness of the ATGM was the method used to aim the ammunition at the target, according to which it is customary to attribute the ATGM / ATGM to one or another generation.

Generation ATGM / ATGM


The following generations of ATGM / ATGM are distinguished.

1. The first generation of ATGMs assumed fully manual control of the missile's flight by wire until it hit the target.


ATGM of the first generation "Malyutka" made increased demands on the qualifications and reaction speed of the operator

2. The second generation of ATGMs already had semi-automatic control, in which the operator was only required to keep the aiming mark on the target, and the rocket was controlled by automation. Command transmission can be carried out by wire or radio channel. There is also a method for guiding the ATGM along the "laser path", when the rocket independently maintains its position in the laser beam.


One of the most advanced second-generation ATGM "Kornet" with ATGM guidance along the "laser path"

3. The third generation includes ATGMs with missiles equipped with homing heads (GOS), allowing to implement the principle of "fire and forget."


American ATGM of the third generation FGM-148 Javelin

Some companies separate their products into a separate generation. For example, the Israeli company Rafael refers its Spike ATGMs to the fourth generation, highlighting the presence of a feedback channel with the operator, which allows them to receive an image directly from the missile seeker and carry out its retargeting in flight.

Transmission of control commands and video images can be carried out over a two-way fiber-optic cable or over a radio channel. Such complexes can operate both in the "fire and forget" mode, and in the launch mode without preliminary target acquisition, when the ATGM is launched from behind cover at the approximate coordinates of a previously reconnoitered target, invisible by the ATGM operator, and the target is captured already during the flight missiles according to data received from its seeker.


Israeli ATGM Spike-NLOS

The conditional fifth generation includes ATGMs that use intelligent algorithms to analyze target images and external target designation.

Prospects for the development of ATGM: hypersound or homing?

The French company MBDA classifies the MMP ATGM as the fifth generation

However, the conditional attribution of the ATGM to the fourth or fifth generation is rather a marketing ploy. In any case, the key difference between the third and the proposed fourth and fifth generations of ATGMs can be considered the presence of a seeker directly on the ATGM.

Advantages and disadvantages


The main advantages of the third generation ATGM are the increased safety and combat capability of the operator (carrier), provided by the ability to leave the firing position immediately after launch. The second generation ATGM is required to provide missile guidance until the target is hit. As the range increases, the time required to "escort" the ATGM to the target also increases, and accordingly, the operator's (carrier's) risk of being destroyed by return fire: an anti-aircraft guided missile (SAM), a high-explosive (HE) projectile, a burst from a rapid-fire cannon.

Currently, in the armies of the world, ATGMs of the first and second generation are simultaneously used. This is partly a technological limitation, when some countries, including, unfortunately, Russia, have not yet been able to create their third-generation ATGMs. However, there are other reasons as well.

First of all, this is the high cost of third-generation ATGMs, especially consumables - ATGMs. For example, the export value of the third-generation ATGM Javelin is about 240 thousand dollars, the ATGM Spike - about 200 thousand dollars. At the same time, the cost of the second-generation ATGM of the Kornet complex, according to various sources, is estimated at 20-50 thousand dollars.

The high price makes the use of third-generation ATGMs suboptimal when attacking certain types of targets in terms of cost / efficiency criterion. It's one thing to destroy an ATGM for 200 thousand dollars a modern tank worth several million dollars, and another thing to spend it on a jeep with a machine gun and a couple of bearded men.


In modern conflicts against terrorist groups, the targets hit can be much cheaper than the ammunition spent on them.

Another disadvantage of third-generation ATGMs with infrared (IR) seeker is the limited ability to defeat non-heat-contrast targets, for example, fortified structures, equipment in a parking lot, with a cooled engine. Advanced combat vehicles with full or partial electric propulsion can have a noticeably smaller and "smeared" IR signature, which will not allow IR seeker to reliably hold the target, especially when targeting protective fumes and aerosols.

This problem can be compensated for with the help of ATGM feedback with the operator, as is implemented in the previously mentioned Israeli complexes of the Spike type, which the manufacturer refers to as a conditional fourth generation. However, the need for the operator to accompany the missile throughout the flight returns these complexes rather to the second generation, since the operator cannot leave the firing position immediately after the launch of the ATGM (in the scenario under consideration, when targets not captured by the IR seeker are hit).

The next problem is typical for both third and second generation ATGMs. This is a gradual increase in the number of armored vehicles equipped with active protection systems (KAZ). Almost all ATGMs are subsonic: for example, the speed of the Javelin ATGM in the final section is about 100 m / s, the TOW ATGM 280 m / s, the Kornet ATGM 300 m / s, the Spike ATGM 130-180 m / s. The exception is some ATGMs, for example, the Russian "Attack" and "Vikhr", whose average flight speed is 550 and 600 m / s, respectively, however, for KAZ, such an increase in speed is unlikely to be a problem.


One of the fastest serial ATGMs of the "Vikhr" airborne guided weapon system

Most of the existing KAZ have problems in hitting targets attacking from above, but the solution to this problem is only a matter of time. For example, KAZ "Afghanit" of a promising family of armored vehicles on the "Armata" platform carries out automatic setting of smoke curtains, which will either completely disrupt the capture of the seeker or force the third-generation ATGM to reduce the trajectory, as a result of which they fall into the zone of destruction of KAZ protective ammunition.


It is assumed that the use of smoke curtains forces the Javelin-type ATGM to reduce the flight trajectory, which makes them vulnerable to existing KAZ

An even more serious problem for third-generation ATGMs can be promising optical-electronic countermeasures (COEC) complexes, including a powerful laser emitter. At the first stage, they will temporarily blind the seeker of the attacking ammunition, similar to how it is implemented in aviation onboard self-defense complexes of the "President-S" type, and in the future, as increasing the power of lasers to 5-15 kW and reducing their dimensions, to ensure the physical destruction of the sensitive elements of the ATGM.

Counteraction of promising KAZ and KOEP can lead to the fact that for guaranteed destruction of one tank, 5-6 or even more third-generation ATGMs will be required, which, taking into account their cost, will make the solution of a combat mission irrational in terms of cost / efficiency criterion.

Are there other ways to increase the survivability of the ATGM operator (carrier), and at the same time to increase its combat effectiveness?

Hypersonic ATGM: theory


As we said earlier, the speed of most existing ATGMs is lower than the speed of sound, for many it does not even reach half the speed of sound. And only some heavy ATGMs have a flight speed of 1,5-2M. This poses a problem not only for second-generation ATGMs, since they need to direct the missile throughout the entire flight phase, but also for third-generation ATGMs, since their low flight speed makes them vulnerable to existing and future KAZ.

At the same time, an extremely difficult target for KAZ is armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles (BOPS), fired from tank guns at a speed of 1500-1700 m / s. ATGMs with a similar or even higher flight speed can also become a difficult target for KAZ. Moreover, the capabilities of hypersonic ATGMs to overcome the KAZ will be even higher, since the presence of a jet engine will allow the ATGM to maintain a higher average speed than the BOPS, which begins to gradually slow down immediately after leaving the barrel of a tank gun.


BOPS are the most difficult target for KAZ and the greatest threat to armor

In addition, a tank cannot fire two BOPS almost simultaneously, which may be necessary to increase the likelihood of overcoming a KAZ and hitting a target, and for an ATGM, firing two ATGMs is a completely normal operating mode.

As in the case of BOPS, the target will be hit in a kinetic way, which is also considered more effective both from the point of view of overcoming armor and for hitting a target, since it is easier to protect against shaped charges than against BOPS, and the armor effect of a shaped jet may not always be sufficient, especially taking into account the means of countermeasures - multilayer armor, reactive armor, lattice screens.

In turn, the disadvantage of an ATGM with kinetic target destruction is the presence of a booster section, where the ATGM will pick up speed.

In addition to increasing the likelihood of overcoming the KAZ, breaking through the armor and increasing the armor action on the target, hypersonic ATGMs can do without the built-in seeker, targeting via a radio channel or a "laser trail" and at the same time ensuring increased survival of the operator (carrier) due to the minimum flight time of the ammunition.

The difference in flight time can be clearly seen by comparing this indicator for most of the existing ATGMs with a flight speed of the order of 150-300 m / s and promising hypersonic ATGMs with an average flight speed of the order of 1500-2200 m / s.



ATGM flight time table depending on flight speed and firing range

As can be seen from the above table, the flight time, therefore, and the operator's accompaniment of a hypersonic ATGM at a distance of up to 4000 meters is about 2-3 seconds, which is 15-30 times less than the flight time of a subsonic ATGM. It can be assumed that the specified time interval of 2-3 seconds will not be enough for the enemy to detect the launch of the ATGM, aim the weapon and deliver a retaliatory strike.

From the point of view of changing the firing position, 2-3 seconds is too short a period of time for the operator of the third generation ATGM to retire to a sufficient distance in order to avoid being hit if the strike is still delivered, that is, the presence of homing in the third generation ATGM will not provide decisive advantages over ATGM with hypersonic flight speed.

Also, the operator's ability to hide behind an obstacle immediately after the shot is not critical, since high-explosive fragmentation projectiles with detonation on the trajectory are becoming more common, accordingly, only an operational change of position can protect the operator (carrier) of the ATGM.


Model of a promising American 120-mm tank multipurpose shot Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP) XM1147 with the possibility of detonation on the flight path for the main tank of the US Army M1A2 Abrams

If we are talking about long-range ATGM firing, of the order of 10-15 kilometers, which is important primarily for aircraft carriers, then here too, a hypersonic ATGM will have an advantage, since it is much more difficult to shoot down an anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) than, to for example, the JAGM subsonic missile. It will also be difficult to destroy the aircraft carrier itself, since the flight speed of the missile defense system is less or comparable to that of a hypersonic ATGM, which gives an advantage to the one who strikes first.

Article Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd We have already examined the impact of the speed of each phase of combat work in terms of the OODA cycle: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act (OODA: observation, orientation, decision, action) - a concept developed for the US Army by former Air Force pilot John Boyd in 1995, also known as "Boyd's loop". Hypersonic weapons fully comply with this concept, providing the minimum possible time at the stage of direct target engagement.

If hypersonic ATGMs are so good, why haven't they been developed yet?

Hypersonic ATGM: practice


As you know, the creation of hypersonic weapons encounters enormous difficulties due to the need to use special heat-resistant materials, problems with controllability, receiving and transmitting control commands. Nevertheless, projects of hypersonic ATGMs were developed, and quite successfully.

First of all, we can recall the American project of the Vought HVM hypersonic ATGM, developed in the 80s of the XX century by Vought Missiles and Advanced Programs and intended for deployment on combat helicopters, fighters and attack aircraft. The speed of the Vought HVM ATGM was supposed to reach 1715 m / s, the body length was 2920 mm, the diameter was 96,5 mm, the rocket mass was 30 kg, the warhead was a kinetic rod.

The project progressed quite successfully, ATGM tests were carried out, however, for financial reasons, the project was closed.


ATGM Vought HVM

Even earlier, the competing Lockheed HVM project of Lockheed Missiles and Space Co.

The work carried out was not consigned to oblivion, and within the framework of the AAWS-H program of the US Army Missile Forces Directorate, Vought Missiles and Advanced Programs and Lockheed Missiles and Space Co, since 1988, have been working to create the Vought KEM ATGM and MGM-166 LOSAT ATGM, respectively.

The KEM missiles were planned to be placed on a tracked chassis, the ammunition load included four missiles on the launcher and eight more in the fighting compartment. The firing range was supposed to be 4 kilometers. The length of the rocket body is 2794 mm, the diameter is 162 mm, the mass of the rocket is 77,11 kg.


Image and 3D model of a combat vehicle with ATGM KEM

Ultimately, Vought was acquired by Lockheed, after which the creation of a hypersonic ATGM continued as part of a single LOSAT project.

Work on the development of the ATGM of the LOSAT project was carried out from 1988 to 1995, from 1995 to 2004, a pilot production of the MGM-166A LOSAT ATGM was carried out, in parallel, work was underway to reduce the length of the ATGM body from 2,7 to 1,8 meters and increase their flight speed to 2200 m / s!

The tests were quite successful, from 1995 to 2004, about twenty tests were carried out to defeat stationary and mobile targets at a distance of 700 to 4270 meters. In March 2004, the test program was completed, it was to be followed by an order for 435 missiles, but the program was closed by the US Department of the Army in the summer of 2004, before the start of deliveries of the MGM-166A LOSAT ATGM to the troops.


ATGM LOSAT on tracked and wheeled carriers

Since 2003, on the basis of the LOSAT project, Lockheed Martin has been developing a promising CKEM (Compact Kinetic Energy Missile) ATGM. The CKEM project was developed within the framework of the well-known Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. It was planned to place the CKEM ATGM on ground and air carriers. It was supposed to create a rocket with a firing range of up to 10 kilometers and a flight speed of 2200 m / s. The mass of the CKEM ATGM was not to exceed 45 kilograms. The CKEM ATGM program was closed in 2009 at the same time as the FCS program.


3D model and layout of ATGM CKEM

What do we have? According to open sources, ammunition with a speed close to hypersonic is being developed and tested for the promising Hermes complex developed by the Tula KBP JSC. The firing range of a promising ATGM will be about 15-30 kilometers.

The rocket of the Hermes complex is presumably equipped with a combined guidance system, including a semi-active laser and infrared seeker, that is, an ATGM can be guided both at the target's thermal radiation and at the target illuminated by a laser, like guided artillery shells of the Krasnopol type. In the future, the installation of an active radar seeker (ARLGSN) is being considered. The mass of the Hermes ATGM missile is about 90 kg.

Presumably, the maximum speed of the rocket will be about 1000-1300 m / s, and in the final section 850-1000 m / s. This is not enough for the kinetic destruction of well-armored targets, so the Hermes ATGM will be equipped with “classic” cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation warheads.


Layout and image of ATGM "Hermes"

All of the above does not allow the Hermes ATGM to be classified as a hypersonic ATGM. However, it must be borne in mind that the design of the Hermes ATGM is based on the design of the SAM used in the Pantsir air defense missile system, for which a hypersonic missile with a speed of over 5M is declared. Presumably, the rocket has the designation 23Ya6 and is created on the basis of the meteorological MERA rocket. The speed of the MERA rocket reaches 2000 m / s, at the end of the active phase of the flight it is still higher than 5M, the maximum ascent height is 80-100 kilometers. The mass of the MERA rocket is 67 kg.


Meteorological rocket "MERA"

It can be assumed that using the solutions used in the Hermes ATGM and the Pantsir hypersonic missile defense system and the MERA meteorological rocket, a hypersonic ATGM can be created with a range of about 10-20 kilometers and a flight speed of over 2000 m / s, with a combined guidance over the radio channel and along the "laser path", with a kinetic warhead.

In the future, the solutions obtained can be used to create other hypersonic ATGMs of different classes for different types of carriers.

GOS or hypersound?


Is it possible to combine the seeker and hypersonic flight speed?

It is possible, but at the same time, the cost of such ATGMs can become unaffordable even for the richest armies in the world. In addition, the heating of the head of the hull of the hypersonic ATGM can significantly complicate the operation of the seeker. If the problem of heating the seeker can be solved, then the firing range will most likely be the determining factor: for short ranges, guidance by radio channel and / or "laser path" will be used, for long ranges - combined guidance, including the use of the seeker.

If the United States has practically created hypersonic ATGMs, then why not put them into service?
There may be several reasons. As already mentioned above, ATGMs with GOS themselves can be more effective and the reason for rejecting them, or at least decreasing their value, may be an increase in the effectiveness of countermeasures for subsonic and supersonic ATGMs. Still, the United States has created an ATGM with a seeker for a long time already and is quite actively using them.

Another point is that the technology for creating hypersonic weapons is very advanced. If the United States had released hypersonic ATGMs 15 years ago and started using them in current conflicts, there would be a high probability that components or even entire samples of such products would end up in the hands of specialists from Russia and China, contributing to the development of their own hypersonic weapons. At the same time, as can be seen from the dynamics of the creation of hypersonic ATGMs, nothing is thrown into the trash in the United States. If there is a threat of a decrease in the effectiveness of an ATGM with a seeker, the United States will quickly revive the CKEM project and launch mass production of hypersonic ATGMs.

Does the Russian army need an ATGM with a seeker?
Of course, yes. KAZ and KOEP will not appear for everyone and not immediately. ATGM with GOS provide much more flexible tactics of use: the possibility of simultaneous firing at several targets at once, video transmission to the operator (in fact, reconnaissance), the possibility of retargeting in flight.

But, according to the author, the priority of development should be for hypersonic ATGMs, since a situation may arise when an increase in the efficiency of KAZ and KOEP with powerful laser emitters, an increase in the effectiveness of multilayer armor and dynamic protection in aggregate will reduce the likelihood of hitting targets by subsonic and supersonic ATGMs with cumulative Warheads to unacceptably low values. In other words, against a high-tech adversary, ATGMs with GOS can become practically useless.
Author:
Photos used:
bastion-karpenko.ru, bastion-opk.ru, topwar.ru, bmpd.livejournal.com, cyberleninka.ru
Articles from this series:
Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd
Armored vehicles against infantry. Who is faster: a tank or infantry?
Increased situational awareness of armored combat vehicle crews
Ergonomics of workplaces and combat algorithms for promising armored vehicles
Unmanned systems for advanced armored vehicles
Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd
Electric tank: prospects for the use of electric propulsion in ground combat equipment
Protecting ground combat equipment: take cover and dodge
Protection of ground combat equipment. There isn’t much armor?
A helicopter against the tank. Standoff more than half a century long
Russian military helicopters and their weapons. History, present and future
Great extinction. Why certain types of weapons may disappear?
193 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 05: 20 New
    +8
    An ATGM with a hypersonic missile will be very bulky, very heavy and very expensive. For example, in order to accelerate a 125-mm sub-caliber projectile weighing 7 kg to 1500 m / s, you need a charge of 5 kg of powder. The Kornet ATGM rocket weighs 26 kg, has a warhead weight of 7 kg and can only accelerate to 250 m / s. It turns out a vicious circle - to make a hypersonic rocket, you need a lot of gunpowder on the rocket, and a lot of gunpowder on the rocket increases the mass of the rocket, which in turn requires a further increase in the mass of gunpowder, etc. In my opinion, a hypersonic missile for an ATGM is a dead-end branch of armament, just like trying to reach a speed of 1000 km / h on a piston aircraft. Here you can recall Kurchevsky's anti-tank installations, which were useless due to the low speed of the projectile, they could not even reach the projectile speed of 700 m / s, the minimum required for anti-tank defense. So there is no need to repeat mistakes and spend money on the development of dead-end weapons.
    1. Thrifty
      Thrifty 3 August 2020 06: 02 New
      -14 qualifying.
      The flight speed of the Kornet rocket is 310m / s, not 250! And, in general, the author wrote nonsense with which there is no point in arguing!
    2. svp67
      svp67 3 August 2020 07: 36 New
      +2
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      It turns out a vicious circle - to make a hypersonic rocket, you need a lot of gunpowder on the rocket

      There is no circle. The ballistic propellants used now will not allow the projectile to be given a hypersonic speed ... alas, other brands of propellants are needed, with a different gas flow rate
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      ... The Kornet ATGM rocket weighs 26 kg, has a warhead weight of 7 kg and can only accelerate to 250 m / s.

      Have you ever wondered if a hypersonic missile needs this warhead? The kinetic energy of a piece of metal, the size and mass of a nut, somewhere on a turnkey basis for 22, but flying at hypersonic speed is enough to completely destroy any modern tank. The Americans were able to test this in practice, however, as in the USSR, using electro-magnetic installations
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 09: 41 New
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        The kinetic energy of a piece of metal, the size and mass of a nut, somewhere on a turnkey basis for 22, but flying at hypersonic speed is enough to completely destroy any modern tank. The Americans were able to test this in practice, however, as in the USSR, using electro-magnetic installations

        Hypersound conditionally starts from Mach 5, which is 1700 m / s, that is, the upper limit of the initial speed of modern BOPS. The scrap is made of tungsten or uranium and has a weight of 5-7 kg. And a piece of metal the size of a nut to destroy a modern tank, you need to have a speed of 10 km / s.
        1. Speedy
          Speedy 3 August 2020 14: 10 New
          -1
          The scrap has a speed of 1500+ at the exit from the trunk. When meeting a target, it is to put it mildly below. That's why all the dancing with hypersonic missiles. Because of the speed on the final trajectory.
          1. Boris Chernikov
            Boris Chernikov 3 August 2020 20: 32 New
            -1
            here the question is in the price - what will be cheaper - to make scrap or put a few simple cumulative
            1. Shopping Mall
              4 August 2020 07: 56 New
              +1
              Quote: Boris Chernikov
              here the question is in the price - what will be cheaper - to make scrap or put a few simple cumulative


              Which will not break through the tandem DZ. Not a fact, of course, but it is easier to reduce the effectiveness of cumulative warheads than scrap. Ultimately, the cost / effectiveness criterion plays the main role.
              1. Boris Chernikov
                Boris Chernikov 4 August 2020 23: 55 New
                -2
                but this is how you look .. the current warhead from the Cornet penetrates 1 mm for the remote zone .. Taking into account that the caliber will be at the level of 200 mm, you can safely bet that the penetration will be under 170-1450 mm .. The thing is that the current missiles can give a maximum of 1500 1-200 m / s, the speed of a conventional BOPS is higher and already fluctuates 1300 1-800 m / s .. KAZ that in the first, which in the second case is unlikely to work, the speed is not the same .. Although Israel swears that it has learned to shoot down similar shells - there are suspicions that "a little" go over the ears
    3. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 08: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      An ATGM with a hypersonic missile will be very bulky, very heavy and very expensive. For example, in order to accelerate a 125-mm sub-caliber projectile weighing 7 kg to 1500 m / s, you need a charge of 5 kg of powder. The Kornet ATGM rocket weighs 26 kg, has a warhead weight of 7 kg and can only accelerate to 250 m / s. It turns out a vicious circle - to make a hypersonic rocket, you need a lot of gunpowder on the rocket, and a lot of gunpowder on the rocket increases the mass of the rocket, which in turn requires a further increase in the mass of gunpowder, etc. In my opinion, a hypersonic missile for an ATGM is a dead-end branch of armament, just like trying to reach a speed of 1000 km / h on a piston aircraft. Here you can recall Kurchevsky's anti-tank installations, which were useless due to the low speed of the projectile, they could not even reach the projectile speed of 700 m / s, the minimum required for anti-tank defense. So there is no need to repeat mistakes and spend money on the development of dead-end weapons.


      So are there examples of real complexes? American ATGM and our promising missiles.

      What good will there be from subsonic supersonic ATGMs if they are intercepted by KAZ and KOEP?
      1. Kot_Kuzya
        Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 09: 57 New
        +3
        The KEM missiles were planned to be placed on a tracked chassis, the ammunition load included four missiles on the launcher and eight more in the fighting compartment. The firing range was supposed to be 4 kilometers. The length of the rocket body is 2794 mm, the diameter is 162 mm, the mass of the rocket is 77,11 kg.

        Work on the development of the ATGM of the LOSAT project was carried out from 1988 to 1995, from 1995 to 2004, a pilot production of the MGM-166A LOSAT ATGM was carried out, in parallel, work was underway to reduce the length of the ATGM body from 2,7 to 1,8 meters and increase their flight speed to 2200 m / s!

        The tests were quite successful, from 1995 to 2004, about twenty tests were carried out to defeat stationary and mobile targets at a distance of 700 to 4270 meters. In March 2004, the test program was completed, it was to be followed by an order for 435 missiles, but the program was closed by the US Department of the Army in the summer of 2004, before the start of deliveries of the MGM-166A LOSAT ATGM to the troops.

        Since 2003, on the basis of the LOSAT project, Lockheed Martin has been developing a promising CKEM (Compact Kinetic Energy Missile) ATGM. The CKEM project was developed within the framework of the well-known Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. It was planned to place the CKEM ATGM on ground and air carriers. It was supposed to create a rocket with a firing range of up to 10 kilometers and a flight speed of 2200 m / s. The mass of the CKEM ATGM was not to exceed 45 kilograms... The CKEM ATGM program was closed in 2009 at the same time as the FCS program.

        Judging by the fact that not a single ATGM was tested and was not put into service, the performance of these prototypes was unsatisfactory. I'm sure they never reached Mach 5 hypersound. Even in the Buk air defense missile system, where the missile is huge, and the maximum speed of the missile is only 1100 m / s. Most likely, modern gunpowder simply does not allow the rocket to reach Mach 5. Even if the projectile speed limit is Mach 5 from the cannon, this is despite the fact that the efficiency of the gun is much higher than the efficiency of the rocket. To achieve hypersonic speed, liquid fuel is most likely needed, and this is unacceptable for rockets used in the field.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 3 August 2020 12: 29 New
          +3
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Judging by the fact that not a single ATGM was tested and was not put into service, the performance of these prototypes was unsatisfactory.

          No, it's much easier.
          Such systems are too rigidly specialized.
          Armored vehicles only
          That in modern conditions of local wars is unacceptable.

          In general, the Americans "cut" a lot of anti-tank equipment. From "Scorpio" mines to "Shro Predator". The latter, however, the marines still purchased in small quantities
          1. Operator
            Operator 3 August 2020 14: 28 New
            -1
            No specialization is visible - as simple as a water pipe, missile launchers can shoot any ammunition, from cumulative to fragmentation.
            1. SovAr238A
              SovAr238A 3 August 2020 23: 55 New
              0
              Quote: Operator
              No specialization is visible - as simple as a water pipe, missile launchers can shoot any ammunition, from cumulative to fragmentation.


              For you, of course, nothing, you cannot look beyond the "water pipe" ...
              You do not have enough understanding that you will have to develop not one rocket, but 3 at once for this very "water pipe" ...

              For you, aviation is a runway, but about the various aircraft themselves, each either specialized or universal, you probably do not know, or pretend ...
              Probably still not in the know, because I have already read so many alternatively gifted texts from you ...
              I even wonder why you are still not on a forced ...
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 10: 24 New
        +2
        Quote: AVM
        What good will there be from subsonic supersonic ATGMs if they are intercepted by KAZ and KOEP?

        There are already projects of anti-tank missiles capable of interfering, performing anti-aircraft maneuvers ... Methods of attacking armored targets with subsonic / supersonic anti-tank missiles are considered when 2 (3) missiles are launched, one of which creates interference, hits the antenna system, optoelectronic devices , for example, shrapnel (including "explosive" ...)
    4. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 3 August 2020 20: 30 New
      -1
      Hermes or a similar project is not a problem to make, but with a diameter of 170 mm, it will with a guarantee punch Abrams in the forehead, and in the side to take off old tanks. Place a conventional snag on the rocket to trigger the DZ, and then two warheads in caliber 90 and then in 170 mm ... there it is not a problem to organize a breakthrough of 2. So such a system will be put on a technique a la Chrysanthemum.
  2. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 3 August 2020 06: 11 New
    +2
    There is LOSAT shooting on YouTube. It looks, of course, super-spectacular, howling, roaring, a bright trail, but after the very first launch, the position will be detected by the enemy and if he is even a little bit of a goof, the shooter will end.
    1. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 08: 13 New
      +4
      Quote: Sahalinets
      There is LOSAT shooting on YouTube. It looks, of course, super-spectacular, howling, roaring, a bright trail, but after the very first launch, the position will be detected by the enemy and if he is even a little bit of a goof, the shooter will end.


      The tank's cannon is also not equipped with a silencer.

      More recently, they talked about the advantage of the Soviet tank school, they say, our tanks have a lower silhouette than NATO ones. And then Armata appeared, and suddenly it turned out that the silhouette for modern detection systems is not so critical.

      So here too - the shot will be detected by UV and IR sensors, whether there will be a rumble or not. The enemy in the tank will not hear him in any case. And he will have no time to retaliate.
      1. Sahalinets
        Sahalinets 3 August 2020 10: 58 New
        0
        BOPS does not leave behind a clearly visible trace. But the loop behind LOSAT is visible from a kilometer away. Here and devices are not necessary to detect the position.
    2. Operator
      Operator 3 August 2020 14: 32 New
      +1
      Shooting BOPS

  3. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 3 August 2020 06: 52 New
    +2
    Informative. The author, for some reason, did not mention the ATGM with a remote control panel - as an option to reduce the destruction of the crew.
    1. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 08: 10 New
      +4
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Informative. The author, for some reason, did not mention the ATGM with a remote control panel - as an option to reduce the destruction of the crew.


      Correct remark. But this is possible in a limited number of options, for example, if we shoot from a combat vehicle (such as BMPT) or from a helicopter, then you can't stand the remote control.

      But if we talk about deployed complexes, then the PMCM may well turn out so that it would be optimal not only to make a remote control, but to carry a launcher with a control system and a reconnaissance system, since a missile shot can be detected by the UV radiation of the engine, or, if enemy radar, track the start point along the trajectory of the ammunition.

      I am primarily confused by the prospects of countering subsonic / supersonic ATGM and KAZ.
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 3 August 2020 08: 12 New
        +1
        "Stugna", if I am not mistaken, is positioned by the presence of a remote control. So there already exists in metal
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 3 August 2020 10: 35 New
          +4
          The remote control was still on Malyutka.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 13: 06 New
            +2
            Quote: garri-lin
            The remote control was still on Malyutka.

            ATGM "Cobra" ... "Mamba" ...
            1. garri-lin
              garri-lin 3 August 2020 14: 27 New
              +1
              Well, the Baby indicated as the first mass.
      2. garri-lin
        garri-lin 3 August 2020 10: 42 New
        +1
        KAZ will gradually turn into an ultimatum. In fact, we observe on tanks what we observed on ships in the 50-60s. Air defense replaced armor. KAZ will not replace, but it is already a priority. ATGM has one way. Active means of breakthrough KAZ. Difficult, expensive but necessary.
        1. Sergey_G_M
          Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 12: 27 New
          +4
          KAZ will not turn into an ultimatum.
          ATGM has one way. Active means of breakthrough KAZ. Difficult, expensive but necessary

          It is not difficult and not expensive, just ATGMs will start firing a doublet.
          It's even easier with hand grenade launchers:

          RPG-30 "Hook"
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 3 August 2020 14: 26 New
            0
            The trophy, against which Hook was invented, was the first serial swallow. Progress in the field of KAZ strides by leaps and bounds. The problem of paired launches can already be considered solved. It is certainly expensive, but the tank is much more expensive. The only way to overcome a promising KAZ is group launches. At the same time, the first missiles are designed to knock out KAZ. Dipoli, cloud, electronic warfare, shrapnel, whatever. The only way. In the coming years, KAZ will learn to confidently shoot down BOPS and will definitely become an ultimatum. And here's why. The launch point of the same ATGM will be calculated in a split second based on the data of the KAZ radars. In fact, according to the calculation, the tank that launched the missile can make a return shot in a few seconds. ATGM will turn into suicide bombers.
            1. Alien ...
              Alien ... 3 August 2020 19: 45 New
              0
              And I will sit like that and watch your radars calmly scan the area ... Uh-huh ... just turn it on ...
              Well, divanologists, remind, why is AZ so terrible for an ATGM? Well, what is she doing with him?
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 3 August 2020 20: 02 New
                +1
                Well, I turned on the radar of the tank, along with a bunch of sensors, and what next? What are your actions?
                And I misunderstood about ATGM and AZ.
                1. Alien ...
                  Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 06 New
                  -1
                  And then he will get a splash in the forehead. Or on the forehead.
                  About how, it is already incomprehensible. ))) I repeat: well, the ATGM is flying to the vehicle, it is flying. And the toy-KAZ. AND? What happens next?
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 3 August 2020 20: 09 New
                    +1
                    And from whom will he receive? And why only after turning on the radar? By the way, it is undesirable to hit the tank in the forehead. Their forehead is the most durable.
                    You can see what happens when the ammunition approaches the zone of the protected KAZ on the Internet. There are many videos. Talking on your fingers is long and indecent.
            2. vVvAD
              vVvAD 10 August 2020 01: 20 New
              0
              You seem to have missed this comment from the author of the article
              Quote: AVM
              But if we talk about deployed complexes, then the PMCM may well turn out so that it would be optimal not only to make a remote control, but to carry a launcher with a control system and a reconnaissance system, since a missile shot can be detected by the UV radiation of the engine, or, if the enemy has Radar, track the launch point along the trajectory of the ammunition.]

              and inattentively read the article (see the ATGM flight time table in it).
              However, the way of overloading the KAZ channel currently seems preferable. But launching expensive items in volleys is expensive. And if, in the case of RPGs, sending a cheap snag from a separate barrel is a way out, then for a hypersonic ATGM it is easier to make imitating, or better - full-fledged tandem warheads without their own SU (crowbars)
              In addition, the ATGM crowbar can have a large mass and speed. And for its deflection or deformation, KAZ will be needed with completely different characteristics than for BOPS. And we are talking about the bar that KAZ has not yet taken.
              So they won't.
          2. Operator
            Operator 3 August 2020 14: 34 New
            -1
            And on a fig - ATGM doublet will shoot with a doublet KAZ.
            1. Sergey_G_M
              Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 14: 44 New
              +1
              I'm not very sure about that.
              The radar is at the heart of the KAZ and when triggered, a field of fragments is created, which is very doubtful that in such conditions the radar would be able to select the second ATGM and manage to turn the KAZ combat element into the sector instead of the first one that worked.
              1. Operator
                Operator 3 August 2020 15: 55 New
                +3
                The millimeter-wave radar will perfectly select both targets on the approach, and the LSI will determine the speed of the targets, calculate the necessary meeting points with the KAZ counter-ammunition and sequentially fire them taking into account the time of the falling fragments from the first shot.
            2. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 15: 59 New
              0
              Quote: Operator
              And on a fig - ATGM doublet will shoot with a doublet KAZ.

              And if you guessed right? Firstly, the operation time of the "electronic warfare missile" is a little earlier than the operation of the KAZ (at a greater distance than the KAZ works ...) ... secondly, the release of a "cloud" of dipoles, for example .. or else "something" masks " "rocket! ...
              1. Sergey_G_M
                Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 16: 59 New
                +1
                I agree with you - KAZ is not some special wunderwolf that the Operator wants to convince us about.
                If KAZ systems appear en masse on tanks, countermeasures will be developed immediately.
                As for the electronic warfare missiles, it is a little doubtful, it is too specialized.
                But the portable jamming systems for KAZ are quite. A radar the size of a suitcase, carried out by the sidewalk can seriously complicate the work of the KAZ radar. And even if the tank detects it and aims in its direction, then let it try to find and accurately aim at a disguised suitcase at a distance of two kilometers, while a tanker is engaged in such garbage, a couple of conventional ATGMs can easily fly into him. And if you synchronize the electronic warfare radar with the ATGM so that the radar turns on only when the ATGM approaches the tank, then the tank will not be able to do anything about it.
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 17: 48 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Sergey_G_M
                  If KAZ systems appear en masse on tanks, countermeasures will be developed immediately.

                  Exactly ! AT missiles, capable of ... oriented to overcome the protection of KAZ. will be more difficult, which means. more expensive than existing anti-tank missiles, even the 3rd generation! This means that they will appear in service only in case of mass equipping of KAZs with "integral" tank units! Already now, such a method as "shooting" with a doublet "Kornet" with a single laser beam is practiced! What prevents, when paired with a PU, equipping one warhead missile with dipoles, for example, and a remotely programmable fuse? What prevents to equip self-propelled anti-tank systems or the warhead of an anti-tank missile with detectors for the launch of a protective ammunition by KAZ? The use of a radar jammer is possible, but it is better to do this on a self-propelled anti-tank system ... A portable generator ... can complicate the organization of countering KAZ ...
                2. Shopping Mall
                  3 August 2020 20: 55 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Sergey_G_M
                  I agree with you - KAZ is not some special wunderwolf that the Operator wants to convince us about.
                  If KAZ systems appear en masse on tanks, countermeasures will be developed immediately.
                  As for the electronic warfare missiles, it is a little doubtful, it is too specialized.
                  But the portable jamming systems for KAZ are quite. A radar the size of a suitcase, carried out by the sidewalk can seriously complicate the work of the KAZ radar. And even if the tank detects it and aims in its direction, then let it try to find and accurately aim at a disguised suitcase at a distance of two kilometers, while a tanker is engaged in such garbage, a couple of conventional ATGMs can easily fly into him. And if you synchronize the electronic warfare radar with the ATGM so that the radar turns on only when the ATGM approaches the tank, then the tank will not be able to do anything about it.


                  In modern tanks, radar with AFAR, it is not easy to drown out. Moreover, its task is to work on targets at 10-200 meters, and the jamming radar should be at 1000-2000 meters and further.

                  And yes, the tank does not need to find the source of interference exactly - the HE shell will cover it according to approximate coordinates.
                  1. Sergey_G_M
                    Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 22: 12 New
                    +1
                    Not strong in radar, it's hard for me to say anything.
                    But here's a HE shell to cover a small-sized target is definitely not very successful.
                    Now, if you use a projectile with arrow-shaped ready-made striking elements, then the probability of covering will be greater. True, the gunner must choose this projectile, then loading (on tanks without an automatic loader, there is a pipe in general), in general, such a thing, here, even without our fantasies, it's just not very easy to hit a pturist faster than a tank.
            3. Alien ...
              Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 07 New
              0
              So, here is closer to the topic. Two questions at once: what and where will they shoot?
              1. Operator
                Operator 3 August 2020 20: 19 New
                -1
                Two counter-ammunition at the meeting points, respectively, with the leading and main rocket-propelled grenades.
                1. Alien ...
                  Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 26 New
                  0
                  , sweeping away everything in its path worse than shrapnel ... Interestingly, someone checked how it really works in "field" conditions, when there is a crew, then there is an infantry, there is equipment and a w / n ... And if the infantry is on armor ... I have not seen or heard this in practice.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 3 August 2020 20: 38 New
                    -1
                    The counter-ammunition "Arena" and "Trophy" - such as the mines MON, after the departure and detonation creates a one-way flow of fragments, the axis of which is directed to the calculated meeting point with the attacking ammunition such as a rocket-propelled grenade or rocket.

                    The safe zone from the shock wave and fragments (including from the possible operation of a cumulative warhead of a grenade / rocket) is beyond 200 meters from the tank.

                    Those. in a tank attack with infantry support, the infantry should be behind the tank at a distance of 200 meters, which is a standard situation for modern tanks firing BOPS with an increased muzzle flame and shock muzzle wave.
                    1. Alien ...
                      Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 53 New
                      0
                      I studied this theory for 4 years.
                      Practice from Syria and Libya so far indicates that military equipment is being shot from ATGM in open spaces to smithereens.

                      And about the order of battle: where are the motorized rifles in relation to the BMP / BTR? What am I for: why is everyone attached to tanks?
                      1. Operator
                        Operator 3 August 2020 21: 08 New
                        -1
                        Have the Russians and Syrians already started using KAZ? laughing

                        Why would BMPs and, especially, armored personnel carriers, go on the attack in the same formation with the infantrymen - all types of non-tankers with KAZ will go behind the infantry at a distance of 200 or more meters, that's all.
                      2. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 3 August 2020 21: 21 New
                        0
                        That's it! That's all the answers to today's questions. fellow

                        all these types of nedotanks and will carve their own infantry, as in a duck hunt. I hope I heard how many times during the exercises they managed to shoot at the infantry in front of the PKT BMP-1 and even the KPVT armored personnel carrier?

                        The topic itself is very interesting, because it does not reject any of the vectors of development. I am impressed by Israeli telecontrol / surveillance. The plus is that operator can fire from closed firing positions. And not to appear in the field of view of the enemy at all. And choose a target to your liking (even such a UAV with a limited lifespan) .. Go find his without radio signal bearing ...
                      3. Operator
                        Operator 3 August 2020 21: 51 New
                        -1
                        Will carve out those who do not grab on the ground from an unsuppressed enemy firing point, after which the BMP / armored personnel carrier will deal with it.

                        KAZ is not for the operator, but for the ammunition.
                      4. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 14: 56 New
                        0
                        And how should they go on the attack? Underground?
                        And what, what for b / n? If you do not destroy the operator, you will be overwhelmed. You won't even know where from ... The same Jerusalemites are now placing this approach at the forefront of the fight against drones ...
                        Listen, what are you there, in general, no one had anything to do with the military service, at least in theory?
                      5. Operator
                        Operator 6 August 2020 17: 51 New
                        -1
                        Have you dealt with KAZ?
                      6. Alien ...
                        Alien ... 6 August 2020 18: 12 New
                        0
                        And you? I've seen her live at least once work(on exercises or tests), and not just some pieces of iron on the armor? Me not. Moreover, there are no such videos from Syria / Iraq / Libya either ... And the same Thrush is years old, like a turtle ...
  • Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 3 August 2020 20: 35 New
    0
    on the Berezhok / Bereg modules, which are now being actively installed on BMP-2 / BMD-2, this was implemented 10 years ago)
  • kapitan92
    kapitan92 3 August 2020 23: 56 New
    0
    Quote: Sergey_G_M
    It is not difficult and not expensive, just ATGMs will start firing a doublet.
    It's even easier with hand grenade launchers:


    RPG-30 "Hook"

    hi The RPG 30 range is only 200m. Alas, this is extremely small.
    Basic structural and combat characteristics:

    caliber - 105 mm;
    weight - 10,5 kg;
    length - 1135 mm;
    shot range - 200 m;
    sight range - 200 m;

    thickness of penetrated barriers: armor - 600 mm, reinforced concrete - 1500 mm, brick - 2000 mm, earth - 3700 mm;
    the starting speed of the grenade is 120 m / s;
    main grenade caliber - 105 mm
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 3 August 2020 07: 33 New
    0
    The best option is the so-called barging ammunition, which must have its own rocket engine for acceleration. The drone brought out such an ammunition, as soon as the target was detected, the wings fold, and having received the maximum acceleration, the ammunition hits the target from above, in the place protected by armor. This is clearly a lot cheaper than hypersonic rounds for ATGMs.
    1. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 08: 10 New
      +4
      Quote: Thrifty
      The best option is the so-called barging ammunition, which must have its own rocket engine for acceleration. The drone brought out such an ammunition, as soon as the target was detected, the wings fold, and having received the maximum acceleration, the ammunition hits the target from above, in the place protected by armor. This is clearly a lot cheaper than hypersonic rounds for ATGMs.


      This is a convenient weapon, but also an easy target for weapons sharpened for small UAVs.
      1. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse 3 August 2020 22: 28 New
        0
        Quote: AVM
        This is a convenient weapon, but also an easy target for weapons sharpened for small UAVs.

        You stepped on the second sore callus. :) After all, there are still no weapons sharpened for small UAVs. All threaten that they say, wait, wait, just about, say, we will strain our brain and do it. But there are no good ideas yet.
        1. Shopping Mall
          4 August 2020 08: 11 New
          0
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Quote: AVM
          This is a convenient weapon, but also an easy target for weapons sharpened for small UAVs.

          You stepped on the second sore callus. :) After all, there are still no weapons sharpened for small UAVs. All threaten that they say, wait, wait, just about, say, we will strain our brain and do it. But there are no good ideas yet.


          I wrote in an article about laser weapons: https://topwar.ru/155508-lazernoe-oruzhie-suhoputnye-vojska-i-pvo-chast-3.html

          In 2017, information appeared about the placement of the Polyus Research Institute for a tender for an integral part of research work (R & D), the purpose of which is to create a mobile laser complex to combat small-sized unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in daylight and twilight conditions. The complex should consist of a tracking system and the construction of target flight paths, providing target designation for a laser radiation guidance system, the source of which will be a liquid laser. On a demonstration sample, it is required to realize detection and acquisition of a detailed image to 20 of air objects at a distance from 200 to 1500 meters, with the ability to distinguish a UAV from a bird or a cloud, it is required to perform a trajectory calculation and hit the target. The maximum contract price announced in the tender is 23,5 million rubles. Completion is scheduled for April 2018. According to the final protocol, the only participant and winner of the competition is the company "Shvabe".


          What the results are unknown ...
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 10: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Thrifty
      The best option is the so-called barging ammunition, which must have its own rocket engine for acceleration.
      In the United States, something similar was being developed ... An anti-tank missile can fly, for example, at subsonic speed .... before the target it switches to "hypersonic" ...
  • tlauicol
    tlauicol 3 August 2020 08: 29 New
    +1
    Why not use a shock core, detonating the charge before the missile enters the kaz range? For 200 meters to go into the roof
    1. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 09: 04 New
      +2
      Quote: Tlauicol
      Why not use a shock core, detonating the charge before the missile enters the kaz range? For 200 meters to go into the roof


      Quite an interesting option, but there are a few points:

      1. If the carrier has a seeker, then the problem of its blinding by the laser remains.
      2. If the carrier is subsonic / supersonic without a seeker (like a second-generation ATGM), then the problem of operator damage remains.
      3. For "large" subsonic ATGMs, the problem of the destruction of air defense missile systems remains, especially since the problem of the proliferation of small UAVs will contribute to the saturation of the armed forces with specialized complexes to combat them, and they will most likely be able to operate on subsonic ATGMs.

      But in general, PMSM, the topic of shock cores in ATGM has not yet been disclosed.
      1. anzar
        anzar 3 August 2020 22: 47 New
        0
        the problem of the proliferation of small UAVs will contribute to the saturation of the armed forces with specialized complexes to combat them, and they are most likely will be able to work on subsonic ATGM.

        This is exactly so!
        KAZ is a bit of a dead-end means, its complexity (and price) grows strongly when trying to overcome the methods of countering it (2-3 attacking missiles, strike nuclei ...) And it is still a "passive" means (by the method of application))) despite to the name. bully It is necessary that each to equip a tank with a KAZ, it is quickly (and cheaply) beefed up / disabled (along with the DZ) by a banal burst of 23mm cannon of the Dushman "technical" ... We do not say about its effect on our infantry (what does she do there ...)) ).
        But if you include, say 2pcs. specialized "anti-aircraft" tanks in a battle group (company) of tanks (6-8) ... Having 50-60mm high-ballistic cannons (projectile with prog. blasting) in combination with a millimeter radar and possibly a laser (medium power) ...
        Such a "defensive" tank (armor similar to MBT) will destroy (cheap!) all what flies, circles, flies, etc. within a radius of 3-1 km. Except for BOPS, of course. Along the way, it can "strip" enemy tanks and armored vehicles, suppress infantry and snipers ... Its crew can launch tactical bezipotniki ...
        Those samples of hypersonic ATGMs may be good for helicopters, but for the earth they are heavy - they require a carrier, and this is, in essence, a shit to replace tanks. It is a fidget - without his protection, there is no need to put 4-8 missiles there, he will not have time to shoot so many times ... 2 for the eyes (if one fails) laughing In addition, despite throwing. principle, they are far from the stability of BOPS against shrapnel fields of protective ammunition. Especially if this field creates a 50-60mm projectile per kilometer from the target (the trajectory changes) and not a KAZ at 20-30m.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 10: 40 New
      +2
      Quote: Tlauicol
      use a shock core, detonating the charge before the missile enters the zone of action of the kaz? For 200 meters to go into the roof

      This idea is well known ... For example, a controlled formation of a penetrator ("shock nucleus") is being developed! When a warhead explodes, a BOPS is formed, which is capable of acting like a "traditional" tank BOPS and hitting armored targets at a greater distance than the usual, already well-known "shock cores"! But I can't vouch for 200 m!
    3. Operator
      Operator 3 August 2020 14: 36 New
      +2
      The shock core has scanty armor penetration, which can be completely reduced to zero due to primitive shielding.
      1. tlauicol
        tlauicol 3 August 2020 15: 10 New
        +1
        Roof shielding? And where will you put all the external stuffing? On caterpillars?
        Penetration from the upper hemisphere by the core is sufficient, with a margin
        1. Operator
          Operator 3 August 2020 15: 59 New
          -1
          To fragment the impact nucleus, it is sufficient to install a 1 cm thick false roof at a distance of 5 cm from the armor roof. The external "minced meat" is installed on the projections of the armored roofs limited in size (which are protected from the core by the "minced meat" itself).
          1. tlauicol
            tlauicol 3 August 2020 17: 21 New
            0

            How would they set the engine on fire or pierce the BMP through and through in your opinion?
            1. Operator
              Operator 3 August 2020 17: 46 New
              -1
              Fragments of the ventilation grill set fire to the engine. And the through penetration of the BMP by the shock core is an urban legend, since the core is deformed and slowed down already when the first obstacle is penetrated.

              The hollow impact core compared to the monolithic BOPS penetrator is like a thimble and a needle.

              In addition, the core has a hypersonic speed only in the first meters of its flight, after which the core is perfectly knocked down by the BOPS counter-ammunition, as well as the ATGM carrier while approaching the point of formation of the core.
              1. tlauicol
                tlauicol 3 August 2020 18: 45 New
                0
                Quote: Operator
                the core has a hypersonic speed only in the first meters of its flight, after which the core is perfectly knocked down by the BOPS counter-ammunition,.

                yes
              2. tlauicol
                tlauicol 3 August 2020 19: 00 New
                0
                Quote: Operator
                Fragments of the ventilation grill set fire to the engine. And the through penetration of the BMP by the shock core is an urban legend, since the core is deformed and slowed down already when the first obstacle is penetrated.

                .

                here are three spaced plates https://www.youtube.com/watch? v = s2hInZOYmvY
                1. Operator
                  Operator 3 August 2020 19: 17 New
                  -1
                  It all depends on the flight distance of the UY - if it is several meters, then the core maintains sufficient speed to break through a serious obstacle. But KAZ will not allow the UYa carrier to fly several meters to the tank and form a core.

                  That's all.
                  1. tlauicol
                    tlauicol 3 August 2020 19: 44 New
                    0
                    30-50mm roof and MO hatches, 70-80mm side is a serious obstacle? It makes its way from tens of meters with the most ancient UYa.
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 3 August 2020 19: 51 New
                      0
                      Tens of meters - this is the range of the KAZ for the UYa carrier.
                      1. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 4 August 2020 03: 49 New
                        0
                        Quote: Operator
                        Tens of meters - this is the range of the KAZ for the UYa carrier.

                        First you write "enough centimeter screen", then "easily knock off" negative
                        Arena, blackbird 6-8m. Afghanite 3-5m. Trophy 30 (?) M. This is not enough even for the eighties. The upper hemisphere is even worse
                      2. Operator
                        Operator 4 August 2020 10: 54 New
                        -1
                        KAZ "Afghanit" uses a missile-type counter-ammunition, so its range can be estimated at no less than 100 meters. It costs nothing to install the Afganita launcher vertically to protect the upper hemisphere.

                        PS shielding serves to intercept UYa, fired from a long distance, KAZ - to intercept the UYa carrier at any distance.
                      3. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 4 August 2020 14: 55 New
                        +1
                        [quote = Operator]
                        "KAZ" Afghanit "uses a missile-type counter-ammunition, so its range can be estimated at not less than 100 meters."
                        .No. KAZ "Afghanit" uses a 107mm caliber missile counter-ammunition with an interception range of 5m.
                        you wait for it at least all-round
                        "It costs nothing to set the Afganita launcher upright to protect the upper hemisphere." No.
                      4. Operator
                        Operator 4 August 2020 21: 26 New
                        -1
                        Green - to make the Afghanit's range of 5 meters convincing (like knocking off the optics from the tower)? laughing
                      5. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 5 August 2020 16: 47 New
                        0
                        Quote: Operator
                        Green - to make the Afghanit's range of 5 meters convincing (like knocking off the optics from the tower)? laughing

                        so far you look like I am in the nineties "can not pierce the BMP through", like him "the first metal barrier destroys", or how "its speed drops before breaking through a serious obstacle at a great distance"And there we will reach the Afghanit's range.
                      6. Operator
                        Operator 6 August 2020 01: 35 New
                        -2
                        Look sensibly at the propaganda murzilka to which you refer - if everything drawn there corresponded to reality, then the RPG warhead (at least) would have long ago been UYa, and not KZ.

                        The devil is in the details - a photo of armor penetration is taken when using UY at a distance of several meters, and a murzilka is drawn for their sphero-conical application at a distance of 50-100 meters.
                      7. tlauicol
                        tlauicol 6 August 2020 03: 40 New
                        -1
                        Murzilka was photographed from 75m in the case of a stand with spaced armor
  • merkava-2bet
    merkava-2bet 7 August 2020 23: 27 New
    0
    In addition, the core has hypersonic speed only in the first meters of its flight, after which the core is perfectly knocked down by the BOPS counter-ammunition
    And who can shoot down a cumulative “shock core” so beautifully and naturally?
    1. Operator
      Operator 8 August 2020 03: 39 New
      -2
      The one who has already shot down caliber BS at a speed of 900 m / s (KAZ "Shater") and is intended to shoot down sub-caliber BS at a speed of over 1500 m / s (KAZ "Afganit").
      1. merkava-2bet
        merkava-2bet 8 August 2020 12: 34 New
        0
        Facts in the studio, documents or videos of the shooting down of the cumulative "shock core".
        The same applies to KAZ Afganit, as it knocks down BOPS and "shock cores".
        Are you an official with high access to sov.secret information, if you assert so zealously or a dreamer with a gullible soul who believes in the tales of your officials, on which there is no place to be branded for lies and heresy.
        1. Operator
          Operator 8 August 2020 14: 17 New
          -3
          If something ("Tent") knocked down a full-fledged AS at a speed of 900 m / s, then it will all the more knock down a lightweight UYa at the same speed.

          Learn Russian - I was only talking about the purpose of "Afganit" according to the public statements of the RF Ministry of Defense employees, and not at all about shooting down at least one BOPS.

          In the meantime, you can self-shoot due to the fact that among your migrants from the actual homeland to the "historical" there was not a single "Tent" developer (unlike the "Arena" developers) bully
          1. merkava-2bet
            merkava-2bet 8 August 2020 16: 07 New
            0
            Once again balabol, facts in the studio, or said silently.
          2. Operator
            Operator 8 August 2020 16: 18 New
            -5
            Improve your knowledge of the Russian language and materiel, Hebrew laughing
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 4 August 2020 19: 22 New
    0
    This shock core cannot pass even the oldest active defense block, correct if not. Purely according to Wikipedia, the world's most expensive plates for broaching an impact core into a hole pierce no more steel than a rocket caliber. But they are silent about what will happen to this core when it hits the active defense unit.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 5 August 2020 06: 55 New
      0
      The caliber of the core, even 70mm, is enough to break through the roof of a tank or the engine grill with a margin. What can we say about 120-150mm? Old CDZs often do not have time to fire on a nucleus or cumulative, and against new ones there is a precharge from the same nucleus of a smaller caliber.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 16: 07 New
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    Impact core has scanty armor penetration,

    These are "traditional" penetrators ("shock nuclei") ...! But now they are working on the controlled formation of a "shock core", when the explosion of an EFP forms a penetrator ("shock core") of a given shape ... for example, in the form of the familiar BOPS of a tank gun!
    1. Operator
      Operator 3 August 2020 16: 16 New
      -2
      Let them work - for the next hundred years.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 17: 05 New
        +4
        Quote: Operator
        Let them work - for the next hundred years.

        Sufficiently elongated shells were formed, on which feathers, in addition to rotation, also gave greater stability. A projectile with 6 feathers with an inclination of 600 to the axis, which developed a speed of 750 rad / s, showed good properties, but further efforts led to more elongated projectiles. By all indications, including normal collision with an obstacle, they turned out to be more effective. Such projectiles of the "6A" project (Fig. 2) developed a speed of 6000 rad / s, giving acceptable accuracy. In view of the difficulty of punching completely perfect nuclei by explosion, their self-stabilizing rotation dramatically increased the hitting accuracy during normal collision. Such technology today will provide leadership for such projectiles in long-range FVS.
        THIS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING!
        1. Operator
          Operator 3 August 2020 17: 40 New
          -1
          Impact core in shape is a purely concrete empty condom, even with wings laughing
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 08: 30 New
    +3
    The author wrote a very interesting, relevant article, which some VO readers could not correctly assess ... well, for example, because of the inertia of their thinking! Hypersonic kinetic anti-tank missiles are a very promising weapon, which, possibly, will gain accelerated development in the near future! Indeed, as noted by the Author, the created prototypes of PT-"hypersonic", basically. "remotely controlled" ... (radio beam, laser beam, laser-command guidance ...), but work is underway to create miniature homing systems, which should "fit" into the ,, dimensions ,, of penetrators of anti-tank missiles, BOPS ... Currently, there is in the United States a hypersonic tank 120-mm projectile with a "caliber" combined seeker (active radar + semi-active laser ...) of the MRM-KE type ... Currently, several options for the development of hypersonic anti-tank missiles (ammunition) are being considered ... There is, for example, such an option, when an anti-tank missile on a long flight path flies at a supersonic (or even lower ...) speed, induced by homing ... near an armored target, the speed increases to hypersonic, guidance like NLAW, SRAW ... Hypersonic missiles can be "fired" in a salvo at several targets at once, as was conceived in Vought HVM. As for the "Soviet groundwork", I heard a rumor that in Soviet times a hypersonic anti-tank missile was developed ... even the name is recalled (although interference from sclerosis is not excluded ...) .... "tornado" ... This missile pierced tank armor, but it was terribly expensive, like a super elite prostitute ... the Soviet military was too expensive ...
  • Taoist
    Taoist 3 August 2020 08: 40 New
    +2
    IMHO certainly. But the point is to create a super-expensive weapon for such purposes? On armored vehicles, in principle, it is impossible to place a too sophisticated active protection complex designed for a multiple target ... so the most effective means will be a cluster warhead of the "active nucleus" type (all the more so there are such warheads) and there is already a question whether it will be a loitering vehicle or a jet a projectile with guidance in the "target location area" ... In general, even a highly sophisticated seeker is not needed there ...
    1. merkava-2bet
      merkava-2bet 7 August 2020 23: 39 New
      0
      Why is it super-expensive, you know how much a modern tank / BMP / armored personnel carrier / combat helicopter costs.
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 8 August 2020 20: 52 New
        0
        I know. But the cassette is all the same cheaper ... If effective defeat is achieved by simpler and cheaper methods then why the heck to fence a vegetable garden? The buzzword "hypersound" to exploit?
        By the way, the speed of the "shock core" is all the same ... There is 1-2 km / sec - no active protection will help ...
        1. merkava-2bet
          merkava-2bet 8 August 2020 20: 57 New
          0
          To be honest, I am in favor of adjustable BOPS and supersonic ATGMs with a tandem warhead with a cumulative "shock core" with non-contact detonation from a distance of say 50 meters, great chances of a KAZ breakthrough.
          1. Taoist
            Taoist 8 August 2020 21: 02 New
            +1
            Well, so am I about the same ...
            RBK-500 SPBE The bomb is equipped with 15 combat elements. Each is equipped with a radio altimeter and a thermal sensor tuned to the infrared radiation of armored vehicles. After the bomb is deployed, the combat elements are parachuted down to a certain height. and 14 kilograms of explosives with a device for forming a cumulative jet dive into the tank. " (from)
            No KAZ will protect you from this.
            1. Shopping Mall
              9 August 2020 23: 43 New
              +1
              Quote: Taoist
              Well, so am I about the same ...
              RBK-500 SPBE The bomb is equipped with 15 combat elements. Each is equipped with a radio altimeter and a thermal sensor tuned to the infrared radiation of armored vehicles. After the bomb is deployed, the combat elements are parachuted down to a certain height. and 14 kilograms of explosives with a device for forming a cumulative jet dive into the tank. " (from)
              No KAZ will protect you from this.


              They have a limitation on the radius of operation, i.e. these are not guided ammunition, if the tank is out of range, then they will no longer be able to fly up to it.

              There are not shaped charges but an impact core.

              You can protect yourself from the IR sensor with a smoke-metal contamination, aerosol, false warm targets. And in the future, for platforms with hybrid electric propulsion, a significant reduction in the IR footprint.

              Well, and most importantly, a COEP with a laser of sufficient power, which can damage the thermal sensor, or even the parachute of the ammunition.
              1. Operator
                Operator 10 August 2020 00: 02 New
                -2
                SPBE-D is triggered at an altitude of 150 meters, so the speed of the UYa meeting with tanks is no more than 900 m / s, which is quite enough to intercept the nucleus with the help of the Afganit KAZ.
                1. Taoist
                  Taoist 10 August 2020 10: 10 New
                  +1
                  KAZ does not work vertically upwards. Again, how many charges can the KAZ intercept at the same time? The meaning of such a scheme is in the "oversaturation" of active protection systems ...
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 10 August 2020 12: 10 New
                    -1
                    KAZ "Afganit" works in the direction where the launching device is directed.

                    One SPBE-D weighs 14 kg, after the deployment of the carrier bomb, these ammunition is scattered over a large area, after which they passively descend on parachutes where the wind will take, if they are lucky, they are above the tank in an amount of no more than one piece. Those. so it is impossible to overload the KAZ.

                    In addition, single-shot launchers "Afganita" (and "Arena"), which are installed in a variety of tanks, allow simultaneous firing of several attacking ammunition - in contrast to a pair of "Trophy", which requires a loss of time to reload after each shot.
                    1. merkava-2bet
                      merkava-2bet 10 August 2020 16: 42 New
                      0
                      In addition, single-shot launchers "Afganita" (and "Arena"), which are installed in a variety of tanks, allow simultaneous firing of several attacking ammunition - in contrast to a pair of "Trophy", which requires a loss of time to reload after each shot.
                      Once again the venerable dreamer, facts in the studio.
                      Have you ever seen how the Afghanit works, that's right, no one has seen it, maybe only those who test it. Regarding the Arena, how many of them are on Russian tanks, then, too, think when you talk nonsense.
                      1. Operator
                        Operator 10 August 2020 16: 44 New
                        -3
                        Stop poking - learn materiel, then you won't need to see.
                      2. merkava-2bet
                        merkava-2bet 10 August 2020 16: 51 New
                        0
                        That truth and truth gnaws. Do not be nervous, namesake, it is better to provide facts and arguments, rather than prostration and fantasy. Have a nice day.
                      3. Operator
                        Operator 10 August 2020 16: 54 New
                        -5
                        Themselves, only yourself.
          2. Taoist
            Taoist 10 August 2020 10: 07 New
            0
            This is the available ammunition ... Nobody bothers to improve it. Again - we are talking about very small application distances - i.e. it is enough to shoot a cassette in the target area - it is almost guaranteed that someone will fall within the range of the sensors. Well, replacing the parachutes with minidrones with the same "shock core" we will get quite a "long-playing" ammunition from which you just can't cover with an aerosol. And the homing channel can be combined - in different optical ranges - the miniatureization of optics and electronics quite allows it.
  • Free wind
    Free wind 3 August 2020 09: 32 New
    0
    Against armor-piercing, going on supersonic, capable of penetrating almost a meter of armor, all these defenses are like grain for an elephant. Shards, blast waves, shit cannot be stopped, and tungsten scrap cannot be destroyed. Also, I'm not sure that the protection will have time to work. Let's say he found a scrap radar, the computer processed the data, we need data about the speed, gave the command to fire, and then there is simple chemistry, and it cannot be compared with the speed of electronics. Until the capsule fires, until the powder ignites, etc., etc.
    1. dzvero
      dzvero 3 August 2020 10: 16 New
      +2
      The task of DZ and AZ is not so much in destroying the "scrap" (a nice bonus if it works out), but in breaking its orientation in flight. If contact with the armor occurs at certain angles, the "crowbar" will break itself.
      The time to activate the protection is not so long - one to two tenths of a second maximum. The speed of the electronics and the computing power of computers are at the level, a person is excluded from the decision-making chain ... To intercept the main ammunition, new systems will have to be developed, but there are no fundamental obstacles. The main problems of KAZ when intercepting tandem warheads or salvo launch.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 3 August 2020 10: 55 New
    +3
    ATGMs based on "crowbars" did not find use, because their
    the action is a direct shot. And the affected area is the frontal armor.
    It is more logical to hit the most vulnerable spots of the tank, and not the most protected.
    The vulnerable are the turret roof and engine on top.
    1. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 11: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It is more logical to hit the most vulnerable spots of the tank, and not the most protected.
      The vulnerable are the turret roof and engine on top.

      That is, the striking element must be controlled. And even the United States and the Israelis could not make a guided missile on hypersonic. Now, make the rockets on hypersonic, plus also controlled ones, then we'll see. Only now I think that such a rocket, which accelerates to hypersonic sound, and is even capable of piercing the roof of a modern tank, and even with an SGBV, and even suitable for field use, will cost like a launch vehicle. It’s cheaper and easier to use nuclear weapons for everything. If everything were that simple, the Americans would have long ago adopted hypersonic missiles. In my opinion, projects on a hypersonic missile with a crowbar are the same dead-end branch as the creation of Kurchevsky cannons at a speed of 700 m / s.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 13: 15 New
        0
        Quote: Kot_Kuzya
        And even the United States and the Israelis could not make a guided missile on hypersound.

        Failed ? belay All prototypes of hypersonic anti-tank missiles in the United States had laser guidance systems! As one company said, they could have made guidance on a millimeter-wave radio beam, but there was no order ...
    2. Free wind
      Free wind 3 August 2020 11: 37 New
      0
      I meant a projectile against a defense, not a missile. Against supersonic missiles, it seems all the same, the speed will not be enough, It's just that the chemical reactions of burning propellant charges are extreme, they cannot be increased. It seems in the magazine Behind the wheel I read about the suspension of the Mercedes a la 600. There the stiffness of the shock absorbers changed from the state of the road, it seems after 160 km / h, all the radars, the sensors did not have time to work. I can't vouch for the figure. If the KAZs are able to intercept targets, then I suppose you will have to shoot two or three shooters, send the first missile not to the tank, but in front of the tank, a bunch of stones and dirt are raised, on which the protection will have to work if lumps fly into the tank, what is flying there , no one will determine, and through them already send the terminator. Or the first missile with locating interference, say with aluminum foil, and the second after working out protection through the cloud. Just my speculation.
    3. Sergey_G_M
      Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 11: 54 New
      +6
      No, the problem of an ATGM with a crowbar is different, in principle, you can make a heavier crowbar that will pierce tanks in the forehead, the dimensions of the gun and space for loading as in a tank are not limited.
      The main problem of such ATGMs is in the dead zone. A rocket needs at least 500 meters to accelerate, and this is a big drawback that sharply makes such an ATGM very highly specialized. For helicopter-based, this is still the norm, and for ground-based - a full hat.
      1. Shopping Mall
        3 August 2020 13: 06 New
        +2
        Quote: Sergey_G_M
        No, the problem of an ATGM with a crowbar is different, in principle, you can make a heavier crowbar that will pierce tanks in the forehead, the dimensions of the gun and space for loading as in a tank are not limited.
        The main problem of such ATGMs is in the dead zone. A rocket needs at least 500 meters to accelerate, and this is a big drawback that sharply makes such an ATGM very highly specialized. For helicopter-based, this is still the norm, and for ground-based - a full hat.


        You are right, the booster section has a place to be. The question is, how much can you reduce it? How fast does the same MERA rocket reach 2200 m / s? How quickly will it reach 1500 m / s (approximately the same speed has a BOPS at a distance of 2000 meters)? Especially considering the fact that it flies upwards, and we do not need to overcome gravity when shooting at tanks.

        The second question is, can this section be shortened? For example, by increasing the combustion area of ​​the fuel. Or, for example, a combination of engines with nozzle (s) in the tail section and oblique nozzles located on the sides? It is possible that the side nozzles can also be used to control the ATGM.

        If it is possible to provide an acceleration range of up to 1500 m / s at 300 meters, this is already good, and if at 100-200 meters, then it is generally wonderful. By the way, the 9A4172 "Vortex" has a minimum launch range of 500 m, the ATGM "Shturm" and "Attack" - 400 m, and the latter are also installed on ground vehicles, incl. on the BMPT Terminator, a front line vehicle.
        1. Sergey_G_M
          Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 14: 29 New
          +3
          There is little data about foreign missiles, about domestic ones, too, but you can still dig up information for comparison and analysis.
          Oddly enough, the closest analogue of a hypersonic ATGM with a crowbar can be taken by the 23Ya6 SAM

          They also tried to disperse the missile as quickly as possible to reduce the affected area.
          And this is what happens (the exact characteristics are unknown, taken approximately)
          Max speed - 1500 m / s
          Acceleration time - 2 sec
          We get: the average speed at acceleration is 750 m / s, the dead zone is 1500 meters.
          So if an American managed to keep within 1000 meters, then this is a very, very good result, there can be no talk of 500, 300, or even more 200-100, this is already from a series of unreal fiction.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 10 New
            0
            "Dead zone" 1-1,5 km is a lot for an ATGM. It is necessary to compensate for it with another, classic "complex. Then is the game worth the candle?
            1. Sergey_G_M
              Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 00: 43 New
              +1
              This is how I compared the performance characteristics from open sources and the analogue of the rocket is not quite suitable.
              According to the article:
              The tests were quite successful; from 1995 to 2004, about twenty tests were carried out to destroy stationary and mobile targets at a distance of 700 to 4270 meters.

              Americans are rich, but they know how to count money and tests were carried out on goals that they can really hit. From this phrase, you can understand that, no matter how hard they tried, they failed to reduce the dead zone to less than 700 meters, but this is less than I "fingers and a piece of paper figured out" but still for ATGM it's a lot, but it's not very much.
        2. Operator
          Operator 3 August 2020 14: 45 New
          -1
          ARS sharply reduces the acceleration section due to its acceleration in the barrel.

          The growth of the rocket engine thrust on the air part of the trajectory is provided by replacing the rocket fuel from ballistic powder (as in ATGM) with phlegmatized HMX (as in RVV), as well as by using high-strength carbon fiber for the manufacture of the engine body instead of steel (with a multiple increase in pressure in the combustion chamber ).
          1. Sergey_G_M
            Sergey_G_M 3 August 2020 22: 42 New
            +1
            Rocket projectiles are of course cool and there are already similar projectiles
            But what does ATGM have to do with it? For ARS, here's a surprise, you need a gun and you can't drag it on yourself, and you can't even carry it on a tarantay like a hamer.
            1. Operator
              Operator 3 August 2020 23: 35 New
              -3
              ATGMs (in connection with KAZ) - everything, controlled by ARS - Foreva. The situation tanks vs ATM goes back to 1944.
        3. Kot_Kuzya
          Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 22: 50 New
          +2
          ... If it is possible to provide an acceleration range of up to 1500 m / s at 300 meters, this is already good, and if at 100-200 meters, then it is generally wonderful.

          Do you even imagine that this is impossible? The Sprut cannon weighs 6,5 tons, while it disperses scrap weighing only 7 kg. And here you are proposing a rocket weighing an order of magnitude more, to accelerate at almost the same distance as the "Octopus". Are you the reincarnation of Tukhachevsky?
          1. Shopping Mall
            3 August 2020 23: 43 New
            -1
            Quote: Kot_Kuzya
            ... If it is possible to provide an acceleration range of up to 1500 m / s at 300 meters, this is already good, and if at 100-200 meters, then it is generally wonderful.

            Do you even imagine that this is impossible? The Sprut cannon weighs 6,5 tons, while it disperses scrap weighing only 7 kg. And here you are proposing a rocket weighing an order of magnitude more, to accelerate at almost the same distance as the "Octopus". Are you the reincarnation of Tukhachevsky?


            A conventional artillery shell has an acceleration of about 100000 m / s2 (10000g). For BOPS, it should be about 200000 m / s2. Those. up to 2000 m / s, the projectile accelerates in 0,01 s.

            The barrel of a tank gun is about 7 meters. We need to accelerate a rocket with a mass 10 times more (70 kg) in a time of 100-200 times more (1-2 s) over a segment 20-40 times more (150-300 m). And the speed is enough to get 1500 m / s.
            1. Kot_Kuzya
              Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 23: 57 New
              +1
              Nonsense. If it were possible to make a recoilless installation of a reasonable mass, accelerating the projectile to speeds like that of barrel artillery, then such an installation would have been adopted long ago and the barrel artillery would have died like muzzle-loading guns died. You are similar to Tukhachevsky, who demanded projectile speeds from recoilless artillery like those of a PTO, who demanded a silent ride from tanks, and who demanded anti-aircraft fire from divisional guns.
              1. Shopping Mall
                4 August 2020 08: 28 New
                +1
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                Nonsense. If it were possible to make a recoilless installation of a reasonable mass, accelerating the projectile to speeds like that of barrel artillery, then such an installation would have been adopted long ago and the barrel artillery would have died like muzzle-loading guns died. You are similar to Tukhachevsky, who demanded projectile speeds from recoilless artillery like those of a PTO, who demanded a silent ride from tanks, and who demanded anti-aircraft fire from divisional guns.


                In principle, there are such installations - they are called MLRS, and they have their own advantages and disadvantages, so they did not supplant the cannon artillery, but supplemented it.

                At the head of the projectile at the exit from the Msta-S barrel, the speed is about 810 m / s, for the Grad projectile at a maximum of 715 m / s.

                Nobody said that the rocket should accelerate in the same area as the projectile. For a projectile this section is 6-8 meters, for a rocket it is 500 meters, and if it is reduced to 200-300, it will still not turn it into 6-8 meters.

                The A-135 missile defense missile accelerated to 5500 m / s in 3-4 seconds, longitudinal acceleration up to 210G. But this is a much more complex product, designed to defeat high-speed targets, flying vertically upward against gravity. and it is unlikely that it was optimized specifically for maximum acceleration - rather, a combination of acceleration, altitude, and maneuverability. I mean, the acceleration section of 200-300 meters up to a speed of 1500 m / s may not be easy, but this is not a fantasy.
            2. Sergey_G_M
              Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 00: 33 New
              +2
              Comrades, comparing shells and ATGMs in the discussion on the article, we begin to compare performance characteristics head-on, while forgetting about the physical processes. Let me explain:
              When a crowbar leaves a tank gun, it already has enormous kinetic energy, inertia, and stabilization (compare the area of ​​anti-tank guided missile stabilizers and a crowbar), the influence of the wind, the underlying surface, and different pressure on the trajectory is very small.
              The ATGM flies out of the container at a low speed and minor disturbances, be it wind gusts, missile alignment tolerances, etc. will lead to a miss. Yes, the ATGM has control, but there is a big "BUT" during operation of the main engine of a hypersonic ATGM it is almost impossible to control it.

              This is the force of the flame from a hypersonic missile defense system (startrix), how will you control the rocket if, during the operation of its main engine, there is a cloud of plasma behind it that suppresses all control signals? How far will the engine stop running? Will the operator be able to see the target through the clouds of sand and dust with the lifted rocket?
              Oh, I feel it's not for nothing that the Americans abandoned such a thing, there are a lot of problems looming.
              1. Shopping Mall
                4 August 2020 08: 34 New
                +1
                Quote: Sergey_G_M

                .
                The ATGM flies out of the container at a low speed and minor disturbances, be it gusts of wind, missile alignment tolerances, etc. will lead to a miss.


                The inertial guidance system will "hold" the ATGM for the duration of the engine operation - this is about 500 meters.

                Quote: Sergey_G_M
                Yes, the ATGM has control, but there is a big "BUT" during operation of the main engine of a hypersonic ATGM it is almost impossible to control it.
                ... how will you control the rocket if, during the operation of its main engine, there is a plasma cloud behind it that suppresses all control signals?


                After turning it off, but in general, there is work on this topic - on control through plasma. It is easier to accept a radio command than to make a window for a full-fledged GOS.

                Quote: Sergey_G_M
                How far will the engine stop running?


                PMSM about 500 m.

                Quote: Sergey_G_M
                Will the operator be able to see the target through the clouds of sand and dust with the lifted rocket?


                During the flight of the hypersonic ATGM, the target will not go far and will not have time to perform a sharp maneuver. And if the target is far away, then the visibility will be restored.

                Quote: Sergey_G_M
                Oh, I feel it's not for nothing that the Americans abandoned such a thing, there are a lot of problems looming.


                Maybe they didn't refuse, I mentioned the possible reasons at the end of the article.
                1. Sergey_G_M
                  Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 09: 16 New
                  +1
                  Andrey, I don't even know what to tell you.
                  Horror horror ((
                  The inertial guidance system will "hold" the ATGM for the duration of the engine operation - this is about 500 meters.

                  How will she support? Than?

                  After turning it off, but in general, there is work on this topic - on control through plasma. It is easier to accept a radio command than to make a window for a full-fledged GOS.

                  Yes, you can, but the radio signal receiver will be 1 kg and 1 liter in size, let's try to stuff it into a 0.9 kg submunition.
                  During the flight of the hypersonic ATGM, the target will not go far and will not have time to perform a sharp maneuver. And if the target is far away, then the visibility will be restored.

                  It is unclear if the goal does not go away then why do we need control. Will visibility be restored? An ATGM with a speed of 1500, 3 km will fly in 2 seconds - i.e. dust sand and all the shit settles in 2 seconds?
                  1. Shopping Mall
                    4 August 2020 16: 01 New
                    0
                    Quote: Sergey_G_M
                    Andrey, I don't even know what to tell you.
                    Horror horror ((
                    The inertial guidance system will "hold" the ATGM for the duration of the engine operation - this is about 500 meters.

                    How will she support? Than?


                    According to the data of small-sized gyroscopes, which by the way support the flight of the third-generation ATGM before the target is captured by the seeker.

                    Quote: Sergey_G_M

                    After turning it off, but in general, there is work on this topic - on control through plasma. It is easier to accept a radio command than to make a window for a full-fledged GOS.

                    Yes, you can, but the radio signal receiver will be 1 kg and 1 liter in size, let's try to stuff it into a 0.9 kg submunition.


                    A bicaliber hypersonic missile will weigh 50-100 kg. With the first stage (we take as a basis the MERA rocket indicated in the article). The mass of the second stage - scrap with a control unit (without an engine) is not 900 grams (this emerged from the post about the Starstreak missile defense system), but about 8-10 kg. We need a sophisticated receiver only in the acceleration section, i.e. in the first stage. At the second stage, it will be several times smaller in size.

                    The question of plasma penetration by laser radiation of various wavelengths, ranging from near UV to IR radiation, is also open to me. Or maybe it's still easier to follow the "laser path"?

                    Quote: Sergey_G_M
                    During the flight of the hypersonic ATGM, the target will not go far and will not have time to perform a sharp maneuver. And if the target is far away, then the visibility will be restored.

                    It is unclear if the goal does not go away then why do we need control.


                    Finishing will most likely be required, but the loss of control close to it will not lead to a miss due to minimal target displacement; at long ranges, minimal trajectory correction will be required.

                    Quote: Sergey_G_M
                    Will visibility be restored? An ATGM with a speed of 1500, 3 km will fly in 2 seconds - i.e. dust sand and all the shit settles in 2 seconds?


                    And how much will it decrease for technical vision systems? IR cameras, thermal imaging and radar? A slight excess of the trajectory, too, has not been canceled. In any case, it is necessary so that the bushes are not cut.
        4. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 23: 10 New
          0
          Quote: AVM
          can this section be shortened? For example, by increasing the combustion area of ​​the fuel. Or, for example, a combination of engines with nozzle (s) in the tail section and oblique nozzles located on the sides?

          I recall that a certain hypersonic anti-tank missile (USA?) Had, thus, up to 6 engines of simultaneous activation ...
    4. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 13: 08 New
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      ATGMs based on "crowbars" did not find use, because their
      the action is a direct shot. And the affected area is the frontal armor.
      It is more logical to hit the most vulnerable spots of the tank, and not the most protected.
      The vulnerable are the turret roof and engine on top.


      And what if KAZ + KOEP learn to effectively intercept three of four such ATGMs? Given the cost of an ATGM with a seeker, this will not be very effective.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 3 August 2020 13: 16 New
        +4
        Weapons are usually made "for the coming decades."
        So it is with ATGMs that can strike from above.
        Almost no one in the army has KAZs. Single samples only.
        And Spikes are a serial weapon, they are widely used. And bring them down
        there is nothing yet.
        When remedies spread, they will return to new / forgotten
        means of destruction. Like the crowbar rockets you described in the article.
        1. Shopping Mall
          3 August 2020 16: 32 New
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Weapons are usually made "for the coming decades."
          So it is with ATGMs that can strike from above.
          Almost no one in the army has KAZs. Single samples only.
          And Spikes are a serial weapon, they are widely used. And bring them down
          there is nothing yet.
          When remedies spread, they will return to new / forgotten
          means of destruction. Like the crowbar rockets you described in the article.


          That is exactly why I wrote that the Russian Federation cannot completely abandon subsonic ATGMs with a seeker. They do it for the coming decades, but sometimes R&D starts almost in half a century - a reserve for the future. The USA, as we can see, has created such a groundwork. It is likely that we also have it, but under the stamp ...
    5. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 16: 18 New
      0
      I see no problem making an ATGM with a "crowbar" to hit the armor target from the top! In my opinion, there was a project of such a hypersonic anti-tank missile ... there the missile should fly at subsonic / supersonic speed at a "decent" altitude ... for example, at least 250 m ... When a target was detected, the missile went into a steep dive with advancement "crowbar" and acceleration to hypersound ... the defeat occurred from the top ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 3 August 2020 16: 47 New
        +2
        The rocket turns out to be two-stage. Dear.
        And on such a missile it is difficult to install a seeker that will withstand
        hypersound temperature. Or such a GOS will be at a cost
        equal to the rocket itself.
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 3 August 2020 18: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The rocket turns out to be two-stage. Dear.

          That's right ... the rocket turns out to be 2-stage ... expensive! What is there to do ? As they said in the 90s ...: and for whom is it easy now? In the case of massive equipping of armored vehicles with KAZs, tanks can regain their "former glory"; that is, they can return the combat value, the role of armored vehicles, the period of WW2! And you still have to fork out to offset the increased importance of tanks! And what does "expensive" mean? We like to say "expensive" (!); but they think less: "why" and "why"? And now you will not wait for an answer to these questions from me ... But one can speculate: why did the weaving factories "buried" the handicraft weavers? Why don't blacksmiths hammer nails now, and there are a lot of nails in stores? Why is machine (factory) production capable of organizing mass and cheap reproduction of goods such as shovels, meat grinders, pots, boots, jeans, locks, motorcycles, tractors, but no electronics? Why not understand the reasons for the high cost of military electronics? Why is there a huge number of smartphones, video cameras, cameras, microprocessors of computers and prices are decreasing over time, and the seeker of combat missiles is still very expensive! Nowadays, a lot of electronic toys are produced, equipped with video cameras, IR sensors, microprocessors, ANNs, miniature electric motors and their prices are decreasing as they become "massive" ... When are there automatic assembly lines for electronic equipment ... "Rekbus, croxword"? Ali is not there?
          1. Kot_Kuzya
            Kot_Kuzya 3 August 2020 22: 54 New
            +2
            Because a lot of money is sawing on military orders. Serdyukov is an honest man compared to the American generals from the Pentagon.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 50 New
              0
              This is a fairly unfounded statement. What data were compared? What is considered a saw? (You have to understand that there is a difference between ineffective spending of funds and pumping them into your pocket through "schemes").
              1. Kot_Kuzya
                Kot_Kuzya 4 August 2020 00: 04 New
                +2
                The US military budget is 10 times greater than the military budget of the Russian Federation, and more than the military budget of all countries in the world combined. That is, a lot of money is spinning in the US military sphere. This is the first thing. Second, the cost of military products purchased by the US Department of Defense, in my opinion, is clearly overstated. For example, the cost of purchasing one Dzhevelin ATGM is almost 200 thousand dollars. I believe that this price is inflated, like the inflated Apple brand, when smartphones of this brand are sold for 120 thousand, and Chinese counterparts are sold for 20 thousand. Out of these 200 thousand, the cost price of Jewelin, I believe, is no more than 20 thousand, all the rest of the money is divided between the people in the subject, and the Pentagon generals who buy these installations at an inflated price are clearly in the share.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 4 August 2020 00: 13 New
                  0
                  The US military budget is 10 times greater than the military budget of the Russian Federation, and more than the military budget of all countries in the world combined. That is, a lot of money is spinning in the US military sphere.

                  More than 10 smile
                  The military budget of China is 4 times larger than the Russian budget (it is like our entire budget), there is also a lot of money spinning there. Good for them. But what follows from this?
                  the cost of military products purchased by the US Department of Defense, in my opinion, is clearly overstated.

                  This is the problem, "in your opinion."
                  Not after a detailed analysis, namely "looking" you make a judgment. That is, it is a priori superficial.
                  Jewelin is almost 200 thousand dollars. I believe that this price is inflated, like the inflated Apple brand, when smartphones of this brand are sold for 120 thousand, and Chinese counterparts are sold for 20 thousand. Out of these 200 thousand, the cost price of Jewelin, I believe, is no more than 20 thousand, all the rest of the money is divided between the people in the subject, and the Pentagon generals who buy these installations at an inflated price are clearly in the share.

                  Keyword: I guess. Without understanding the cost structure, the production cycle, you make a superficial assumption. By the way, R&D costs are always included in the cost, don't forget.
                  About Apple. Compare with the Chinese flagship Huawey or One Plus or Xiaomi. The difference is not 10 times, and not 2.
                  Via E-Catalog:
                  The price of the IPhone 11 Pro 256GB starts from 81400r, One Plus 8 pro - from 64700.
                  The cost of both is much lower. But Apple itself carries out the development (or orders them), implementing many solutions first.
                  Of course, 10 percent still goes to the brand. But where is the extra zero?
                  1. Kot_Kuzya
                    Kot_Kuzya 4 August 2020 00: 56 New
                    +1
                    It's ridiculous to compare the One Plus 8 pro to the iPhone 11 Pro. This is heaven and earth. My colleagues have 11 iPhones, I did not see anything supernatural in them. I myself have been using ASUS ZenFone Max Pro M15 for 1 months, I am happy as an elephant, the screen is 6 inches, it does not slow down at all, all the applications I need work, the battery is 5 Amperes (!!!!!), it is enough for the whole working day from 8 am to 8 pm, while colleagues with iPhones are constantly running around with charging cords. 32 GB of internal memory is enough for the eyes, the memory card just dangled uselessly in the phone, and it was inserted into the new recorder. And this pleasure cost only a miserable 12 thousand. I just don't understand why pay 120 thousand for an iPhone when you can buy a good smart for 12 thousand?
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 4 August 2020 03: 16 New
                      0
                      A friend's 11 pro does not slow down at all, the camera is better, but not always noticeable. Works in an office with enough battery. smile
                      I have Mi 9 pro 256GB and I don't think about uploading content, etc. I type less at Linpack than she does.
                      I just don't understand why pay 120 thousand for an iPhone when you can buy a good smart for 12 thousand?

                      From the moment I bought the first flagship (Samsung S7 Edge) in 2016, I realized that I would no longer switch to budget models (once I also reasoned, and until 2014 I used a good push-button).
                      Consider me a major. I bought a Chinese flagship for 65000, for 2/3 salary.
                      And for the convinced user of the "button", the major is you smile
                      1. Kot_Kuzya
                        Kot_Kuzya 4 August 2020 03: 51 New
                        +1
                        I don't understand what needs to be done to clog 256 Gigabytes of memory. My phone has a built-in memory of 32 GB, 11 GB of free memory, the applications I need have been downloaded, after 15 months of use there is still a lot of free memory.
                      2. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 August 2020 04: 20 New
                        0
                        I have about 100 in total free. Lots of photos (10-15 MB each) and videos, applications.
                    2. Sergey_G_M
                      Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 04: 11 New
                      0
                      I used to use the "Baby" when launching, I had to combine the line of sight of the missile and the target, and the joystick was, well, such a thing, in a word, a soviet wooden silumin. Then I switched to Cornet here, of course, it's better, but again soviet roots make themselves felt, what can I say? It seems like nothing, but after all, they could have painted them in fashionable cartoons, so there is no money! Damn the union with jeans and chewing gum destroyed, now on the multicam they made a decision, what to do with a Soviet cotton scoop, Rogozin stole the paint !. But no, he's green as a cucumber, it's even inconvenient to appear with him in front of the guys - they will laugh! Here Javelina's guys have a dark knob like a dick, cool cool! looks very manly! There are different missiles for Javelin, both with control by wire and with different homing heads and with a "fire and forget" type of target capture
                      Antennae, pimples and grease, just a lyalka, ugh, what am I talking about? I almost forgot! Javelin is cool! Even if you have the first generation, which has already expired all the service life and has never had any INS or GOS, well, this is still not visible. But the black head can be rubbed with shoe polish and it will look super on the photos, all the chicks will flow, as I tell you!
            2. Shopping Mall
              4 August 2020 15: 47 New
              0
              Quote: 3danimal
              This is a fairly unfounded statement. What data were compared? What is considered a saw? (You have to understand that there is a difference between ineffective spending of funds and pumping them into your pocket through "schemes").


              "Inefficiency" is also a relative term. The same Darpa invests huge amounts of money in breakthrough projects, and even if 99% of them do not yield results, the remaining 1% will pay off a hundredfold.

              Sometimes there are double standards - our project of the supersonic T-4 is a breakthrough, a ruined unborn project, the Americans have a closed project of the Comanche helicopter - it drank.

              There are two types of coexistence between companies and the state (and people too) - symbiosis and parasitism. If a company received a lot of money for development and gave a result, even if the project was shelved, it is a symbiosis, even if the company received a good profit - it should be so, no one wants to work for free. The results of the project may allow another breakthrough project to be implemented in 20 years.

              If they ordered a fundamentally new orientation system, accurate as GPS, but autonomous, and it did not work, then this is also in the order of things. And to understand that it was unrealizable is often possible only "in hindsight". Unfortunately, in this situation, different "Petriks" can always leak, the question of their elimination is already a matter of competence and degree of risk.

              But if the money stupidly went to "geldings" and at home, then it drank.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 4 August 2020 16: 33 New
                0
                Sometimes there are double standards - our project of the supersonic T-4 is a breakthrough, a ruined unborn project, the Americans have a closed project of the Comanche helicopter - it drank.

                I completely agree. IMHO, this is an attempt to neutralize (in words and in your mind, auto-training) the incomparable difference in income and expenses, the military, in particular.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 3 August 2020 23: 43 New
          +1
          You yourself answered your own question: "and prices for them are decreasing as they become widespread."
          Military electronics are not mass-produced. Small series. Special, not household, performance.
          Hence the high prices.
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 13 New
        0
        An option is presented only with an analogue of the Cornet (guidance in the tail of the rocket, flight in the laser beam). Then there will be only "crowbar" ahead request
        But there is a problem with a dead zone in the boost section.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 3 August 2020 23: 47 New
          +1
          Will not work. Have you seen the Cornet or similar rockets "prowl" when moving
          to the goal? They move in a laser corridor more than a meter in diameter.
          This is possible only at low speeds when the forces of inertia are small.
          At high speeds, centrifugal forces during yaw throw the rocket out of the corridor.
          1. Shopping Mall
            4 August 2020 08: 37 New
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Will not work. Have you seen the Cornet or similar rockets "prowl" when moving
            to the goal? They move in a laser corridor more than a meter in diameter.
            This is possible only at low speeds when the forces of inertia are small.
            At high speeds, centrifugal forces during yaw throw the rocket out of the corridor.


            Hypersonic ATGMs in the United States, too, in my opinion, were guided along the laser path. Judging by the test tables on the network, they flew successfully.
            1. Andrey.AN
              Andrey.AN 4 August 2020 19: 07 New
              0
              The weaknesses of the hypersonic portable ATGM, among other things, include the difficult choice of the launch position. If they are not portable, then BOPSs are clearly cheaper by orders of magnitude. These missiles from the frontal direction will not taxi into the roof or side. Although your truth is, if they are approached from the outside, KAZ will not help. KAZ chooses subsonic targets so that it is not emptied by the fact that it can withstand the armor, does not work against hypersonic targets, not because it cannot, because it is not necessary.
          2. 3danimal
            3danimal 4 August 2020 12: 34 New
            0
            Perhaps then it is worth using radio command guidance? The attack flies at supersonic (not hyper), hits the target request
  • riwas
    riwas 3 August 2020 13: 37 New
    +3
    Hypersonic ATGM: theory

    How realistic is it today? Let us consider the prior art using the example of the well-known Starstrick MANPADS, which can be taken as a basis for a hypersonic ATGM.
    The propulsion engine accelerates a rocket with three arrows of 2 kg each in a split second on the first 300 m of flight to a speed corresponding to 4 M. After acceleration, the arrows separate and fly further by inertia. At the tail of each arrow with a diameter of 23 mm is a laser targeting device. Aiming arrows at the target is carried out using a beam formed by two lasers located in the guidance unit. In this case, one of them scans in the horizontal plane, and the other in the vertical.
    1. Shopping Mall
      3 August 2020 15: 57 New
      +3
      Quote: riwas
      Hypersonic ATGM: theory

      How realistic is it today? Let us consider the prior art using the example of the well-known Starstrick MANPADS, which can be taken as a basis for a hypersonic ATGM.
      The propulsion engine accelerates a rocket with three arrows of 2 kg each in a split second on the first 300 m of flight to a speed corresponding to 4 M. After acceleration, the arrows separate and fly further by inertia. At the tail of each arrow with a diameter of 23 mm is a laser targeting device. Aiming arrows at the target is carried out using a beam formed by two lasers located in the guidance unit. In this case, one of them scans in the horizontal plane, and the other in the vertical.


      Good example. I also thought about including this missile defense in the article. Of course, three anti-tank "scrap" is unlikely to be delivered, but you can probably put one main "scrap" and one or two side by side - compact, lightweight, but with corner reflectors to increase the RCS, to distract the KAZ.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 15 New
        +1
        And this is where we come: anti-missile defense equipment on ATGM smile
        A reasonable decision against the background of the intensification of the development of KAZ.
        However, the problem of the "dead zone" remains. It is still suitable for a helicopter, but for a ground complex it will be critical.
      2. Sergey_G_M
        Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 00: 01 New
        +1
        I will write an answer to the comment "theory", with a comment with the title:
        "Hypersonic missiles - practice"
        First of all, when discussing the characteristics of weapons, you should not rely on advertising materials, and if you take them into account, then at least first critically analyze these materials yourself.
        In MANPADS Starstreak there are no three combat elements weighing 2 kg each. What is known about these elements: the mass is 2 kg, there are steering drives, there are explosives, diameter 23 mm, length ... half of the above is already a lie. Just look at the picture (counting the density is lazy):

        For this arrow to weigh 2 kg, it must be made of uranium! And this is without taking into account the occupied volume of drives and explosives. A more realistic weight of 900 grams (I saw the same in some materials on this rocket).
        Those. 3 elements - 2,7 kg, which is critically small for a crowbar ((
        Why - I'll explain how I understand it: considering the impact of the crowbar on the target, our developers first focused on the energy of the projectile, our sub-caliber projectiles weighed 5 kg and v = 1750, foreign 7 kg and v = 1500, when calculating the kinetic energy, the speed is taken in the square and in terms of energy, our shells win. But the thing is that the physics of the interaction of a sub-caliber projectile with armor turned out to be more complicated, it turned out that physics (a projectile-armor at such speeds) is more like the physics of a stream of water falling into a pool - here the length and mass of the jet (crowbar) begins to influence.
        Let's go back to the Starstreak ATGM - we understand that 2,7 kg is nothing and we need at least 5-7 kg, we figure out what we will succeed, but it will not work out very well - we need an engine with a fuel supply at least twice as large and the near zone of destruction of 300 meters floats away to unknown distances, it seemed strange to me even for a standard rocket, but now it is generally anreal.

        And like the icing on the cake: everyone forgets that a hypersonic rocket has just an unreal "exhaust" of the engine, comparable only to the exhaust from a tank gun, for a missile defense system it can be survived, but what an ATGM operator will see behind such a rocket flying 5-10 meters from the ground lifting from the earth is dust and sand, and a jet of flame from such a rocket will be about 10-20 square meters in projection relative to the ATGM operator.
        I cut out the force of the flame from the video precisely from the startrix
        1. riwas
          riwas 4 August 2020 06: 38 New
          +2
          The weight of 2 kg of an arrow is data from the old magazine ZVO, when only the Starstrick MANPADS appeared, now it is actually 0,9 kg, but this, in principle, does not change anything, since the ATGM engine will naturally be larger than the Starstrick MANPADS "and, accordingly, the weight of a single" crowbar "can be made larger. I gave the Starstrick MANPADS as an analogue and did not suggest using it as a one-to-one ATGM.
          a hypersonic missile simply has an unreal "exhaust" of the engine, comparable only to the exhaust from a tank gun, for a missile defense system it is possible to survive, but what an ATGM operator will see behind such a rocket flying 5-10 meters from the ground, raising dust and sand from the ground, and a jet of flame from such a missile, approximately 10-20 square meters will be in projection relative to the ATGM operator.
          I cut out the force of the flame from the video precisely from the startrix

          So what? For MANPADS "Starstrick" control starts only when the engine is running. There is a dead zone, but it is quite acceptable.
          1. Sergey_G_M
            Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 06: 55 New
            +1
            Ahhh, I want to bite my own elbow!
            So what? For MANPADS "Starstrick" control starts only when the engine is running. There is a dead zone, but it is quite acceptable.

            The dead zone is at least 500 meters! ATGM is not a missile defense system and flies at a height of 5-20 meters from the ground and this is a fucking exhaust from a hypersonic accelerator, which, when flying, will arrange a TORNADO from dust, sand, branches and dirt, damn it, how can you not understand that hypersound is not a fake nozzle on the ATGM Baby, this is during the passage, the shock wave and the operator after it will not see a damn thing!
            1. riwas
              riwas 4 August 2020 11: 16 New
              +1
              ZRPK "Strastrik" is designed to destroy not only air, but also ground targets.
              Like previous British MANPADS, Starstrick can fight both air and ground targets. Specifications
              Target hitting range - 0,3-7 km Target hitting altitude - 0,01-5 km Maximum speed of targets hit - 1000 m / s Probability of hitting - 0,9

              http://www.nnre.ru/tehnicheskie_nauki/oruzhie_sovremennoi_pehoty_illyustrirovannyi_spravochnik_chast_ii/p94.php
              The erroneous weight of 2 kg was taken from the magazine "ZVO" N3 2005 (Colonel P. ALEXEEV, Lt. Col. A. NAZAROV. "STATE AND PROSPECTS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PORTABLE AIR-ROCKER COMPLEXES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES").
  • Operator
    Operator 3 August 2020 14: 16 New
    +5
    ATGM with a cumulative warhead and a flight speed of up to 900 m / s - an outgoing nature in connection with the ongoing development of KAZ.

    A hypersonic ATGM will not work because of the very long acceleration distance of up to 2200 m / s - it is impossible to fight at close range (it is for this reason that all American programs for the development of the GPU were curtailed).

    The only alternative is an active-rocket artillery projectile with a kinetic warhead and a flight speed of at least 2200 m / s (2000 m / s to ensure self-sharpening of the tungsten core during armor penetration, 200 m / s for aerodynamic braking in the ballistic section of the trajectory based on a loss of 30- 40 m / s for every 1000 meters of distance).

    At hypersonic speed, the projectile / rocket flies in a plasma envelope, so all guidance methods are not applicable here, except for one - inertial. Modern solid-state INS have a volume of the order of one cubic centimeter and provide guidance accuracy of the order of 10 cm per second of flight, which, in terms of a distance of 5 km and an average speed of 2000 m / s (taking into account the additional acceleration of the ARS on the trajectory), will be 25 centimeters.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 3 August 2020 20: 36 New
      0
      Kaz is already being taught to work on targets flying at a speed of 1500-2000 m / s. Or add masses to the kinetic penetrator up to a couple of tens of kilos. Or it will become irrelevant in a few years.
      1. Operator
        Operator 3 August 2020 21: 03 New
        -1
        They can teach and teach, but to no avail: 2 km / s is a full-fledged ballistic target, and even with a reaction time for KAZ within a few seconds (less than that of large missile defense systems).
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 3 August 2020 21: 09 New
          0
          For Afghanit, the possibility of intercepting BOPS is declared. Israel and the United States also announced that they are working in this direction. Purely physical it is possible. The accuracy and speed of the sensors. The speed of computing systems. Executive mechanisms. You just need to work it out. The task is quite achievable.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 21 New
            0
            There is slyness somewhere, I think. Under ideal conditions, perhaps. From a distance of 3 km, the approach time is 1,8 s, from 2 km - 1,15 s. This is extremely small
            1. garri-lin
              garri-lin 3 August 2020 23: 37 New
              0
              If several manufacturers declare that this is possible, but personally you say that it is not, then I wonder who will believe more.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 56 New
                0
                Several? Who exactly? (On Wiki there is only a link to TV Zvezda and "military expert Viktor Murakhovsky").
                1. garri-lin
                  garri-lin 4 August 2020 08: 40 New
                  0
                  A wiki is a wiki. Have you tried crawling with normal sources?
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 4 August 2020 09: 36 New
                    0
                    Google issues TV programs request
                    1. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 4 August 2020 12: 06 New
                      0
                      Here on VO in the news was.
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 4 August 2020 12: 29 New
                        0
                        Not reliable enough.
                        It's easier with the air defense system: there is an Almaz-Antey website
        2. 3danimal
          3danimal 3 August 2020 23: 19 New
          0
          Smaller. BOPS flies to a distance of 2 km in 1,15-1,3 seconds.
    2. Sergey_G_M
      Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 02: 26 New
      +1
      Let's figure it out, flies separately, cutlets separately.
      In no case do I want to offend you given in the title of my post, I apologize in advance. It so happened that in my work I came across modern solid-state inertial systems, whether based on fiber-optic or laser gyroscopes, and with what you cited as an example, most likely this is an ANN based on gyroscopes on micromechanics.
      The accuracy of the ANN is not measured in centimeters at a time, in angles, yes, but not in centimeters, for artillery remote control (goniometer division) who understood this to "like" and, as is customary now, it is fashionable to say "shake hands, hug"))
      Although, xs xs if you are an artilleryman, then for you the remote control, centimeters, degrees and radians is as easy as a sapper's shovel.
      10 cm volume of the INS, then most likely it is micromechanics, when firing direct fire for such a system, the accuracy of determining the directional angle is not very important, the parameter of the "drift" of the gyroscope is more important here, and here the parameter is not
      provide guidance accuracy of the order of 10 cm for each second of flight
      and degrees per second and in comparison with laser and fiber-optic gyroscopes, micromechanics has a significant drift, plus vibrations from the propulsion engine, to be honest, will VERY strongly affect the accuracy of ANN calculations.
      And figs with her with ANN, let it be as accurate as an iPhone and lead us exactly to Starbucks. How are you going to control this missile-missile? When the main engine is running, there is such a flame force that radio waves will penetrate it weakly (the flame force is, just in case, a high-temperature plasma). For example, let's take a speed of 2200, take about 700-1000 meters for acceleration, then we get if the target is 1200 meters, then the operator has: 1200-700 = 500 m (at 1200 m, the speed will be about 2000 m / s, the maximum speed will be at 700 plus a drop) 500/2000 = 0.25 seconds, the operator will not cope with this - for example, try to count to one for yourself and then divide by 4, you will definitely not be able to target something during this time.

      Well, as always, my favorite is "the cherry on the cake"! If you think that solid-state gyroscopes do not need time to enter a mode such as spinning mechanical gyroscopes, then you are very wrong, you need to turn them on in 3-5 minutes in advance)) These are the pies - a controlled projectile is not a crowbar from a cannon.
      Search the Internet for the "gyro-compass mode" and you will understand that solid-state machines and mechanics go to the mode in about the same way.
      1. Operator
        Operator 4 August 2020 02: 56 New
        -1
        The INS, after leaving the barrel of an active-rocket projectile, independently leads it to the target in a straight line set by the gunner before firing. No operator required.

        Smartphones have solid-state accelerometers that go into mode in a split second. Three accelerometers installed along mutually perpendicular axes, and a specialized processor - that's the whole solid-state inertial system.

        The control aerodynamic device is a movable head fairing of a kinetic ammunition, deflected using a piezoelectric actuator (the Americans created such a thing for 30-mm aircraft cannon projectiles). Plus a mini battery with a high temperature solid electrolyte and a chemical initiator.
        1. Sergey_G_M
          Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 03: 36 New
          0
          Rrr !!!
          I want to bite you (((Wow, you need to exhale))
          What you wrote is some kind of cruel, rusty and merciless tin. I hope you don’t troll me, otherwise I’m starting to burn with you. According to your messages, you are a normal person who is not deprived of intellect.
          The INS, after leaving the barrel of an active-rocket projectile, leads it to the target in a straight line set by the gunner before firing. No operator required.

          I would like it this way, but gyroscopes and accelerometers in the ANN have such a thing as "drift" and deviations from the straight line set by the gunner can be significant. In ANN on mechanics, the angle is obtained from the angle of rotation of a mechanical gyroscope, in ANN on lasers, fiber optics or micromechanics, the angle is obtained as a result of mathematical calculation, solid-state workers do not measure the angle, they measure the angular velocity. Those. Basically, while the system is stationary, we are tied to the angular velocity of the earth's rotation, and when the system with ANN moves, we recalculate the acceleration and the angle based on the frequency of polling the sensors from the angular velocity. It's almost the same with accelerometers, except that they measure accelerations and are tied to the acceleration of gravity.
          In smartphones, solid-state accelerometers are installed, which go to the mode in a split second. Three accelerometers installed along mutually perpendicular axes, and a specialized processor - that's the whole solid-state inertial system.

          Not. ANN in the general case is three accelerometers (measures acceleration-hence the speed-hence the distance traveled), three gyroscopes (hence the angular velocity-directional angle), a calculator (integrates and differentiates this whole bunch of data by recalculating everything into normal decard coordinates)
          The aerodynamic control device is a kinetic ammunition head fairing deflected using a piezoelectric actuator (the Americans created such a thing for 30-mm aircraft cannon projectiles). Plus a mini battery with a high temperature solid electrolyte and a chemical initiator.

          I didn’t understand a bit about this, if you’re talking about drives on Starstreak, then this is very cool, it’s not serious to put drives into such dimensions with control.
          1. Operator
            Operator 4 August 2020 10: 47 New
            -1
            The smallest size of the head aerodynamic control unit with a piezo actuator for the Americans was 20 mm - under the caliber of their "Vulcan". The diameter of the BOPS penetrator is 22 mm.
  • Operator
    Operator 3 August 2020 16: 15 New
    -1
    Quote: Nikolaevich I
    if you guessed right

    BIS does not guess, but counts.
  • Alien ...
    Alien ... 3 August 2020 20: 01 New
    +1
    ...And further. Of the commentators, who was ever in any military exercises? So, even in calm conditions and in medium-rugged terrain, you will never notice from 1,5-2 km where it flew over you. And with 5 ...
    1. Sergey_G_M
      Sergey_G_M 4 August 2020 05: 26 New
      +1
      Yes, not what you mean, there are a lot of experts on VO, most of whom are serious guys with experience, you can't drink experience, drank a little, got up from the couch, and now you look from the window of a nine-story building, you can immediately see that the range of a direct shot should be at least 2- 5 km, those on the first or second floor do not use windows - why there is an Internet there they will explain everything. And crawling and squeezing into the ground - well, what are you talking about, it's just some kind of philistinism.
      P / S. with respect who crawled, swallowed dust.
  • KSVK
    KSVK 3 August 2020 22: 32 New
    0
    Quote: Operator

    A hypersonic ATGM will not work because of the very long acceleration distance of up to 2200 m / s - it is impossible to fight at close range (it is for this reason that all American programs for the development of the GPU were curtailed).


    And if a vertical launch? The first stage raises the missile by 250-300 meters, maybe with a slight tilt towards the enemy. At the highest point, the rejection of the first stage, targeting with the help of the head, such as on "Onyx", with a release after orientation. And the start of the main accelerating engine, possibly with a slight correction, before reaching hypersound. And the issue with the "dead zone" is resolved and the target will be hit in the upper hemisphere. And shooting the KAZ dipoles will be useless. Well, in terms of fantasizing. yes
    The price, however, of such a rocket will be considerable. repeat
    1. Operator
      Operator 3 August 2020 23: 47 New
      -1
      To achieve a speed of 2000 m / s, you will have to climb up at least several hundred meters, but another thing is not clear: how from there the hypersonic munition will hit a ground target - like will it perform a Nesterov loop with a radius of 1 km in the air?
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 3 August 2020 22: 57 New
    +1
    The article is very interesting, thanks to the author!

    Hypersonic ATGMs look very interesting for hitting moving targets from long distances. Flight time of 20-40 seconds is a lot! Not every target will loom in the sight for so long, simply hide in the folds of the terrain without even noticing the enemy ATGM.

    But in terms of overcoming KAZ, the advantages of hypersonic ATGMs are not obvious. The higher the speed, the less agile the rocket is. A conventional ATGM is even visually noticeable that it flies along a very winding trajectory, this greatly complicates the work of the KAZ. But the BOPS flies almost in a straight line, such a trajectory is easy to calculate by two or three points and in advance put on the BOPS path different types of striking elements. After all, electronics do not care, 300 m / s or 1500 m / s, the only question is in the speed of the actuators of the starting systems, but they can be done in several pieces and used in parallel. In general, it seems that actively maneuvering missiles are much more difficult for KAZ than a fast but straightforward one.
  • KSVK
    KSVK 4 August 2020 00: 08 New
    0
    Quote: Operator
    To achieve a speed of 2000 m / s, you will have to climb up at least several hundred meters, but another thing is not clear: how from there the hypersonic munition will hit a ground target - like will it perform a Nesterov loop with a radius of 1 km in the air?

    So I wrote. In the upper part of the trajectory, the rocket speed is near-zero. Small thrusters on the nose position the missile on the target. Further, the main overclocking. Down is easier to accelerate. It is possible to ascend in the direction of the target and to dive vertically to the target from a height (possibly) up to a kilometer and a half.

    Shl with the shooting of the head "podrulek" got excited. There is also a solid fuel tank. There is no WFD. It makes no sense to shoot the "thrusters". They can be used to correct the trajectory during the main acceleration.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 4 August 2020 18: 45 New
    0
    A hypersonic ATGM is unlikely to be portable, here both the price and the dead zone are very inconvenient and expensive for an infantryman, I think if you offer a landing party a dozen tandem Cornets, a pair of Javelins, or one hypersonic one. They will choose a dozen of Cornets, they themselves will provide compensation for weaknesses in cash by other means - which are in vain overlooked.
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 4 August 2020 20: 28 New
    0
    It seems clear that only BOPS can take it in the forehead, but gaps remain. The main weakness of any tank is the crew. Let's consider the ways of influencing him, those that are not covered by higher powers. Let me be clear, the higher ones do not undertake what they can cope with without them. We cope in our own way, do not worry.
  • Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 5 August 2020 08: 07 New
    0

    unfortunately, Russia has not yet been able to create its own third-generation ATGMs.

    The author, you should know perfectly well that there are no technical barriers. There is no desire to have a 3rd generation. That's all
    1. Alien ...
      Alien ... 5 August 2020 13: 48 New
      0
      Which is nonsense. What was the stubborn disregard of thermal imagers in favor of IR illuminators. Hussein's Iraqi tank crews reaped the benefits ...
  • foxhound
    foxhound 10 August 2020 06: 41 New
    0
    The topic remained unsolved - how to deal with jeeps with bearded men?