Military Review

The Pentagon wants a new sea-launched cruise missile

61

Rocket launch BGM-109 by the destroyer USS Stethem (DDG-63)


Discussions on the prospects of the nuclear missile sphere have once again begun in the United States. The State Department and the Defense Department exchanged views on a promising sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM) with nuclear combat equipment (Sea-Launched Cruise Missile Nuclear - SLCM-N). Perhaps, now this concept will begin to be promoted - right up to adoption and use as another political argument.

Ministerial dialogue


On July 23, the Department of State published the report Strengthening Deterrence and Reducing Risks, Part II: The Sea-Launched Cruise Missile - Nuclear (Strengthening Deterrence and Reducing Risks, Part 2. SLCM-N Missile). The authors of the document examined the current military-political situation and the existing capabilities of the US armed forces. On the basis of such data, they confirmed the already known recommendation.

In a constantly changing world and growing international tension, as well as in connection with the confrontation with Russia and China, it is proposed to develop and complement the US nuclear forces. To solve such a strategic task, several types of weapons can be used, incl. promising SLCM with a special warhead. Such weapon was first mentioned in the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, and has been regularly remembered ever since.

The State Department recalls that products of this class were in service with the US Navy until 2010, but then they were abandoned due to a general reduction in nuclear forces. Meanwhile, Russia continued to build up its operational-tactical nuclear potential. Moscow is suspected of wanting to gain advantages in a hypothetical conflict through the use of such weapons. Non-strategic nuclear weapons can be used to end a regional conflict in their favor. In this regard, the Pentagon needs a symmetrical response.


"Desert Storm": the missile is launched by the battleship USS Missouri (BB-63)

In addition, Russia continues to create A2 / AD zones that can dramatically reduce the potential of the strategic component of the US Air Force. To counter such a threat, appropriate measures are required - one of them could be SLCM with deployment on ships and submarines.

On August 4, the US Department of Defense published its commentary on this topic. The note contained the most important quotes from the State Department report and some additional information. Pointing to all this, the Pentagon agreed on the need to create and deploy a promising nuclear cruise missile in the Navy.

However, such a dialogue between the ministries so far affects only the concept itself. The State Department and the Pentagon point to certain features of the weapon necessary to obtain the desired results, but there is no talk of creating a real model of speech yet. However, such processes can be started at any time.

Nuclear past


In the context of the promising SLCM-N, they recall another weapon that was removed from service many years ago - the BGM-109A Tomahawk Land Attack Missile - Nuclear cruise missile (TLAM-N). The deployment of such weapons began in the first half of the eighties. Its carriers in different periods were destroyers, cruisers and battleships of various types, equipped with different launchers, as well as submarines of several projects.

TLAM-N was a cruise missile with a turbojet engine, providing subsonic flight at a range of up to 2500 km. The combat load is a W80 type nuclear charge of variable power from 5 to 150 kt. With the help of onboard navigation aids, the rocket could go to a ground target with previously known coordinates.


The destroyer USS Gonzalez (DDG-66) performs night firing

The BGM-109A missile service lasted only a few years. In 1991, the US command, pointing to a thaw in international relations, proactively removed such SLCMs from duty and sent them for storage. They remained there until 2010, when an order was issued for the removal from service and the subsequent disposal of the remaining products.

Foggy future


Eight years after the official removal of TLAM-N from service in Washington, they again started talking about the need for such weapons in connection with the change in the strategic situation in the world. So far, the proposals of the Nuclear Policy Review have not moved beyond the discussion, but the situation may change in the near future.

A fundamental decision on the development and implementation of a promising SLCM can be made at any time. Moreover, the recent exchange of views between the State Department and the Ministry of Defense may hint at the fact that everything has already been decided - and all that remains is to issue the necessary orders and orders. In this case, real design work on a promising topic can start in the coming months.

In general, SLCM-N development can take two paths. The first is notable for its sufficient complexity, increased costs and time requirements, and also does not guarantee the desired results. This is a full-fledged research and development work at all stages, from the development of technical specifications to the launch of the series.

The Pentagon wants a new sea-launched cruise missile

Submarine launch "Tomahawk" from the boat USS Florida (SSGN-728)

The second approach is to modernize the existing Tomahawk BGM-109 taking into account the experience of previous projects, incl. TLAM-N. The creation of such a nuclear missile based on the available components will be quite fast and simple - in fact, you only need to replace the conventional warhead with a special one and modify the software. At the same time, all the positive qualities of the original rocket will be preserved - but with them all the shortcomings will remain.

Military-political tool


Regardless of the approaches to creation, a promising SLCM will become a rather convenient and flexible instrument of military policy and will give Washington some new opportunities and leverage. How realistic it is to achieve all the desired potential is a big question.

First of all, the SLCM-N is interesting in that new weapons will appear at the disposal of the high command, expanding the general capabilities fleet... Ships and submarines will be able to solve additional tasks, both in the context of the projection of force and in a real conflict. In particular, the appearance in the region of ships with SLCM-N is seen as a workable deterrent to an enemy with conventional or nuclear forces.

TNW as a whole is of great interest to the US Army. Unlike strategic weapons, they are actually not limited by any international agreements. Such arsenals can be created and developed solely taking into account their own plans, without fear of anything other than simple criticism from abroad. SLCM-N follows this logic, and therefore the concept can be brought to a real project.


Cruiser USS Bunker Hill (CG-52) attacks a training target

The United States has long feared that a potential adversary in the person of Russia or China could use tactical nuclear weapons during a regional conflict. Due to the specific doctrine of the development and use of tactical nuclear weapons, the American army will not be able to respond to this in a timely manner. The emergence of the SLCM-N and possibly other prototypes of this kind will provide the United States with a tool to respond symmetrically to threats considered relevant.

However, the main task of new nuclear weapons, incl. A promising SLCM is precisely deterrence at the strategic and operational-tactical levels. The United States plans by all available means to exclude and prevent the use of nuclear weapons by a potential adversary. In this case, the hypothetical conflict will occur in a non-nuclear format. Washington believes that in such a war all the advantages remain with the American army.

The development of non-strategic nuclear forces of the United States may be interested in its allies. Some of them have tensions with their neighbors and there is a real or perceived risk of conflict. By enlisting US support with new sea-based "tools", these countries can feel more secure.

Answering a call


Thus, within a few years, the US Navy may receive weapons that are old in their concept and new in implementation with nuclear weapons, designed to solve a number of important tasks. It will pose a serious challenge to third countries, and they should take into account the current American plans and intentions.

We are talking about a sea-based cruise missile, which determines the ways of counteraction. So, to combat carriers, means of detecting and tracking ship formations are needed, as well as anti-ship missile systems of all basing options. These funds will make it possible to disable ships before the missiles are launched. After the launch of the SLCM-N, all the main means of air defense should begin to work - from long-range radars to anti-aircraft systems.

There is nothing fundamentally new in the methods and means of dealing with SLCM-N and its carriers. However, in this case, a special responsibility is assigned to defense. Time will tell whether the likely adversaries of the United States will be able to take the necessary measures and defend themselves against the still non-existent sea-launched cruise missile.
Author:
Photos used:
US Navy
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vadim237
    Vadim237 10 August 2020 18: 18 New
    -4
    Subsonic cruise missiles are the easiest target for modern air defense systems over a smooth sea surface, especially since Russia has a response to this new missile Tor M2 and Pantsir SM, as well as new radars.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 10 August 2020 22: 13 New
      +5
      Quote: Vadim237
      Subsonic cruise missiles are the easiest target for modern air defense systems over a smooth sea surface, especially since Russia has a response to this new missile Tor M2 and Pantsir SM, as well as new radars.

      it is immediately clear that you have nothing to do with air defense (any) ...
      it all depends on the number of missile launchers, as it was calculated that NATO can simultaneously release two or three waves of 1-000 missile defense units, which will completely overload our air defense and there will be no difference whether or not there is a special warhead on the radar.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 11 August 2020 00: 47 New
        -2
        Well, the Torov plan to buy at least 2027 pieces by 300 - so I think that overloading from 1500 cruise missiles will definitely not happen, I still don't take into account other air defense systems and fighter aircraft, which can also shoot down subsonic cruise missiles into light.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 11 August 2020 21: 08 New
          -1
          An important point is forgotten: the Torahs will be distributed to different parts and districts. And you will NOT know in which parts of the coast the missiles will go. They fly at low altitude, the curvature of the Earth (be it three times wrong) and the relief to help them.
          Again, due to ignorance of the places of flight of the coastline, it will not be possible to use Stroybat to change the terrain, in order to confuse the TerCom guidance system smile
        2. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 12 August 2020 16: 54 New
          0
          Quote: Vadim237
          Well, the Torov plan to buy at least 2027 pieces by 300 - so I think that overloading from 1500 cruise missiles will definitely not happen, I still don't take into account other air defense systems and fighter aircraft, which can also shoot down subsonic cruise missiles into light.



          Firstly, it is impossible to shoot down the CD with "light" aircraft.
          No more than 1 rocket per flight ...

          Secondly, Torah - with a radio command missile guidance system. There are 4 target channels in total.
          Overloaded "at once" ..
          Electronic warfare chokes on "two" ...
          For a PRLR of the Kharma type and even for an AMRAAM type of airborne missile system of the D modification, it is a "tasty and uncomplicated goal" ..
      2. Hermit21
        Hermit21 11 August 2020 07: 51 New
        +3
        Which ones? From what media? What theater of operations?
      3. Private-K
        Private-K 11 August 2020 10: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: PSih2097
        it is immediately clear that you have nothing to do with air defense (any) ..

        It is also immediately clear that you do not know anything about missile defense and air defense and do not understand how MRU KR is applied. what are their features and capabilities. And pull horror stories from the past decades: "Five thousand missiles in a salvo!" ("Thirty thousand couriers alone!" (C) Gogol)

        Undoubted fact: the subsonic CD has ceased to be a highly effective weapon against countries with advanced modern air defense. And the Russian Federation, too, is undoubtedly a country with a developed missile defense system. Moreover, the best in the world in terms of the combination of quality and quantity.
        The era of the Tomahawk-type CD is over. All. This is not a fashion item.
        The United States, to break through the missile defense zones and achieve goals in the depths of the pr-ka, needs missiles of a completely different class, with different characteristics than the CR concept of the 1970s.
        And the next reincarnation of the archival Tomahawk - frank and insolent drank the American military budget in such difficult times for the nation. tongue
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 11 August 2020 21: 14 New
          -1
          That the Thor, that the S-400 has a short range against the CD. She, you see, flies low, and the radio horizon even at sea is not more than 30 km. So there may be less. (Don't remind about the towers, the ship's radar is also high).
          The only option is to drive the entire huge fleet of AWACS aircraft (9 pieces) to a certain section of the sea border. But even here there can be difficulties (misinformation or false movements, as before "D-Day").
        2. PSih2097
          PSih2097 13 August 2020 16: 06 New
          0
          Quote: Private-K
          It is also immediately clear that you do not know anything about missile defense and air defense and do not understand how MRU KR is applied. what are their features and capabilities. And pull horror stories from the past decades: "Five thousand missiles in a salvo!" ("Thirty thousand couriers alone!" (C) Gogol)

          And which VVUZ did you graduate, what would consider me incompetent? they still talk about this at the VPVO Academy, but maybe you know more teachers, including those with combat experience, so share with us the poor ones, especially with real numbers, and not fairy tales from TV and the Internet ...
      4. 3danimal
        3danimal 11 August 2020 21: 04 New
        -1
        Adepts of the omnipotence of the SAM / ZRPK against subsonic missile launchers can begin to appeal to the number of shells in the Shell. 10 rounds for as simple a target as you can save missiles smile
        1. PSih2097
          PSih2097 13 August 2020 16: 09 New
          0
          Quote: 3danimal
          Adepts of the omnipotence of the SAM / ZRPK against subsonic missile launchers may begin to appeal to the number of shells in the Shell.

          well, if the rocket passes within a radius of 1 - 2 kilometers from the Shilka / Tunguska / Pantsir installation, it will be able to demolish it with machine guns ...
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 13 August 2020 21: 18 New
            0
            In theory. A small target imitating an anti-ship missile / drone (but the speed is significantly less than 700-800 km / h) from 1,5-2 km could not be shot down twice (they showed it in the Military Acceptance and in one more transfer, there were at least two different "showings"). They shot down, in the end, missiles.
            Rate of fire .. not AK-630 and the base is large between the guns request
            1. PSih2097
              PSih2097 13 August 2020 23: 57 New
              0
              Quote: 3danimal
              In theory. Small target

              So that's just the point ZRPK - it's first missiles, and only then guns ... And not exclusively guns. Although it all depends on the team / crew, if, like in Yar, everything will be demolished, if, like in Syria / Libya, then nothing and equipment will be lost.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 14 August 2020 03: 16 New
                -1
                In the image of the thermal imager, it was clear that the target was flying between two tracks, or something. It was very likely that the density of the queue was lacking. Need a solution like Avenger, IMHO.
      5. Essex62
        Essex62 12 August 2020 16: 25 New
        0
        If so, these waves were already flying towards us. The masons always keep the turnover on the most vulnerable - their own skins. Judging by the periodic statements, some western six of the masters of the planet, Russia is not yet robbed enough. I want to but very prickly.
        And technically, it is not difficult to demolish a subsonic missile defense system, for a modern echeloned air defense system. The question is who will run out of cucumbers faster. Have amers rivet this byaki of course more opportunities.
        I just didn’t understand what they want to restrain them, SSBNs? So they will have time to shoot at any. When there is a lot to one point, it is all the same to sit in the bunker with artificial ventilation and eat canned food until the end of days.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 13 August 2020 21: 31 New
          -1
          I just didn’t understand what they want to restrain them, SSBNs?

          For conflicts when SSBNs (which "they" also have) are highly redundant.
          masters of the planet

          Any intelligent and unbought person understands that the planet is captured by reptilians smile (Masons are just a cover)
  2. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 10 August 2020 18: 49 New
    +5
    This was to be expected. And then, from hopelessness, the Yankees began to equip the Tridents with a low-power BB, distorting the W76 to the level of 5-8 kT ...
    But equipping the NK and especially the submarine / SSGN with new mallets is a direct and obvious threat to us and China. The northern direction will be especially dangerous for us: a blow from under the ice of the Arctic. And such plans already exist.
    1. Private-K
      Private-K 11 August 2020 10: 20 New
      -5
      Quote: BoA KAA
      For us, the northern direction will be especially dangerous: a blow from under the ice of the Arctic. And such plans already exist.

      It won't, but it WAS.
      The diagram shows the situation in the 1980s, 1990s. Then there was no effective response against the CD. Amer nuclear submarines with SLCMs on board hung out in the Arctic as they wanted (yes, yes, including in Soviet times, yeah).
      But now there are:
      a) intelligence assets of the Kyrgyz Republic already at the stage of their launch
      b) means of tracking the CR FLOWS

      Yes Yes! CRs are FLOWING into the COLUMN one or two (bearing). Those. do not approach the goal at once in a wave of tens or hundreds, but in the "approach one by one" style. Therefore, in principle, they cannot overload the channels of modern missile defense systems. All the more so if these funds were specially developed and optimized to combat the missile defense - and this is practically all air defense missile defense systems developed in Russia.

      c) the troops have been supplied with a large number of anti-missile defense systems providing guaranteed destruction of the missile defense system with the ratio "the price of a missile defense system versus the price of an anti-aircraft missile defense system" like 100 to 1.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 11 August 2020 18: 29 New
        +4
        Quote: Private-K
        It won't, but it WAS.

        There is for "today", and moreover - it is increasing, as evidenced by the direction of the BP of the submarine forces of the US Atlantic Fleet. Moreover, the Yankees involve the British in this activity. Therefore, we are forced to create and deploy the Harmony underwater observation system.
        CRs are FLOWING into the COLUMN one or two (bearing). Those. do not approach the goal immediately in a wave of tens or hundreds, but in the "approach one by one" style.
        Broaden your horizons! Read at least about the "158-E" car, which can even patrol in the waiting area, not like retargeting in flight! The problem of volley formation was solved by us on Granites. Do you think we are worse than us if we still cannot catch up with them on the brains of the board ...
        in principle, they cannot overload the channels of modern missile defense systems.
        Lord! Well, where are you so "smart" come from !? belay
        Answer for the "dark ignoramus": maybe you have heard a thread about electronic warfare? about anti-radar missiles? EMP ammunition? actions of other forces to support the strike of the KRBD? about STEALTH technology, finally? Maybe once the thread saw device-1 in the "milk" from interference? And SDC did not help, about the OLS it was blind ...
        Therefore, it is not a fact that there will be polygon conditions, but the KRBD will line up for execution one by one, as you instruct them.
        Yes, and a free tip: take care of your hats, do not throw them over trifles. Winter is going to be cold. They are useful for their intended purpose.
        AHA.
        1. Private-K
          Private-K 14 August 2020 08: 45 New
          0
          Quote: BoA KAA
          Well, where did you come from so "smart" !?


          1. Oil painting: covertly starting Tomahawks are in a round dance to wait for all the missiles in a salvo. And they immediately allow themselves to be reliably detected, to reveal the exact location of the launch, to give the Russians extra time to check, prepare and meet the guests.

          1a. The selected positional launch areas in the Arctic, in addition to the advantage in the increased secrecy of nuclear submarines entering them, also have a very significant disadvantage: the amount of time required for the approach of SLCMs to targets sharply increases, and most of the flight takes place over the wastelands.

          2. How many missiles does one nuclear submarine fire? And how many missiles do you need in a single wave to saturate the air defense system? Well, against a battery of Armor from 4-6 units? AND? More than 12? or 24? What, for one boat against the Armor battery and no longer works? 1000x the difference in price? Yeah. Yes, of course, the CD will be hit by longer-range air defense missile systems S-300 / -400.

          2a. And, yes, even the "wave" of the CD will look like the "flow" of the CD only with a reduced interval. I strongly doubt that it is possible to line up, for example, a 24-48 Tomahawk in a line "shoulder to shoulder".

          2. The Americans themselves only talk about the extreme difficulty of breaking through the A2 / HELL zones, up to the present impossibility to do this. Those. goals they can only define themselves among the naked, or weakly covered infrastructure... Yes, it’s unpleasant, but such blows will not do harm in principle, but will only make you angry. It is extremely difficult for Amer SLCMs to destroy / damage really important military targets. This is the point.

          3. What kind of amerskie electronic warfare over Siberia do you suppose? ES-135 fervently flying to Omsk from Norilsk? Bugagaga!
          EMP ammunition? Why? From what media? With a B-1B bomber on a suicidal flight? Put on the Tomahawk? Yes, they are not enough - everything is under the calculation at best.

          To cause REALLY TALK damage to the Russian Armed Forces, the system of government, the most important infrastructure facilities, amers need not "five hundred" SLCMs, but TEN thousand five hundred "Tomahawks, including those with nuclear warheads.

          Threat And there is no shapkozakidatelstva from the Russians. For several decades they have been taking care of and carefully creating funds against the MRAU KR. The stones of Syria will not let you lie - the Russians are very advanced in this.
          And the Americans do not suffer from harshness, but are very concerned about the fundamentally increased Russian counter-CR potential. And they openly express this (and tear their hair at the fifth point, which a half dozen Ohio did not do with SLCM).
      2. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 12 August 2020 17: 26 New
        +2
        Quote: Private-K
        Quote: BoA KAA
        For us, the northern direction will be especially dangerous: a blow from under the ice of the Arctic. And such plans already exist.

        It won't, but it WAS.
        The diagram shows the situation in the 1980s, 1990s. Then there was no effective response against the CD. Amer nuclear submarines with SLCMs on board hung out in the Arctic as they wanted (yes, yes, including in Soviet times, yeah).
        But now there are:
        a) intelligence assets of the Kyrgyz Republic already at the stage of their launch
        b) means of tracking the CR FLOWS

        Yes Yes! CRs are FLOWING into the COLUMN one or two (bearing). Those. do not approach the goal at once in a wave of tens or hundreds, but in the "approach one by one" style. Therefore, in principle, they cannot overload the channels of modern missile defense systems. All the more so if these funds were specially developed and optimized to combat the missile defense - and this is practically all air defense missile defense systems developed in Russia.

        c) the troops have been supplied with a large number of anti-missile defense systems providing guaranteed destruction of the missile defense system with the ratio "the price of a missile defense system versus the price of an anti-aircraft missile defense system" like 100 to 1.



        What are you writing that?
        Have you read reviews of the times of the Iraqi war how the CDs walked through the deserts at especially noticeable reference points?

        So, I dare to assure you that in our area there are not smooth deserts.
        And our reference points can be any part of the surface. And the bend of the river in the taiga, and a detached farm in the middle of the fields, and an abandoned bush of rocking chairs in the middle of the tundra ...
        And TERKOM works great on our reliefs.

        And if earlier, 30-40 years ago, in view of the fact that the formation of the flight task for the RC took from 15 to 22 hours, and the transfer of it to the carrier of the RC also took 30 minutes or more, loading into the rocket itself for at least 20 minutes - then the probability of flying in single file was quite real ...

        But now, when the miscalculation of the flight task takes a couple of hours at most, when the transfer to the carrier and to the rocket takes a few minutes ...
        When the concept of using massive strikes by the CD came to the conclusion that there is a simultaneous coordinated massive strike from all possible directions ...
        And single file flights have not been practiced for a long time.
      3. 3danimal
        3danimal 13 August 2020 21: 33 New
        0
        The diagram shows the situation in the 1980s

        Tooting. In the 80s, the tension was much greater. For example, there were about 500 thousand US military personnel in Europe. And now - 50 thousand ...
    2. Hermit21
      Hermit21 11 August 2020 10: 56 New
      0
      As I understand it, in the opinion of the authors of this scheme, the carriers do not notice dozens of Granites, Onyxes, Volcanoes, Kinzhalov, Kh-22 / -32, 9M723, Kh-35U, they easily approach the coast, missiles do not notice air defense and electronic warfare and hit silos that can withstand a direct hit from a nuclear warhead?
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 11 August 2020 18: 45 New
        +1
        A couple of remarks to your angry post, my ironic counterpart:
        1. All the number of ROs listed by you will not cause any harm to Elk / Virgin / Nut with KRBD, because the launch of these missiles (109A and further along the branch) is underwater.
        2. The carriers do not need to "come close to the shore": they have enough range of the CD to shoot from the ice edge.
        3. This air defense must "notice" the airborne missile launchers flying under the cover of jamming, and not vice versa. Although the option with a breakthrough "air defense / missile defense of the first echelon is possible, for the passage of the second wave of the CD.
        4. It is difficult for electronic warfare to interfere with the INS KRBD, or control over the satellite line ...
        5. There are no silos in the world that would withstand a "direct hit of a nuclear warhead." Don't believe me? ask the missile specialists (ballistics) what happens with a ground / buried nuclear explosive with silo glasses, and what is the funnel from 100 kT of ammunition ...
        1. Hermit21
          Hermit21 12 August 2020 07: 32 New
          0
          The combat-ready SSNS in the US Navy is one third of the payroll with a total feeble ammunition load as in one SSGN "Ohio".

          Need to. The radius of the Axes is 1600 kilometers. Non-nuclear, of course. There are no nuclear ones since 2010.

          What's the break lol? What are the 150 missiles going to break there? And where will the "interference" come from? Moreover, which can interfere with the work of our air defense systems

          Everything is perfectly choking and jamming. The two blows on Syria poured into the sand are an example of this. Oh yes, I forgot, it was only the Syrians who shot down, bg-g-g.

          There is. These are Russian ones, which are much more resistant to nuclear weapons than American ones.

          Anyway, come up with something worse. Does not excite
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 14 August 2020 03: 24 New
            -2
            Two blows on Syria poured into the sand are an example of this

            You forgot to add: if you believe the Assad and Russian media.
            Both "mergers" were done in a similar way: the number of targets was called greater than the number of targets. False targets were declared completely repulsed, joyful reports that only 10-20% of missiles broke through smile
            The radius of the Axes is 1600 kilometers. Non-nuclear, of course. There are no nuclear ones since 2010.

            Let me remind you - the article is about what they want to revive them.
            What are the 150 missiles going to break there?

            A 400 kT nuclear warhead arrives at the S-5 battery location. The battery is not operational.
            1. Hermit21
              Hermit21 14 August 2020 07: 38 New
              0
              For questions of faith, you can contact the nearest church.
              I like to operate with facts more.

              Will not revive. There is nowhere to take the warheads.

              It looks like a rocket is materializing out of thin air. How else to explain that it will cut through several hundred kilometers unnoticed and bypass radar stations, interceptors and dowries to guard the "Armor" or "Torah"
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 14 August 2020 08: 29 New
                -1
                There is nowhere to take the warheads.

                New ones will be produced. Of course, the disposal of nuclear warheads from Tomahawks was shortsighted from the outside.
                I like to operate with facts more.

                So what about the facts about "fully reflected" missile waves in Syria?
                How else to explain that it will cut through several hundred kilometers unnoticed and bypass radar stations, interceptors and dowries to guard the "Armor" or "Torah"

                It is problematic to create a continuous radar field against low-altitude targets. And how far? 100, 500, 1000 km? The interceptor (MiG-31, I believe) sees the CD against the background of the earth no further than 30 km (in the absence of measures to reduce the visibility). You need to know exactly where the strikes will go and lift ALL planes. With a large wave, not knowing the exact plans of the enemy, a considerable part of the missiles will inevitably break through.
                1. Hermit21
                  Hermit21 14 August 2020 09: 25 New
                  0
                  Solid and unnecessary. It is well known what objects may interest the enemy and are the primary goal, in the direction of them and an echeloned air defense is created. The launch of the KR is excellently opened and subsequently "carried out" by means of radar control.

                  An interceptor is any modern fighter whose radar is capable of distinguishing targets against the background of the earth's surface. And yes, "Zaslon-BM" detects promising RCs with RCS of 0,01 m2 at a distance of up to 150 km.

                  What is the big part? I am already tired of refuting persimmons over and over again about thousands of CDs flying to Russia and destroying all targets without hindrance. In reality, the US Navy can collect in one place 700-750 cruise missiles on surface and underwater carriers. Because some of the carriers are under repair / are being repaired, some are in other regions of the oceans. If you strain very hard, they can scrape together 900-1000. The bulk of the salvo is given by surface ships. How to deal with them - look above. No one will wait until they release all the ammunition - it is easier to act directly on them. Well, the submarine - 2-3 dozen KR from them is generally not serious
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 14 August 2020 11: 44 New
                    -1
                    The launch of the KR is excellently opened and subsequently "carried out" by means of radar control.

                    I wonder how, if produced from a ship or a nuclear submarine? The curvature of the Earth, don't forget.
                    It is well known what objects may interest the enemy and are the primary goal, in the direction of them and the echeloned air defense is created

                    Only dastardly modern CDs can be not so straightforward and come ashore along a complex trajectory.
                    Yes, Zaslon-BM detects promising RCs with RCS of 0,01 m2 at a distance of up to 150 km.

                    And where did you get such data ?? Radar with phased array not of the first freshness (more than 18 years) have you turned out better than the technically advanced "Squirrel" with AFAR, adjusted for the Su-57? smile
                    1. Hermit21
                      Hermit21 14 August 2020 11: 55 New
                      0
                      I wonder how


                      Which to the top.

                      Earth curvature, don't forget


                  2. 3danimal
                    3danimal 14 August 2020 12: 12 New
                    -2
                    If you strain very hard, they can scrape together 900-1000. The bulk of the salvo is given by surface ships.
                    Well, the submarine - 2-3 dozen KR from them is generally not serious

                    Let me remind you about the converted Ohio, with 154 (!) Tomahawks each. Few??
                    1000 missiles with tactical nuclear warheads? With the right organization of the attack, it will fly too much.
                    No one will wait for them to release all the ammunition

                    Burke or Tika fires 50-60 Axes in 2 minutes. And Very Well Protected.
                    1. Hermit21
                      Hermit21 14 August 2020 13: 27 New
                      0
                      140 do not fit for some reason. And they will not be able to drive all of them purely physically.

                      When there are 1000 nuclear Axes, then we'll talk. And this is still a very optimistic figure.

                      Maybe they do, but a volley of several hundred CRs lasts for several hours. Nobody will wait. The US Navy KUG air defense breaks through from a half-kick with heavy supersonic and hypersonic anti-ship missiles. So you can tell someone else how Tomahawks roam the universe
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 14 August 2020 14: 17 New
                        -1
                        They may be fired, but a volley of several hundred CRs lasts for several hours.

                        A simultaneous volley lasts several minutes.
                        (One ship - in two minutes. 10 ships - also in two minutes, there is no need to "stand in line").
                        Air Defense KUG US Navy breaks with a half-kick with heavy supersonic and hypersonic anti-ship missiles.

                        And YOU are obviously a master with extensive experience in breaking through the air defense of a group of ships of the first rank?
                        How many super / hypersonic anti-ship missiles? When flying at high altitude, they are good targets. On low - there is no hypersound, the air is too dense. Again, long-range supersonic flight is also at high altitude.
                        To 40-year-old Granite, there are big questions about resistance to modern (powerful, up to 1 MW at the peak) shipborne electronic warfare systems. There should be a slight difference compared to the Caliber, no?
                2. Hermit21
                  Hermit21 14 August 2020 09: 29 New
                  0
                  New ones promise no earlier than 2033, and it's not a fact that they will be postponed again. Because once they promised from 2017. And, most likely, they will first make BB for ICBMs and SLBMs. These cool stories about how Omerega rivets anything as much as he wants in a year - it’s for those who are not in the subject and do not know the state of their nuclear weapons.

                  The only thing our MO can lie about is that it was only the Syrians who shot down. Although everyone has long understood everything
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 14 August 2020 14: 29 New
                    -1
                    The only thing our MO can lie about

                    Is it because of genetic proletarian honesty?
                    Confidence? No, faith smile
                    (I have already explained how the forgery is done. Assad's anti-aircraft gunners are generally a song. The main thing for them is to shoot more missiles, no matter where, and write a report better)
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 13 August 2020 22: 06 New
        -2
        withstanding a direct hit of a nuclear warhead?

        Special charges have existed for a long time.
        dozens of "Granites", "Onyxes", "Volcanoes", "Daggers", X-22 / -32, 9M723, X-35U,

        There are no more granites. And the CDs are intended more for a war with China.
        1. Hermit21
          Hermit21 14 August 2020 07: 46 New
          0
          Special charges for the winners of special Olympiads, of course. There are still carpet, believing in persimmon from American advertising campaigns, about some "deadly" ultra-precise missiles.

          Is it true? And in "Petra" / "loaves" not "Granita", no? Are heavy supersonic anti-ship missiles CD? And what about China? Where are these geynies bred in general?
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 14 August 2020 08: 31 New
            -1
            Special charges for the winners of special Olympiads

            The so-called "surface piercing", before the explosion, deepening into the ground for 10-50m. Energy is distributed somewhat differently than in air.
            There are people who are too lazy to look for information. wink
            1. Hermit21
              Hermit21 14 August 2020 09: 31 New
              0
              Cool. Where are they?
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 14 August 2020 12: 14 New
                -1
                Cool. Where are they?

                They were created starting from the 50-60s. Google (US nuclear arsenal)
          2. 3danimal
            3danimal 14 August 2020 08: 53 New
            -1
            in "Petra" / "loaves" not "Granita", no?

            Expiration dates are running out, new ones, as far as we know, are not being produced. Everywhere there is a replacement for the Caliber.
            1. Hermit21
              Hermit21 14 August 2020 09: 32 New
              0
              However, they are still in service.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 14 August 2020 12: 15 New
                -1
                they are still in service

                Leftovers and with dubious performance.
                1. Hermit21
                  Hermit21 14 August 2020 13: 28 New
                  0
                  With dubious performance, i.e. with expiring deadlines being shot at exercises
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 14 August 2020 14: 32 New
                    -1
                    So they are ALL old, with dubious combat effectiveness. Radar seeker and "brains" when created? The storage periods were clearly not 40-50 years planned.
                    It is not surprising that the plans include a widespread replacement for Caliber. And not a word about the resumption of production.
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 10 August 2020 18: 59 New
    -1
    Foggy future

    vague, this is not the worst assumption ... worse, much worse, when we understand, decide that it is becoming doomed!
    1. Hermit21
      Hermit21 14 August 2020 09: 31 New
      0
      Nevertheless, they are still in service.
  4. 5-9
    5-9 10 August 2020 19: 10 New
    0
    Does the United States have missile heads? Can they do it more precisely? It seems that they haven't made new ones since 1993.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. frfcv
    frfcv 10 August 2020 22: 50 New
    +2
    A powerful country with a powerful economy can afford it, there is no doubt about it, they already have excellent Tridents. if necessary, they will come up with something else.
  7. KSVK
    KSVK 10 August 2020 23: 44 New
    +3
    Something I did not quite understand about the "promising" NEW missile with special warheads.
    There is an Ax. Its Block IV modification appeared in 2017. Those. the rocket is relatively "fresh". You can place it on a whole bunch of "Arlie Burks" and the remaining "Ticonderogs". And also on ANY of its submarines, since "Axes" are able to launch from torpedo tubes. The truth does not seem to be the last modification. It is only from the surface. And there are special warheads for the Ax, which are in storage in a semi-disassembled state. Like the W80 is indicated. And there are more than 300 of them. Yes, the new "special heads" will not be able to produce soon. But there is no problem to place 300 existing "special heads" on existing working carriers and scatter them on combat ships. So what are they going to invent, the Author? recourse
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 11 August 2020 00: 50 New
      0
      A new warhead and a new CD in the dimensions of an Ax - they will appear, at best, by the mid-20s.
    2. Hermit21
      Hermit21 11 August 2020 07: 49 New
      +1
      With the American rate of "growth" in the number of warheads in minus 150-300 per year, there is a nonzero probability that they are already much less or have been pilfered for other needs
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 14 August 2020 12: 17 New
        -1
        They have different approaches to large-scale production, they build new factories in a year and rivet (for example, the F-35).
    3. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist 11 August 2020 11: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: KSVK
      And there are special warheads for the "Ax", which are in storage in a semi-disassembled state

      The remaining nuclear warheads, suitable for installation on Tomahawks, are used in the B-61. It is difficult to say which of the bundles has less illusory chances to work on the target - the F-35 with a free-fall nuclear bomb a la the middle of the 35th century, or the slightly less archaic subsonic missile launcher, which gets lost in almost everything that we have, and in commodity quantities. Probably the F has a higher probability of reaching the target. Naturally, this will be a one-way flight.
  8. Hermit21
    Hermit21 11 August 2020 07: 47 New
    +4
    The rocket might be made. But there is nowhere to take the warheads until at least 2033. The Air Force will not share - they themselves do not have enough for a full nuclear salvo from the B-52N
  9. Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 11 August 2020 17: 00 New
    0
    In any case, it is very inconvenient for them to do all this, even Putin does not like to admit his mistakes, the Americans do not like it either, all the more it is necessary to catch up yesterday. They focus on development on what is cool enough for them now.
  10. Andrey83
    Andrey83 11 August 2020 22: 00 New
    0
    What is the probability that the tomahawk will reach the target in modern conditions? And what is the cost of specials. Combat unit? Are there any risks that special. Will the warhead mounted on the tapor fall into the hands of the enemy? How many tomahawks do you need to guarantee hitting a target? It seems to me that it is not rational to put a special warhead on tapor, we need a new carrier that meets modern requirements
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 13 August 2020 16: 30 New
      0
      Quote: Andrey83
      What is the probability that the tomahawk will reach the target in modern conditions? And what is the cost of specials. Combat unit? Are there any risks that special. Will the warhead mounted on the tapor fall into the hands of the enemy? How many tomahawks do you need to guarantee hitting a target? It seems to me that it is not rational to put a special warhead on tapor, we need a new carrier that meets modern requirements

      there is such a thing as overloading air defense, when there are targets, but there is nothing to shoot with (from the word at all), it takes 30 - 45 minutes to reload the same "Thor", ie take out an empty glass - install a charged one and pair it, with the "Buk" it is easier - both launchers and launchers can work there, then S-300V / S-300P-PS-PT-PMU1-PMU2 / S-400 is :
      very low rate of PU reloading, not less than one hour. Moreover, even this value is purely theoretical, since to implement it, you need to have a TPM for each launcher and spare ammunition at the position of the division.

      In short, without a deeply echeloned air defense system and complete coverage of the state. borders with radar zones, even forget about state security ...
      1. Andrey83
        Andrey83 13 August 2020 17: 45 New
        0
        Well, so why is he special. Combat unit? You can also overload air defenses with conventional ...
        1. PSih2097
          PSih2097 14 August 2020 00: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Andrey83
          Well, so why is he special. Combat unit? You can also overload air defenses with conventional ...

          And this garbage usually follows, finally knocking out what the conventional power supplies did not knock out ...