Military Review

The USA is going to dismantle the 155-mm guns on the Zumwalt stealth destroyers for the future deployment of hypersonic missiles

144
The USA is going to dismantle the 155-mm guns on the Zumwalt stealth destroyers for the future deployment of hypersonic missiles

In the American press, materials appeared that "the issue of arming the latest stealth destroyers has been finally resolved." We are talking about the Zumwalt-class warships that replenish the US Navy. At the moment, the US Navy has two such destroyers - the lead Zumwalt (DDG 1000) and the first serial Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001).


With the destroyers, problems immediately began to arise. The command could not decide in any way which weapon should become the main one for stealth destroyers. At first, they even talked about the railgun, then about the laser combat weapon. After that, they began to talk about plans to deploy hypersonic missile weapons. However, to date, no unambiguous decision on the armaments of the Zamvolts has been made.

The American press, referring to the command of the US Navy, writes that now "the issue has been resolved." The Zumwalt-class destroyers are said to receive C-HGB (Common Hypersonic Glide Body) hypersonic missile systems. At the same time, it is noted that these systems will be installed on ships after the effectiveness of hypersonic weapons is confirmed. The estimated date is 2025.

At the same time, the question immediately arose concerning the location of installations for hypersonic missiles on board the Zamvolts.

The US Navy announces that 155 mm long-range naval artillery guns will be dismantled to accommodate the C-HGB. These weapons were said to be controversial. They were designed to "reduce the radar signature of ships." They were planned to be used to strike at the enemy's coastal infrastructure when the destroyer approached a suitable distance.

According to some reports, dismantling the guns and installing the C-HGB systems on ships will additionally cost the US Navy's budget about a quarter of a billion dollars per ship. This is despite the fact that each stealth destroyer has already cost the United States more than $ 4 billion.

It is believed that the C-HGB missiles are the very "super-duper weapons" that Donald Trump spoke about at one time. According to American sources, they are capable of speeds up to Mach 17.

Experts, commenting on the plans to deploy hypersonic missiles on Zamvolts, note that American warships will receive missiles of this type at least 3-4 times later than the ships of the Naval fleet Russia.
144 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 8 May 2021 15: 21
    +3
    Yes, dispose of these "Zumvolts" ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.
    1. Cheshire
      Cheshire 8 May 2021 15: 23
      +18
      am Well, no, but then what are we going to joke about?
      1. Bradley
        Bradley 8 May 2021 16: 35
        +3
        Well, no, but then what are we going to joke about?

        And what is there to joke about? Everything is fine in our fleet, do we have similar projects?
        It makes sense to joke when it is equal to the one over whom you are joking.
        1. Murmur 55
          Murmur 55 8 May 2021 16: 47
          +19
          Why do we need such a project ???? At that price? With such a practical application ??? The US itself does not know what to do with it and where to stick it, we also need something like that ??? And about joking if only we were weak we would have long ago been plowed up like Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia. In your opinion, if a neighbor does something stupid and spends a lot of money on it, there is no need to joke, because you did not spend money on it and are not able to?
          1. Rageee
            Rageee 8 May 2021 16: 58
            +3
            The US navy is three heads stronger than the Russian navy, there is even nothing to discuss, everything is so obvious. And from Russia they did not plow up like Iraq or Yugoslavia because Russia is a nuclear power, and not because it supposedly has a strong fleet or aviation there.
            1. Murmur 55
              Murmur 55 8 May 2021 18: 16
              +4
              Well, then why do you need a fleet like in America ??? If they can't attack? For show-off type we have a fleet not less ??? Measure?
          2. Bradley
            Bradley 8 May 2021 16: 59
            +1
            In your opinion, if a neighbor does something stupid and spends a lot of money on it, there is no need to joke, because you did not spend money on it and are not able to?

            This is the neighbor's money, not yours, he knows better where to spend it. And if this is nonsense for you, then not for the neighbor. The neighbor drives a Mercedes, and you drives a VAZ-2101. Do you feel the difference and how ridiculous the banter about the neighbor is?
            But if you achieved the same as your neighbor, then this is a different story.


            And about joking if only we were weak we would have long ago been plowed up like Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia.

            Those. we are strong? Can we fight on an equal footing with not only Japan - with the United States in the ocean?
            NSNF and Strategic Missile Forces do not allow anyone to attack us.
            1. Murmur 55
              Murmur 55 8 May 2021 18: 22
              +6
              And what did the Yankees achieve specifically with THIS project ??? There was a lot of money, the efficiency is more than controversial, and now you have to invest a lot more so that suddenly at least something will work out. If your neighbor's Mers costs him money and he doesn't really know what to do with him, then why such a MERS? Just to claim I have a car for 100500 miles?
              1. Bradley
                Bradley 8 May 2021 19: 26
                +3
                And what did the Yankees achieve specifically with THIS project ???

                Low stealth, high engine power (80 Megawatts).

                There was a lot of money, the efficiency is more than controversial, and now you have to invest a lot more so that suddenly at least something will work out.

                Because his main weapon was never made. It is for this weapon that the destroyer has such high energy efficiency.

                If your neighbor's Mers costs him money and he doesn't really know what to do with him, then why such a MERS? Just to claim I have a car for 100500 miles?

                Don't worry, there will be tasks for the destroyer.
                And although a Mercedes is expensive, a neighbor can afford to keep it.
                The Americans have gained experience from this program, they will use it.
                1. Murmur 55
                  Murmur 55 8 May 2021 20: 11
                  +2
                  Until they found his SPECIFIC application, he is a shock, then he is a scout, then an air defense and missile defense burglar, then a killer of surface ships and coastal objects, now a floating laboratory for testing. So the neighbor pokes his Mears in all places.
                  1. Bradley
                    Bradley 8 May 2021 23: 10
                    +3
                    Until they found his SPECIFIC application, he is a shock, then he is a scout, then an air defense and missile defense burglar, then a killer of surface ships and coastal objects, now a floating laboratory for testing.

                    It has long been used as a laboratory. They will finish off the weapons, and then there will be targets. His main weapon is absent, so they cannot determine the role.
              2. onstar9
                onstar9 9 May 2021 04: 25
                0
                Quote: Murmur 55
                If your neighbor's Mers costs him money and he doesn't really know what to do with him, then why such a MERS? Just to claim I have a car for 100500 miles?

                Well, we would have driven our Zhiguli. Otherwise, you all drive a Mersey ... with a "wagon of money" for service ...
            2. Murmur 55
              Murmur 55 8 May 2021 18: 23
              +3
              Why do we need to fight with Japan or the United States on the high seas ????
              1. Bradley
                Bradley 8 May 2021 19: 27
                +2
                Why do we need to fight with Japan or the United States on the high seas ????

                Why do we need to fight with anyone at all? Why did we fight with Germany in 41?
                Few people will ask us.)
                1. Murmur 55
                  Murmur 55 8 May 2021 20: 08
                  +4
                  If now a war breaks out in strength equal to WWII, then I think there will be no sea battles, Nazi Germany shores its super-duper battleships and the war was fought by destroyers and flocks of "daddy" Dennitsa. And now missiles and strategic bombers will decide everything, no one will duel like in 18, everything will be done dirty and from around the corner.
                  1. Bradley
                    Bradley 8 May 2021 23: 11
                    0
                    I'm talking about something else. If there is a war, then it will be, with Japan, with the United States or someone else. Maybe we have no need to fight with anyone, but someone may be why.
            3. unhappy
              unhappy 9 May 2021 10: 12
              -3
              Don't you read the news? Assessments of NATO countries of the state of the Russian army, air defense systems, electronic warfare and other elements of warfare. Not we, but they declare the superiority of our army. Even without nuclear weapons, they "feel bad", and they Europeans have become gentle and do not want to fight in blood. Moreover, for some Balts and Ukrainians ...
          3. Shopping Mall
            Shopping Mall 9 May 2021 14: 40
            +1
            Quote: Murmur 55
            Why do we need such a project ???? At that price? With such a practical application ??? The US itself does not know what to do with it and where to stick it, we also need something like that ??? And about joking if only we were weak we would have long ago been plowed up like Libya, Iraq, Yugoslavia. In your opinion, if a neighbor does something stupid and spends a lot of money on it, there is no need to joke, because you did not spend money on it and are not able to?


            They have worked out a bunch of new technical solutions. And already on these decisions they will make a more effective project. Likewise, they first made three super-expensive Seawulfs, and then a more economically viable Virginia.

            And so, there is an anecdote on this topic:

            Flight to Paris. Customs
            A passenger with a huge heavy suitcase.

            - "What have you got there?"
            -"Brick."
            - "How's the brick?"

            They open it - the suitcase is full of bricks.

            - "So! What's in the bricks?"
            - "Nothing. Just a brick."

            They tapped, enlightened, sniffed, split a couple of pieces - nothing ...

            - "It was I who bought a plot in Paris. Now I drive a brick, I am building a house."
            ...
            At the shift change, the customs officer tells the shift worker:
            - "Count it up, here one carries a brick to Paris, builds a house."
            He replies:
            - "If we build houses of bricks in Paris, then who are you and me?"
        2. Cheshire
          Cheshire 8 May 2021 17: 44
          +3
          Quote: Bradley
          And what is there to joke about? Everything is fine in our fleet, do we have similar projects?
          It makes sense to joke when it is equal to the one over whom you are joking.

          That's right, the Americans have to write off littoral ships, and there is no reason for laughter at all. It was sarcasm, plus catch)
          1. Bradley
            Bradley 8 May 2021 18: 00
            +1
            I have to answer in the same way with a plus.
        3. aszzz888
          aszzz888 9 May 2021 03: 17
          -4

          Bradley (Nagatoro-san)
          Yesterday, 16: 35

          -2
          Well, no, but then what are we going to joke about?

          And what is there to joke about? Everything is fine in our fleet we have similar projects?
          Did you think well, or did you squeeze it in on the "machine"?
      2. garik191
        garik191 8 May 2021 17: 00
        -5
        Immediately cancel the reduction factor when calculating the military pension. Return the lost pension to all categories of the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Internal Affairs, etc., starting in 2012.

        https://www.roi.ru/70721/

        Vote, 35 thousand votes left ...
        1. Fan-fan
          Fan-fan 8 May 2021 17: 43
          0
          No, guys, you supported the 65-year retirement for us, now you yourself try to live in our shoes.
      3. Alex777
        Alex777 8 May 2021 23: 27
        0
        and then what are we going to joke about?

        And what does the USS Gerald R. Ford not suit you as a target? wink
        1. Cheshire
          Cheshire 9 May 2021 07: 08
          0
          Quote: Alex777
          And what does the USS Gerald R. Ford not suit you as a target?

          hi
          As a target for banter - very much even nothing. As a target for missiles - healthy, but I believe in ours, and you can miss it. Most of all, he suits me as a reference point when designing my own aircraft carrier. I'm waiting.
          fellow
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 9 May 2021 11: 33
            -1
            As a target for banter - very much even nothing. As a target for missiles - healthy, but I believe in ours, and you can miss it. Most of all, he suits me as a reference point when designing my own aircraft carrier. I'm waiting.

            I agree with everything except one. It will be necessary - we will not miss. hi
            1. Cheshire
              Cheshire 9 May 2021 13: 40
              +1
              As a true realist, I hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
              hi
    2. credo
      credo 8 May 2021 15: 35
      +8
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Yes, dispose of these "Zumvolts" ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.

      Why incomprehensible? Very understandable if you pay attention to the price of its manufacture.
      And taking into account the new "ideas" and spending on the installation of hypersonic products, this type of ships generally becomes a gold mine for the American military-industrial complex.

      Another thing is that this article suffers from truncation and understatement, tk. the program for the installation of hypersonic products in the US Navy involves their installation on submarines, and possibly not only on them.

      It should only be admitted that the US military, like their colleagues from the local military-industrial complex, does not eat bread for nothing and they work out the preparation for cutting the budget thoroughly so that later they can safely say - Well, this experiment was not successful on the Zumvolts, but it went well on submarines or naval aviation.

      The United States will always find "enemies", and it does not mind any money for them.
    3. Cat Alexandrovich
      Cat Alexandrovich 8 May 2021 15: 36
      +6
      No need to dispose of! Let them devour!
    4. xorek
      xorek 8 May 2021 15: 40
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Yes, dispose of these "Zumvolts" ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.

      Aha, they are even afraid to let him go on duty, suddenly a hundred lard will sink))))
      Iron, he and ..

      Biden requested negotiations quietly .. laughing
    5. dauria
      dauria 8 May 2021 15: 45
      +3
      ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.


      Just new. The destiny is to be a platform for testing new solutions. This is usually the case. If you want a workhorse, do not shrink, do it the old fashioned way. If you want to step forward - be ready to spit and swear "What a ram I am! I didn't realize right away." They will lick out in the end. The idea with the case is quite excellent.
      1. Pereira
        Pereira 8 May 2021 16: 16
        +1
        The body idea is not new.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 9 May 2021 03: 38
          0
          Do not write nonsense. Appearance - it can be deceiving.
      2. Murmur 55
        Murmur 55 8 May 2021 16: 50
        0
        Something takes a long time to "lick". And it is not clear what they want, the US itself is rushing from side to side with this project.
        1. spirit
          spirit 8 May 2021 17: 02
          0
          Yes, the project itself, in essence, is already everything! No one will rivet them any further. The Americans have now made a test laboratory of the Navy out of it, and are trying to cram and work out everything that is possible from the advanced on it. From an economic point of view, this is quite justified, it is better to break all the spears here, on a limited edition, than then to alter everything conditionally on the next generations of Berks, which will already be riveted in large quantities and the alteration will cost several times more. hi
      3. lucul
        lucul 8 May 2021 16: 59
        -5
        The destiny is to be a platform for testing new solutions

        Only with him all new solutions turned out to be a failure - that's why banter)))
        The idea with the case is quite excellent.

        Failed idea - failed)))
    6. Rageee
      Rageee 8 May 2021 16: 10
      +5
      Why are you so worried about American money and budget? Moreover, they have a printing press there, they can print dollars as much as they like, right? laughing
      1. Murmur 55
        Murmur 55 8 May 2021 16: 53
        +1
        I understand that it is not special, but even America cannot churn out money ENDLESSLY, sooner or later the amount of printed material will destroy printers and oooooooochen many around.
    7. Pereira
      Pereira 8 May 2021 16: 14
      0
      Give it to Ukraine. To intimidate the Black Sea Fleet.
      1. frruc
        frruc 8 May 2021 16: 38
        +1
        What for. On the deck of this trough, you can earn money: Restaurants, casinos, can finally be used for filming disaster films. fellow
        1. Prisoner
          Prisoner 8 May 2021 20: 29
          0
          You can sell it to the Chinese. On pins and needles.
    8. RealPilot
      RealPilot 8 May 2021 16: 24
      +2
      Dismantle the gun mounts, and then everything else. Apparently, this will end. Or such dismantling will not even begin ...

      After all, we are talking about the removal of the worker in order to deliver the non-existent!
    9. Thrifty
      Thrifty 8 May 2021 16: 28
      0
      Dismantle the wheelhouse, and place 410 mm guns in its place, so that this mountain is considered a missile battleship. ...
    10. Prisoner
      Prisoner 8 May 2021 20: 28
      +1
      No way! Also let them rivet. Yes, more. laughing
    11. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 04: 39
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Yes, dispose of these "Zumvolts" ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.

      Eh, it would be Russian, as it were praised ... Like Armata ... "There are no such analogs" they say in the world ... And since the American one, they smeared it like a shit ..... And Russian gunsmiths do everything "with a bang?" ... And not "sawed"? All penny to penny? And "Palaces with Brushes" and Yachts are the largest in the world, what to build on?
  2. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 8 May 2021 15: 26
    +3
    I grumble, how much more dough is thrown into this miracle - trough? Mattress toppers beat all records of separation from our reality)))
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 8 May 2021 15: 30
      +3
      Quote: TermNachTER
      I grumble, how much more dough is thrown into these miracles - trough

      And on our forum, fans of "everything American", secretly minus, without argumentation ... Ku ku, guys ... there's nothing to say?
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 8 May 2021 15: 32
        +2
        Yes, it is somehow violet to me that they minus me, the opinion of smart people is interesting to me.
      2. Prisoner
        Prisoner 8 May 2021 15: 38
        +3
        The lads are offended for the pan. It happens.
      3. xorek
        xorek 8 May 2021 15: 46
        -2
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Quote: TermNachTER
        I grumble, how much more dough is thrown into these miracles - trough

        And on our forum, fans of "everything American", secretly minus, without argumentation ... Ku ku, guys ... there's nothing to say?

        ANGRY! Well, this is good, after all, Eugene .. hi
        And before the minuses were a signal that something was wrong .. And the skulls of the skull, now they are marshals and generals ..))) Well, we, as always, the infantry are going forward to the line of fire ..
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 8 May 2021 16: 05
          +2
          Quote: xorek
          Well, we, as always, the infantry are going forward to the line of fire ..

          Did you serve in the army Mikhalych or cut it in the 90s?
          1. sabakina
            sabakina 8 May 2021 17: 19
            +2
            Quote: Aaron Zawi
            Quote: xorek
            Well, we, as always, the infantry are going forward to the line of fire ..

            Did you serve in the army Mikhalych or cut it in the 90s?

            Aron, Vitalya served an urgent service in the US ILC, graduated from the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Federation. Do you still have any questions? wink And, yes, I forgot, he was still in the IDF as a warrant officer.
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 8 May 2021 17: 24
              +3
              Quote: sabakina
              Quote: Aaron Zawi
              Quote: xorek
              Well, we, as always, the infantry are going forward to the line of fire ..

              Did you serve in the army Mikhalych or cut it in the 90s?

              Aron, Vitalya served an urgent service in the US ILC, graduated from the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Federation. Do you still have any questions? wink And, yes, I forgot, he was still in the IDF as a warrant officer.

              Well, if we have a warrant officer, then of course it is, yes, there are no words. An Israeli warrant officer is more terrible for his army than the Hezbollah assault company.
      4. Alexander 3
        Alexander 3 8 May 2021 16: 16
        +1
        Banderlogists come to our forum along the way and shit everywhere, well, their life is so mean.
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 8 May 2021 16: 53
          -2
          Banderlogists come to our forum along the way and shit everywhere, well, their life is so mean.

          They work on a rotational basis, to earn money here.
          1. Alexander 3
            Alexander 3 8 May 2021 17: 14
            +3
            I don’t remember when, there was a note saying that a certain businessman was recruiting workers from Ukraine. Every morning before work he demanded to sing the Russian anthem.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 8 May 2021 17: 47
              +4
              Judging by the minuses, they wander around, earn on tsibulya with bacon.
              1. Alexander 3
                Alexander 3 8 May 2021 17: 54
                +2
                Here is the fat on the tsibulya and the nose to move the fat.
      5. aszzz888
        aszzz888 9 May 2021 03: 16
        -2

        Mountain shooter (Eugene)
        Yesterday, 15: 30

        +4
        Quote: TermNachTER
        I grumble, how much more dough is thrown into these miracles - trough

        And on our forum, fans of "everything American", secretly minus, without argumentation ... Ku ku, guys ... there's nothing to say?
        Adeptics work out their grub. For by evening they may not have matzo. wink
    2. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 8 May 2021 15: 34
      +4
      long-range naval artillery 155 mm will be dismantled.
      Each shot is worth 1000000 dead presidents! Involuntarily you will think ... wassat
  3. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 8 May 2021 15: 33
    0
    Super duper hyper missiles do not fit into Arleigh Burke, without reducing their ammunition. Iron is just right. With shells worth under a million pieces, they did well. When will their hyper fly? The iron is much worse than Abramovich's yacht, the latter even walks the seas. advice weld it to the berth and do not do anything with the iron, otherwise, during the next re-equipment, burn the irons during welding. drinks
  4. Light
    Light 8 May 2021 15: 41
    +1
    I'm wondering which of the amer's defense scams cost their budget more, trough Zumwalt or F-35 irons, they have a competition there)
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 8 May 2021 15: 45
      +3
      Quote: Bright
      they have competitions there

      Irons against penguins ... recourse
    2. Rageee
      Rageee 8 May 2021 16: 17
      +8
      Zumwalt is the processing of new technologies, the Americans can afford it, since they have full-fledged Arlie-Burk destroyers under 70 in service, and are still building, while for Russia even building a couple of destroyers is not a feasible task nowadays, it remains to rivet coastal mrk and corvettes ...
      The F-35 is an advanced 5th generation aircraft, which have already been riveted for 600+ units, and for which the queues lined up for years ahead. How many su-57s are there in the ranks? what about the second stage engine when we see the launches from the internal compartments? radar afar finally mastered? some questions ...
      1. frruc
        frruc 8 May 2021 16: 46
        +2
        This means that coastal mrk and corvettes are currently more relevant, based on the tasks of the Navy. Our fleet is not yet surfing the Caribbean Sea, until ...... But SSBNs are being built, missiles and infrastructure for them.
        1. Rageee
          Rageee 8 May 2021 16: 54
          +3
          oh, that's it, I thought it was about financial capabilities and technical competencies, but it turns out that the Russian Navy simply does not need destroyers, or it’s the MRK’s business good
          1. frruc
            frruc 8 May 2021 17: 00
            +2
            You forgot to specify the carriers! crying
            1. Rageee
              Rageee 8 May 2021 17: 01
              -1
              that Russia can build an aircraft carrier, just that the country supposedly does not need it? so why are you torturing poor Kuzya?)))
              1. frruc
                frruc 8 May 2021 17: 02
                -1
                I agree. On the good, it is necessary to send to the scrap.
          2. sabakina
            sabakina 8 May 2021 17: 26
            -1
            Quote: Rageee
            oh that's it, I thought
            The turkey also thought, but got into the cabbage soup.
            1. Rageee
              Rageee 8 May 2021 17: 39
              +3
              I'm just overwhelmed by such argumentation, bravo)))
              1. sabakina
                sabakina 8 May 2021 17: 41
                -3
                Quote: Rageee
                I'm just overwhelmed by such argumentation, bravo)))

                Thank you! 30 years of jurisprudence have not gone down the drain.
          3. Murmur 55
            Murmur 55 8 May 2021 18: 27
            +2
            Answer this question: Why is the United States building an aircraft carrier with WWII? And the USSR did not build, well, except for Kuznetsov? What was the lack of money too? Or was the strategy and tactics different?
        2. Sanguinius
          Sanguinius 8 May 2021 16: 58
          +1
          Naturally, it does not plow ... because there is NOTHING, and not because it is not necessary or not relevant!) In this way, everything can be justified)))
      2. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 8 May 2021 16: 54
        -1
        F-35 advanced 5th generation aircraft, which have already been riveted for 600+ pieces,

        Are you serious?
      3. lucul
        lucul 8 May 2021 16: 56
        -2
        Zumvalt is the processing of new technologies,

        What technologies ?????
        If I do something, then I imagine in advance how it looks and how it will work.
        And here we first build, and then think about why.
        since they have full-fledged destroyers Arlie-Burk under 70 in service,

        Few, very few of them - after all, Arlie Burke could not destroy even one airfield in Syria, firing his ammunition at it.
        And how many airfields are there in Russia? )))
        No, Arlie Berkov is not enough - you need three times more)))
        Do not forget - the annual service price of one Arleigh Burke is $ 80 million))))
      4. Murmur 55
        Murmur 55 8 May 2021 16: 59
        +1
        Immediately I will make a reservation that it is not special, but why do they run in for so long ??? If I understand correctly, then this experimental platform should not climb out of the oceans and the crew should change on a rotational basis, well, in order to experiment, at the level of modern missiles, ships become targets, so the United States quietly wants to abandon the AVIANOSETS, or replace it with a light version hi
        1. Disant
          Disant 8 May 2021 22: 52
          0
          fairy tales about one million dollars per shot are fairy tales.
          with the same success you can write that two lemma per shot.
          .
          Without even speaking and without reaching questions about accuracy and range - they have problems with the railgun gun - when fired, the projectile takes with it half of the internal content of the barrel.
      5. Light
        Light 8 May 2021 18: 33
        -1
        I never would have thought that a low-speed, subsonic cruising airplane, with aerodynamics and iron maneuverability, with a disgusting thrust-to-weight ratio, is something advanced 5th generation) If anything, our stage 2 engine has been flying for a long time, they are testing, AFARs stand, of different ranges, in the nose and wings. Su-57, I think, they want to first modify and test, as expected, and then rivet, and not vice versa, following the example of amers.
        We also build frigates from ships. And icebreakers, which for amers, apparently, an unbearable task .. Not, of course, let them do what they want, do what they want, exchange guns for missiles, and vice versa, for lard greens, rivet sea and air irons, I'm all for it. The more the budget is drunk, the easier it will be for us.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 8 May 2021 20: 15
          +2
          "low-speed, with subsonic cruising speed, aircraft, with aerodynamics and iron maneuverability, with a disgusting thrust-to-weight ratio" ///
          ---
          You are greatly mistaken about aerodynamics and maneuverability.
          1) Aerodynamics of the F-35 with weapons in the inner compartments better,
          than any 4-generation fighter with weapons on foreign pylons.
          2) The maneuverability of the F-35 is good, better than that of the F-16. Small radius turn
          at 0.9 MAX it does better than any heavy fighter.
          With regard to speed, rate of climb and thrust-to-weight ratio, you are right.
          1. Light
            Light 8 May 2021 21: 17
            -1
            Well, well, I would like to see how the F-35 maneuvers at supercritical angles of attack and repeats the aerobatics of the Su and MiGs hung with weapons on engines with a controlled thrust vector, but, it seems, no luck.
            I don't know about the comparison with the F-16, but I heard the opposite, how the F-16 is easier to maneuver.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 8 May 2021 21: 29
              +2
              I would like to remind you that all maneuvers with a controlled thrust vector
              produced at speeds no higher than 0.5-0.6 MAX. At these speeds
              The Su-35 is more maneuverable than the F-35. But air battles take place on transonic
              speeds - 0.8-0.95 MAX. It is for these speeds that the F-35 is optimized.
              Reducing the speed to 0.5 MAX is very dangerous - the plane can be attacked
              to his spectacular super-maneuver.
              For this reason, the Americans at one time canceled the introduction of nozzles with a controlled
              thrust vector developed for the F-16 and other aircraft (only
              on the F-22 in the vertical plane).
              So the outcome of close combat between the F-35 and the Su-35 is very ambiguous.
              Here intercept Su-35 F-35 will not be able to due to lack of speed.
              The F-35 is not an interceptor at all.
              1. Light
                Light 9 May 2021 00: 10
                -1
                I read more about thrust vector control, it is used at all speeds, both at near-zero and supersonic.
                The use of all-aspect thrust vector deviation will allow not only control of the fighter during maneuvering (including super-maneuverability modes - at very high angles of attack and minimum speeds), but also stabilization of flight parameters along all three axes during normal piloting, thus reducing costs for balancing and, accordingly, fuel consumption. Spatial OBT makes it possible to obtain high angular roll velocities and provide effective heading control when flying at high angles of attack, when traditional aerodynamic controls significantly lose their effectiveness, as well as significantly increase the pitch angular velocities.

                American flying laboratories F-15, F-16, F-18, Kh-31 experimented with UVT. for example
                The first flight on the F-15 ACTIVE with UHT took place on March 27, 1996, and already on April 24 of the same year, the first deviation of the thrust vector was carried out for control in the side channel at supersonic speed (M = 1,6). During the tests, the range of flight conditions under which the thrust vector was deflected for pitch and heading control was expanded to speeds twice the speed of sound.

                F-22 with a flat nozzle, deflected in a vertical plane, because before it they experimented only with a flat nozzle on the F-15S. Then they continued with a fully deflected nozzle and showed its effectiveness and superiority in maneuverability at all speeds and angles of attack, they wanted this on the F-35, but they never installed it.
                As a result, only ours are now flying on serial engines with all-aspect UHT. The Spaniards are still planning such nozzles for the EJ200 Eurofighter.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 9 May 2021 00: 39
                  +1
                  "and supersonic" ///
                  ----
                  At supersonic sound, slight deflections of the nozzles are used to
                  flight stabilization. This is their own post.
                  If you make a sharp maneuver at supersonic by turning the nozzles
                  ("super maneuverability"),
                  then the airplane's glider will not withstand the overload and will collapse.
                  Super maneuverability is a useful thing in close combat,
                  but it has speed limits.
                  1. Light
                    Light 9 May 2021 01: 22
                    0
                    I do not argue that the super-maneuverability mode is subsonic, but the UHT allows you to make quite energetic maneuvers, turns in supersonic, and effective anti-missile ones at subsonic, and rather high strength characteristics of the hull are laid into aircraft, composites are introduced, at least in our new ones. In any case, it is better with thrust vector control than without it, I don’t know why the Americans didn’t make it in their F-35 ashtray as planned.
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 9 May 2021 03: 54
                      0
                      UHT allows you to make quite energetic maneuvers, turns in super sound

                      Doesn't allow. Exceed Max overload and destroy the glider (as in the Su-57 episode). On serial, as a rule, EDSU simply will not allow you to do this.
                      and rather high strength characteristics of the hull are laid in the aircraft

                      Maximum 9-10-11g. Destruction when exceeded by 2-3G, and the higher the speed, the greater the overload occurs with the same (deg / second) turn.
                      thrust vector control is better than without it, I don’t know why the Americans didn’t do it in their F-35 ashtray as planned.

                      It's cheaper without it.
                      Applicable and effective in a limited range of speeds, priority was given to combat out of sight (BVR fight).
                      Here somersaults do not work (Max overload), it is more important to maneuver at high speeds, the ability to quickly gain speed.
                      But the 35th is by no means helpless in close combat, the same Su-27/30 will "twist".
                      1. Light
                        Light 9 May 2021 07: 49
                        +1
                        I would not say that a nozzle with an all-aspect OVT significantly increases the cost of an aircraft, despite the fact that it is really useful and applicable over the entire speed range, from 0 to maximum, and does not eat up 10-15% of the thrust like a flat nozzle. You can not lose control even in a fall with the tail down and an inverted spin. Here are the words of Sergei Bogdan: "The revolutionary leap in terms of stability and controllability of the aircraft, especially in air combat, was made thanks to the controlled thrust vector. A completely new quality of piloting was achieved when the aircraft enters super-maneuverability modes along with obtaining high characteristics in angular velocities. rotation. "
                        It seems that the creators of the F-35, having relied on stealth, practically did not count on close combat. When both aircraft of the 5th generation, such as the F-22 and Su-57, are optimized for supersonic operation (although in the case of the F-22, no more than 1.1 / 1.2M, otherwise the armament compartment doors cannot be opened), their supersonic airframe profile gives less drag air, which, coupled with a large thrust-to-weight ratio and non-afterburner operation of the engines, allows you to have a significant advantage over the aircraft of the 4th generation on transonic and supersonic.
                      2. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 9 May 2021 11: 37
                        +2
                        "It looks like the creators of the F-35, having relied on stealth, practically did not count on close combat." ///
                        ----
                        Almost true. The F-35 is designed for medium-range combat.
                        Stealth and
                        situational awareness (infrared sensors around the perimeter).
                        And close combat is planned as a defensive measure when
                        it is impossible to avoid. And the presence of a sharp turn and a sharp turn
                        greatly increases the chances in close combat.
                        Norway buys 50 F-35s, transferring from F-16s.
                        They plan to use the F-35, mainly
                        as a fighter, not a striker. Conducted many training
                        battles with their F-16, and with other NATO aircraft.
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 9 May 2021 12: 20
                        0
                        When, like the 5th generation aircraft, like the F-22 and Su-57, they are optimized for supersonic operation (although in the case of the F-22, no more than 1.1 / 1.2M

                        Everything opens up for him, cruising supersonic 1,6M.
                        practically did not count on close combat

                        We are only talking about the absence of OVT, he will confidently disassemble from a cannon (Su-27/30, Mig-29 without OVT) or missiles with OVT (AIM-9x, it is possible to launch "backwards") the enemy in close combat, if it comes to that.
                        Much depends on the combat pilot's raid and group tactics. Now no one seeks to get closer: you will be banally shot down by a medium / long-range missile with an ARL of the seeker, which both sides have.
                        For example, a new helmet is almost ready for mass purchases, allowing you to see "through" the plane, including at night. Not a single plane has such a quality yet.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
                      5. Light
                        Light 9 May 2021 23: 39
                        0
                        There is an interesting article. http://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-air/zapusk-raket-na-sverxzvuke-3/ There is a whole section on why the arodynamics of the F-22, and in particular the air intakes, does not facilitate the use of its weapons at speeds of 1.2M +
                        In general, yes, in conditions of limited conflicts or the initial phases of large-scale conflicts, as long as there are plenty of expensive high-precision weapons, battles will take place at maximum distances.
                      6. 3danimal
                        3danimal 10 May 2021 04: 46
                        0
                        We have shown above that from the point of view of aerodynamics and energy, the F-22 is not worse than the 4th generation aircraft in subsonic modes due to the high thrust-to-weight ratio and the ability to reach large angles of attack. In a narrow range of transonic speeds, M = 1.1–1.2, the Raptor significantly outperforms all fourth-generation fighters in instantaneous unsteady turn speeds.

                        How modest, "not worse." The F-22 indicator for "extreme turn" reaches 70 'per second. In close combat, 4th generation fighters have some chances only when using NSC and missiles with OVT, in the case of using the R-60M / AIM-9M and guns - the chances are near zero.
                        (Of course, if an ace is not at the helm of the F-18, and a beginner is in the F-22 chair, but this is also impossible).
                        Another advantage: the F-22 and F-35 have HOTAS controls, which reduce the pilot's workload when maneuvering at high G-forces.
                        By the way, sites with names like "otvaga.2004" are usually filtered out by my personal spam filter.
                        as long as there is plenty of expensive high-precision weapons, battles will take place at maximum distances.

                        Any explosive missile is a precision weapon. Do not fight only with cannons smile
                        This will not happen, the AIM-120 alone produced over 20000 units.
      6. 3danimal
        3danimal 8 May 2021 23: 08
        +2
        Would like to - look. Everything is on YouTube, you only need 5 minutes of time and motivation to search (no laziness?).
        https://youtu.be/MJLoW1ClNE0

        The Cobra maneuver, 45 'per second, for comparison, the maximum for the Su-27 is 36' / s.
        How do you feel when you see how the "iron", created 30 years later, twists the Su-27 in its signature maneuver?
        (What have you misled?)
        Objectively, Lightning II is one of the most maneuverable modern aircraft without OVT.
        1. Light
          Light 9 May 2021 00: 22
          +1
          I saw this video. And where is the Cobra, if it's a U-turn? You should look at the real Cobra, how it is performed by "Su" shki. In general, I reviewed many full demonstration flights of the F-35, but I never saw anything that closely resembled the super-maneuverability of our fighters.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 9 May 2021 02: 18
            +1
            At the air show, spectacular aerial acrobatics are visible,
            but the screen does not display the speed at which these techniques
            are performed. It would be displayed, little secrets would be revealed.
            F-35 does not tear forward to intercept at high speeds - this is its minus negative ,
            but also does not slow down for the sake of performing sharp turns or turns -
            this is its plus. good
            Everything happens at a stable 0.8-0.9 MAX.
            And it does without a rotary nozzle. His maneuverability is normal.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 9 May 2021 04: 02
              -1
              At the air show, spectacular aerial acrobatics are visible,
              but the screen does not display the speed at which these techniques
              are performed.

              True, but you can see the angle of the reversal and the time it took.
              After all, one of the main myths says that the F-35 is helpless in close combat, has the maneuverability of an "iron, transport", which is clearly not the case. (Then it's time to recognize the Su-27, F-18, F-16 irons).
            2. Light
              Light 9 May 2021 07: 58
              +1
              It is good that he does this at 0,8-0,9M, but at 0,6M it is easier and more relaxed to do it. Therefore, it is unclear, if an anti-missile maneuver is needed, it is still preferable to slow down a little, and if you quickly reach the line of attack, break away and immediately reach a new line, then add. A large thrust-to-weight ratio would allow good acceleration dynamics after exiting the maneuver, but alas, one engine of such power to its weight of the F-35 is clearly not enough for energetic acceleration. Well, as far as I remember, the F-35 is in principle contraindicated in supersonic, something with the reliability of the tail section of the glider.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 9 May 2021 10: 58
                +3
                "but 0,6M makes it easier and more relaxed." ///
                ----
                Sure. But braking is fatal in aerial combat.
                The American and Israeli Air Forces use a strictly collective
                tactics. There are no aces like Kozhedub who work wonders in battle.
                Everything is divided into groups with their own functions. One group gets involved
                into air combat and plays the role of "beaters", using numerical
                advantage. Moreover, they do not go to exacerbations.
                And there is a group of "gunmen".
                They catch enemy aircraft when they are forced to switch to intensive maneuvers with UHT and hit
                them at the moment of braking.
                This is not a theory, but a tactic practiced in the annual exercise in the United States.
                International exercises. There are other groups: distracting, electronic warfare, etc.
                The Americans have a lot of planes.
                Therefore, the stunts that amaze viewers on the show are in real combat
                will be deadly. It is safer to fight at high speeds.
                ----
                In the F-35, the trailing edge of the tail is burned with a continuous afterburner.
                plumage. The stealth cover is damaged. Therefore, it is not recommended for exercises
                afterburner - only in critical cases.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 9 May 2021 13: 01
                  0
                  In the F-35, the trailing edge of the tail is burned with a continuous afterburner.
                  plumage. The stealth cover is damaged. Therefore, it is not recommended for exercises
                  afterburner - only in critical cases.

                  Does this also happen with Israeli F-35s? The F-22 does not seem to have such a problem (besides, it can easily fly 1,6M on a "supercruise").
                  Because of what could it be? Inner parts of the horizon. the stabilizer is too close to the hot jet?
                  I wonder if they can find a solution?



                2. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 9 May 2021 13: 12
                  +2
                  "Is the interior of the horizontal stabilizer too close to the hot jet?" ///
                  ---
                  Yes. Moreover, the test pilots who drove the planes at maximum afterburners swore that there was no visually noticeable burnout or damage to the coating.
                  But the instruments during the inter-flight service recorded damage to the coating from overheating of the edges.
                3. 3danimal
                  3danimal 9 May 2021 13: 30
                  0
                  Hmm ... F-22 +/- also has edges close to the nozzles request
                  Could it be the lower power of each engine and flat nozzles (lower temperature)?
                  And how to be? Use afterburner only when absolutely necessary?
            3. Light
              Light 9 May 2021 23: 56
              0
              In general, even in local conflicts, a significant nomenclature of forces and means of reconnaissance and destruction is involved, and in the event of larger-scale conflicts, there will be other strategies and tactics, since everything will be used: from aircraft, cruise and ballistic missiles, to ground-based air defense and electronic warfare systems, and the same F-35 will be one of the cogs of the big war mechanism.
          2. 3danimal
            3danimal 9 May 2021 12: 08
            0
            Therefore, it is unclear if an anti-missile maneuver is needed, it is still preferable to slow down a little.

            This is disastrous. Acrobatics - only for close combat, in order to prevent the enemy from shooting at you with a cannon / launching a missile with an OVT.
            When fighting out of sight, high speed, when you are attacked, is generally survival.
            You will not impress the AIM-120 with somersaults, its Max G-force is 36 g, more than three times yours (the condition of confident interception is met). Its only weakness is its limited fuel supply. Therefore, the tactic is to reduce speed to the ground on Bor and maneuver without losing it
      7. 3danimal
        3danimal 9 May 2021 02: 46
        0
        That means they saw badly.
        Look for information: the maximum turning speed in this maneuver of the Su-27 is 36 '/ s. (By modern standards, this is not so much: the same Eurofighter and Rafal can do better).
        Here's another:
        https://youtu.be/6Kg-ztkPDok

        Cobra can be done at any angle: vertical, horizontal (in the latter case - without such a noticeable loss of speed). You can call it a U-turn at ultra-high angles of attack.
        I saw and closely similar to the super-maneuverability of our fighters.

        Because now you are talking about OVT fighters.
        An important point: with 6 suspended missiles, an aircraft without internal weapons bays has additional resistance and more restrictions on Max overload.
        Find a video from the F-22, it can be more than fighters that do not have OVT.
        https://youtu.be/J-dEuKqGUB0

        Here: both perform a vertical maneuver, but the F-22 completes it faster and leaves it noticeably faster (higher thrust-to-weight ratio and OVT give an advantage).
        1. Light
          Light 9 May 2021 08: 13
          +1
          According to the combat turn, it is clear that it will be easier for lighter vehicles to turn around, the force of inertia has not been canceled.
          This is the point of the Cobra, so that the plane does not turn around, but flies tail first, at an angle of attack of more than 90%, keeping motion in the same flight plane. This demonstrates stability at high angles of attack, and the practical significance of the possibility of emergency aerodynamic braking, without changing course, if necessary.
          2 engines in any way will have an advantage over 1 in terms of thrust-to-weight ratio. Once upon a time, the Americans referred to the 5th generation program as 4S-Stealth, STOL, Supercruise, Supersonic agility, however, after the appearance of the F-22, 3S remained, and the F-35 was 2S.
          By the way, the choice of an aerodynamic shape with a wide fuselage for the intra-compartment placement of weapons contributes to stealth, but negatively affects the maneuverability and the ability to use weapons, especially at critical angles of attack. It's funny that the fewer missiles will remain on the outer pylons of older-generation aircraft, the less frictional drag and the greater the maneuverability advantage over stealth ashtrays.
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 9 May 2021 12: 32
            0
            that it will be easier for lighter cars to turn around, the force of inertia has not been canceled.

            The MiG-29 makes an extreme turn worse than the Su-27. It's lighter though.
            By the way, the choice of an aerodynamic shape with a wide fuselage for the intra-compartment placement of weapons contributes to stealth, but negatively affects the maneuverability and the ability to use weapons, especially at critical angles of attack.

            However, the glider developers provided it with very high maneuverability at critical angles of attack.
            Many "vortex-forming" influxes on the bureau, developed wing mechanization allow more than the Su-27 glider can.
            It's funny that the fewer missiles will remain on the outer pylons of older-generation aircraft, the less frictional drag and the greater the maneuverability advantage over stealth ashtrays.

            Not funny: you will not spend explosive missiles to “dump ballast” (this is your survival) and there is no guarantee that the enemy with this advantage will not knock you down sooner.
            There is one of the world's best DCS flight simulators from the Russian Eagle Dynamics, the mechanics of combat out of sight are very well implemented there.
            https://youtu.be/bV8CREdH6Tc

            https://youtu.be/bV8CREdH6Tc

            https://youtu.be/bV8CREdH6Tc

            https://youtu.be/ftrekvePuJQ

            The videos are small, watch them all.
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 9 May 2021 04: 27
    0
    Don't tell me about icebreakers. They have New York - these types of our Crimea and Sochi. Are there many icebreakers on the Black Sea? The Americans do not need them. No, no.
    1. Light
      Light 9 May 2021 07: 53
      0
      It is strange then to hear their statements about how they took care of the creation of icebreakers and butting with Russia for the Arctic.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 8 May 2021 15: 41
    +1
    Finally, "ripe" ... or not yet?
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 8 May 2021 17: 30
      0
      Quote: rocket757
      Finally, "ripe" ... or not yet?

      Vitya, dear, just for God's sake don't mention the stick used to knock down fruit! Otherwise, local apologists will misunderstand. With prYuvet!
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 8 May 2021 17: 53
        +1
        Vyacheslav soldier
        The point is that on some topics there is NO neutral opinion! All the same, you will fall under the distribution, from one side or the other!
        I don't care ....
        About the experiments of minke whales ... they are looking for and it may happen that they will find, do something really that no one has and this will give them real advantages.
        So it can also happen .... "iron", well, as long as it is, without a handle, besides!
  • YOU
    YOU 8 May 2021 15: 42
    -1
    I think another attempt to justify this brainchild. Apparently it became completely impossible to make excuses for this miracle, without real application. Let's see what happens this time.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 8 May 2021 16: 06
      +4
      Quote: YOU
      I think another attempt to justify this brainchild. Apparently it became completely impossible to make excuses for this miracle, without real application. Let's see what happens this time.

      In fact, they run new ideas on them. Sometimes they are successful, more often not. But these are their problems.
      1. YOU
        YOU 8 May 2021 16: 46
        -1
        Well, I would understand if it was one experimental, experimental. Why two at once.
        1. sabakina
          sabakina 8 May 2021 17: 33
          +1
          YOU, I'm not Aron, but I will answer in Aron.
          - And Schaub asked!
        2. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 8 May 2021 17: 34
          0
          Duc seems to be finishing the third iron. And this is a series!
      2. Murmur 55
        Murmur 55 8 May 2021 17: 01
        +3
        Aaron is a question without sarcasm, but how many of these platforms were held in the ocean, how many in bases, how many in rem. zones ???
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 8 May 2021 17: 21
          -1
          Quote: Murmur 55
          Aaron is a question without sarcasm, but how many of these platforms were held in the ocean, how many in bases, how many in rem. zones ???

          I have no idea. But they are being driven.
          1. Murmur 55
            Murmur 55 8 May 2021 18: 31
            +1
            Aron is just progmatism here, if this is an experiment, then Zumvalts should be operated as they say in the tail and mane, otherwise it is no longer an experiment, and if they stand at the pier or docks for repairs more often than at sea, then this is already a failure and the project is not successful.
  • rruvim
    rruvim 8 May 2021 16: 14
    +1
    Zumwalt is a walking server. AFAR around the perimeter. Negros for monitors can track who ISS drilled a hole. A programmer's dream, in general. But the explosion is 1 clt. at an altitude of 30-40 km of altitude, it will bring this electronics out easily. All these Zumwalds are for the natives.
    1. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 04: 56
      0
      Quote: rruvim
      But the explosion is 1 clt. at an altitude of 30-40 km in height, it will easily bring this electronics. All these Zumwalds are for the aborigines.

      Will it not "bring out" Russian electronics? Is it made of Vibranium, or what?
  • bistrov.
    bistrov. 8 May 2021 16: 25
    +4
    So far, not only the missiles themselves are not there, there is not even a prototype, so it is unlikely that such missiles will appear in the United States by 2025.
    1. Alexander 3
      Alexander 3 8 May 2021 16: 36
      +2
      It’s good, let them rust along with the aircraft carrier at the dock. So that all their ingenious vessels rusted at the dock. They will shit less.
  • Old26
    Old26 8 May 2021 16: 54
    +6
    Quote: dauria
    ... An incomprehensible ship devouring the budget of the Navy.


    Just new. The destiny is to be a platform for testing new solutions. This is usually the case. If you want a workhorse, do not shrink, do it the old fashioned way. If you want to step forward - be ready to spit and swear "What a ram I am! I didn't realize right away." They will lick out in the end. The idea with the case is quite excellent.

    Maybe in 15-20 years we will learn that similar work was carried out in Russia. At least the testing of ship models in the basin of the Krylov Center with such a hull took place somewhere in the 90-2000s. But "don't go." Why? HZ. Maybe they were too "new" and it was impossible to guarantee good luck, or maybe something else.
    But I completely agree with you. If you want a "workhorse" - do it without frills, if you want "novye" - rskuy, without a 100% guarantee of good luck. Therefore, "New Projects" try to do so that the level of novelty does not go off scale ...
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 8 May 2021 17: 08
    +1
    "that Zumwalt-class destroyers will receive C-HGB (Common Hypersonic Glide Body) hypersonic missile systems." ///
    ----
    This is a tactical weapon.
    The planning warhead is located on an intermediate-range ballistic missile,
    and not on ICBMs like the Russian Vanguard.
    Such gliders on the MRBM have already been made by the Chinese. The Americans were a little late.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 8 May 2021 17: 33
    +1
    I suspect these weapons would be more useful than semi-mythical rockets.
    1. Rusticolus
      Rusticolus 8 May 2021 17: 48
      +2
      It depends on what is considered useful. If the use of combat, then not quite. Previously, the Zamvolts at least lost to Aurora, but now they will lose to my inflatable rubber boat. But if you look at the drank dough, then the tools have already been sawed, you need to saw something new.
  • Anachoret
    Anachoret 8 May 2021 17: 38
    +5
    more zumwalts, white, beautiful and expensive)))
    ... and upgrade them more often, do not skimp on budgets, the main thing))
    1. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 04: 58
      0
      Quote: Anchorite
      more zumwalts, white, beautiful and expensive)))
      ... and upgrade them more often, do not skimp on budgets, the main thing))

      Don't worry about budgets ... Ours will catch up too ... at the "Palaces and Brushes" ... Zumvolts will seem like a trifle ...
  • Machete
    Machete 8 May 2021 17: 56
    +1
    And without some kind of global processing of the hull, can you remove the turret and gash a missile silo there? Or will it again come out of the ship to polar?
    1. Avior
      Avior 8 May 2021 20: 20
      +2
      it is likely that without too much trouble
      there is a gun cellar and an automatic loader under the tower, so there is a place
  • Fan-fan
    Fan-fan 8 May 2021 17: 59
    +3
    The most bitter thing for us is that they have enough money for everything, even for such experiments, so we can only joke.
  • Aleksandr97
    Aleksandr97 8 May 2021 20: 00
    +2
    Big iron Big rocket !!! smile To help the ship for $ 3 lard, SM-3 missiles at $ 12-24 million per unit will do. Unlike the cost of a shot 1 - 155 $. The question is what should be the goal ??? Well, of course, apart from cutting the budget ...
  • Gato
    Gato 8 May 2021 20: 41
    0
    There is no need to rush. Better to wait for the anti-material blasters to appear. fellow
  • mark2
    mark2 8 May 2021 20: 56
    0
    They are funny, Americans.
    They come up with something, and then think about how to use it. I once wrote for a long time about the difference in the design of military equipment in the Russian Federation and the United States.
    In Russia, a technical task is set, which the customer wants to see in the final result. And for this TK technologies, design solutions and materials are being developed.
    And in the USA it is the other way round. First they come up with something, and then they think what and how to integrate into the technique.
    So it is with Zumwalt.
    But something else amuses:
    At first, they even talked about the railgun
    Failure. And I read a fantastic book, where Zumwalts with working rails were smashed against the enemies. And it turns out they are not.
    then about laser combat weapons
    Bummer.
    Lasers depend on weather conditions and air quality. those. there is no guarantee of its effectiveness. And the lasers themselves are so-so in terms of penetration
    As a result, they delivered 155-mm guns. Well super! It turned out to be a kind of classic destroyer. But the engines are 80 MW.
    And now to hypersound ... Something tells me that everything will stop at 155-mm guns.
    A lot of money is good, but if it doesn’t help to solve the design problem, then it’s good for it.
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 9 May 2021 04: 32
      0
      Something with the fleet, your vision somehow does not fit at all. Here everything is quite the opposite. The American Navy is reasonable to the point of offense. The shipbuilding policy is straightforward as rails. It's already enviable. And here we have .... You there the case in your fabrications did not confuse the country?
    2. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 05: 05
      0
      Quote: mark2
      Bummer.
      Lasers depend on weather conditions and air quality. those. there is no guarantee of its effectiveness. And the lasers themselves are so-so in terms of penetration
      As a result, they delivered 155-mm guns. Well super! It turned out to be a kind of classic destroyer. But the engines are 80 MW.
      And now to hypersound ... Something tells me that everything will stop at 155-mm guns.
      A lot of money is good, but if it doesn’t help to solve the design problem, then it’s good for it.

      Do not rush .... Lasers and railguns have not yet arrived ... Technologies turned out to be more complicated than they thought .... But, they will do .... Don't hesitate ... This will be the next step. And the fact that Zumvolt is expensive means that the new technology is not cheap, even for Russia. The Su-57, as far as I know, is almost commensurate with the cost of the F-35. And the case with Armata "stalled" because of its high cost ... We switched to cheaper tanks ...
  • sevryuk
    sevryuk 8 May 2021 22: 09
    -3
    Quote: Bradley
    And although a Mercedes is expensive, a neighbor can afford to keep it.

    Is he a Mercedes? Some kind of incomprehensible animal ...
  • Cheerock
    Cheerock 8 May 2021 22: 35
    -2
    Quote: voyaka uh
    I would like to remind you that all maneuvers with a controlled thrust vector
    produced at speeds no higher than 0.5-0.6 MAX. At these speeds
    The Su-35 is more maneuverable than the F-35. But air battles take place on transonic
    speeds - 0.8-0.95 MAX. It is for these speeds that the F-35 is optimized.
    Reducing the speed to 0.5 MAX is very dangerous - the plane can be attacked
    to his spectacular super-maneuver.
    For this reason, the Americans at one time canceled the introduction of nozzles with a controlled
    thrust vector developed for the F-16 and other aircraft (only
    on the F-22 in the vertical plane).
    So the outcome of close combat between the F-35 and the Su-35 is very ambiguous.
    Here intercept Su-35 F-35 will not be able to due to lack of speed.
    The F-35 is not an interceptor at all.

    In 2019, I was at MAKS. Then many participants "because of" the river did not come and the organizers brought several pairs of "dryers" of naval aviation in order to fill out the flight program. They showed senior pilots and KBP elements. And several pairs showed the same thing: a pair of "dryers" was flying, suddenly - an attack from the rear hemisphere. Further - an instant turn, disruption of the attack, gaining speed, approaching on a collision course and transferring the battle to close, super-maneuverable, at low speeds and radii. And all this painfully resembled something very similar to a battle with an unobtrusive, but not very fast and maneuverable enemy.
    1. onstar9
      onstar9 9 May 2021 05: 11
      -1
      Quote: CheeRock
      And all this painfully resembled something very similar to a battle with an unobtrusive, but not very fast and maneuverable enemy.

      Don’t hope the Americans are not going to "catch up" to close combat ... The F-35 was not created for that. Therefore, such a fight can happen in some kind of emergency. Russian planes can train as much as they want for close combat, but the Americans will not participate in it. You, like a drunk, pull up "to a fist fight" all the time. And they don't want that ...
      1. Cheerock
        Cheerock 9 May 2021 15: 17
        0
        Quote: onstar9
        Quote: CheeRock
        And all this painfully resembled something very similar to a battle with an unobtrusive, but not very fast and maneuverable enemy.

        Don’t hope the Americans are not going to "catch up" to close combat ... The F-35 was not created for that. Therefore, such a fight can happen in some kind of emergency. Russian planes can train as much as they want for close combat, but the Americans will not participate in it. You, like a drunk, pull up "to a fist fight" all the time. And they don't want that ...

        Yes Yes. In the case of a real batch, the Awaks will be allowed to fly and aim at targets with impunity.
  • faterdom
    faterdom 8 May 2021 22: 40
    +1
    Are railgun mounts suitable for hypersonic missiles?
    Isn't it a collective farm? And then our traffic cops are strict, they will not forgive.
  • Dmitry Izmalkov
    Dmitry Izmalkov 9 May 2021 00: 40
    +1
    The only thing left to do is to develop, test and produce
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 9 May 2021 03: 12
    -1
    At the same time, it is noted that these systems will be installed on ships after the effectiveness of hypersonic weapons is confirmed. The estimated date is 2025.
    At least we have more than 5 years' time! This is very good for us, of course. Perhaps we will do something else.
  • Artemion3
    Artemion3 9 May 2021 19: 40
    +1
    That's why in the 21st century these cannon-beaters at all