Military Review

Air-to-air anti-missile missiles

105
Air-to-air anti-missile missiles

When it comes to the conduct of hostilities in the air, then most often they talk about the range - the range of detection of the enemy by reconnaissance means, radar and optical location stations (radar and OLS), the firing range of air-to-air (V-V) or air-to-ground missiles ( B-C). It would seem that everything is logical? I spotted the enemy at maximum range before he spotted you, launched V-V or V-Z missiles earlier, first hit an enemy fighter or anti-aircraft missile system (SAM). Meanwhile, in the foreseeable future, the format of the war in the air may undergo radical changes.


Imagine that a stealth fighter was the first to spot an enemy combat aircraft, possibly with the help of external target designation, and was the first to launch B-B missiles. To increase the probability of hitting a target, two V-V missiles were fired. Judging by the effective dispersion surface (EPR), the enemy aircraft belongs to the fourth generation machines. Potentially, he can "twist" one V-V missile, but he has no chance of evading two. It would seem that victory is inevitable?

Suddenly, the marks of the B-B missiles disappeared, while the enemy plane continues to fly as if nothing had happened, without even changing its course and speed. The stealthy fighter fires two more V-B missiles - the pilot gets nervous, only two V-B missiles remain in the weapons bay. However, the missile marks disappear, like the previous ones, and the enemy aircraft continues its flight calmly.


The ammunition load of modern stealth aircraft is extremely limited.

Having fired the last two V-V missiles and no longer counting on victory, the pilot of the stealth fighter turns the car and tries to break away from the enemy aircraft at maximum speed. The last thing the pilot hears before ejection is the warning system signal about the approach of enemy air-to-air missiles.

How can the above scenario come true? The answer is active defense systems of promising combat aircraft, one of the key elements of which will be promising small-sized anti-missiles В-В, ensuring the destruction of В-В missiles of the enemy with a direct hit (hit-to-kill).

Hit-to-kill


It is very difficult to hit a rocket with a rocket, in fact, "bullet to bullet". In the early stages of the development of air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles, this was almost impossible to implement, therefore, high-explosive fragmentation and rod warheads (warheads) were used to defeat targets, and are still mostly used today. Their destructive abilities are based on the detonation of warheads and the formation of a field of fragments or ready-made destructive elements (GGE), providing direct target destruction at some distance from the point of initiation with varying probability. The calculation of the optimal detonation time is carried out by special remote fuses.


The principle of operation of the core warhead

At the same time, there are a number of targets, the defeat of which by fragments can be difficult because of their significant size, mass, speed and strength of the shell. This primarily applies to the warheads of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which can be guaranteed to be destroyed only with a direct hit or with the help of a nuclear warhead (nuclear warhead).


A transatmospheric kinetic interceptor must engage ICBM warheads using a direct hit method.

Supersonic anti-ship missiles, which, due to their size and mass, can reach the attacked ship by inertia, are also a difficult target for the destruction of fragmentation warheads - the fragments may not cause detonation of the warhead.

On the other hand, there are small, high-speed targets, such as air-to-air missiles, which are just as difficult to shoot down with a fragmentation or rod warhead.

In the late XX - early XXI century, homing heads (GOS) appeared, allowing to ensure a direct hit of a missile on a target - another missile or warhead. This method of defeat has several advantages. Firstly, the mass of the warhead can be reduced, since it does not need to form a field of fragments. Secondly, the likelihood of hitting the target increases, since a missile hit will inflict much more damage on it than one or more fragments hit. Thirdly, if, when a missile hits a target from a fragmentation warhead, a cloud of debris visible on the radar appears, then it is not always clear whether they are debris of the missile and the target or only the missile itself, while in the case of hit-to-kill the appearance of a field of debris with a high probability indicates that the target has been hit.

An important element that ensures the possibility of a direct hit is the presence of a gas-dynamic control belt, which provides a V-V missile, anti-aircraft guided missile (SAM) or an anti-missile with the possibility of intensive maneuvering when approaching a target.


Gas-dynamic control belt

V-V missiles against V-V missiles


Can existing air-to-air missiles be used to intercept air-to-air missiles or missiles? Perhaps, but the effectiveness of such a solution will be very low. First of all, without serious revision, the probability of interception will be low. An exception can be considered the Israeli air-to-air missile Stunner, made on the basis of the eponymous anti-missile system of the land-based system "David's Sling", which provides hit-to-kill target destruction.


Modern V-V missiles can potentially intercept enemy V-V and SAM missiles, but the effectiveness of such a solution will be low


The Israeli air-to-air missile Stunner was tested from the F-16 fighter and is apparently the most effective air-to-air missile in existence, capable of striking enemy air-to-air missiles and missiles

Secondly, air-to-air missiles are mostly designed to intercept enemy aircraft at long ranges - tens and hundreds of kilometers. They will not be able to intercept a V-V missile or an air defense missile at such a range - its dimensions are too small, it is far from the fact that the carrier's radar will be able to detect them at such a distance. At the same time, to ensure a long flight range, a lot of fuel is required, which leads to an increase in the size of the rocket.

Thus, when using V-V missiles to intercept enemy V-V missiles, a situation may arise when, with comparable ammunition, the consumption of V-V missiles of a defending fighter will be higher, since several V-V missiles may need to be launched on one enemy V-V missile. used as an anti-missile. As a result, the defending aircraft will remain unarmed earlier than the attacking one, and will be destroyed despite the missiles it has shot down.

The way out of this situation is the development of specialized air-to-air interceptors, and such work is being actively carried out by our probable enemy.

CUDA / SACM


On the basis of the AIM-120 air-to-air missile in the United States, Lockheed Martin is developing a promising small-sized guided missile CUDA capable of striking both aircraft and air-to-air / surface-to-air missiles of the enemy. Its distinctive feature is the dimensions and the presence of a gas-dynamic control belt that are halved compared to the AIM-120 missile.

The CUDA missile must hit targets with a direct hit-to-kill. In addition to the radar homing head, like the AIM-120 missile, it should be able to correct radio signals from the carrier's aircraft. This is extremely important when repelling group launches of V-V missiles and enemy air defense missile systems: in order to prevent all interceptor missiles from reaching the same target, as well as to quickly re-target anti-missiles from already destroyed targets to new ones.


Rocket CUDA

The data on the firing range of CUDA missiles differ: according to some data, the maximum range will be about 25 kilometers, according to others - 60 kilometers or more. It can be assumed that the second figure is closer to reality, since the range of the original AIM-120 missile in the AIM-120C-7 version is 120 kilometers, and in the AIM-120D version - 180 kilometers. Part of the volume of the CUDA rocket will go to accommodate a gas-dynamic engine, but, on the other hand, it must be borne in mind that the implementation of hit-to-kill targets can significantly reduce the size and weight of the warhead.

The dimensions of the CUDA missile will significantly increase the ammunition load of both fifth-generation stealth fighters (for which this is especially important) and fourth-generation aircraft. So, the ammunition load of the F-22 fighter can be 12 CUDA missiles + 2 short-range AIM-9X missiles, or 4 CUDA missiles + 4 AIM-120D missiles + 2 AIM-9X missiles.

For fighters of the F-35 family, the ammunition load can be 8 CUDA missiles or 4 CUDA missiles + 4 AIM-120D missiles (for the F-35A, the placement of 6 AIM-120D missiles in the internal compartment is considered, in this case its ammunition load will be comparable to the F-22 ammunition load) , except for short-range missiles AIM-9X).


Models of CUDA missiles in the weapons bay of the F-35 stealth fighter

There is nothing to say about the ammunition load of the fourth generation fighters, placed on the external sling. The newest F-15EX fighter can carry up to 22 AIM-120 missiles, or, respectively, up to 44 CUDA missiles.

A similar missile CUDA - a small missile with improved capabilities (Small Advanced Capability Missile - SACM) is being developed by Raytheon, which is logical, given that it is she who produces the AIM-120 missile. In general, the relationship between US defense contractors has a stable state of love-hate - huge concerns either cooperate with each other or compete fiercely for military orders. Given the secrecy of the CUDA / SACM program, it is unclear if SACM Raytheon is an extension of Lockheed Martin's CUDA or if they are different projects. It seems like Raytheon won the tender, but whether it used the developments of Lockheed Martin is unclear.


SACM Tasks

It can be assumed that the CUDA / SACM program has a high priority in the US Air Force (Air Force), since the result obtained will allow not only to actually double the ammunition of combat aircraft, but also to ensure an increased probability of hitting enemy aircraft due to a direct hit-to-kill hit , as well as provide combat aircraft with the possibility of self-defense by effectively intercepting enemy V-V missiles and missiles.

If the CUDA / SACM missiles are more correctly called air-to-air missiles with advanced anti-missile capabilities, then the MSDM missile must be classified precisely as a short-range air-to-air missile.

MSDM / MHTK / HKAMS


The program for the development of a small-sized MSDM (Miniature Self-Defense Munition) anti-missile missile with a length of about one meter and a mass of about 10-30 kilograms of Raytheon aims to provide combat aircraft with means of short-range self-defense. The small size and weight of MSDM interceptors will allow them to be deployed in large numbers in weapons bays with minimal damage to the main armament. A key requirement for the project is also to minimize the cost of a single item and their production in large series so that these ammunition can be spent in large quantities.

The primary target designation for MSDM-type interceptors should be issued by the radar and OLS of the carrier aircraft, as well as by the missile attack warning system.


Dimensions of the MSDM anti-missile in comparison with the AIM-9X and AIM-120 missiles

Presumably, Raytheon MSDM missiles will only have passive guidance to thermal radiation using an infrared homing head (IR seeker), supplemented by the ability to target a radar radiation source - for better interception of enemy V-B missiles with an active radar homing head (ARLGSN), and According to one of the company's patents, the elements of guidance for radar radiation are located not in the head part, but in the steering surfaces. Raytheon's MSDM missile defense is expected to be completed by the end of 2023.


Image from the Raytheon patent for the placement of radar sensors in steering surfaces

Lockheed Martin is also working in this direction. About her aviation There is very little information on the anti-missile, but there is information about the testing of an MHTK (Miniature Hit-to-Kill) missile of the surface-to-air (Z-V) class, designed to intercept artillery mines, shells and unguided rockets. Most likely, the Lockheed Martin anti-aircraft missile is structurally similar to the MHTK anti-missile.

The length of the MNTK anti-missile is 72 centimeters and weighs 2,2 kilograms. It is equipped with an ARLGSN - such a solution is more expensive than that of Raytheon, but it may become more effective when working on air-to-air missiles and missiles (for intercepting artillery mines, shells and unguided missiles, ARLGSN is an inevitable necessity). The range of the MNTK anti-missile is 3 kilometers, respectively, the aviation version can have a comparable or slightly longer range.


Tests of the MNTK anti-missile and the dimensions of the MNTK anti-missile model relative to the size of a five-dollar banknote

The European company MBDA is developing an HKAMS antimissile with a mass of about 10 kilograms and a length of about 1 meter. The specialists of the MBDA company believe that the improvement of the seeker of promising V-V missiles will make the traditional traps and decoys used by combat aircraft ineffective, and only V-V anti-missiles will be able to resist the enemy's V-V missiles.


HKAMS rocket model

It is characteristic that in all photos and images of MSDM / MHTK / HKAMS interceptors there is no visible gas-dynamic control belt, it is possible that super-maneuverability is realized by the deviation of the thrust vector.

The small dimensions of the MSDM / MHTK / HKAMS interceptor missiles will allow them to be deployed in three instead of one AIM-9X melee V-V missile, or, presumably, six MSDM missiles instead of one AIM-120 family missile.

Thus, the F-22 fighter will be able to carry 12 CUDA missiles + 6 MSDM missiles, or 4 CUDA missiles + 4 AIM-120D missiles + 6 MSDM missiles.

The ammunition load of the F-15EX fighter can be, for example, 8 AIM-120D missiles + 16 CUDA missiles + 36 MSDM interceptors. And when solving a problem, for example, covering a long-range radar detection aircraft (AWACS), the ammunition load can include 132 MSDM anti-missiles or 22 CUDA missiles + 64 MSDM anti-missiles.

Northrop Grumman also patented a kinetic anti-missile defense system for stealth aircraft, which can be compared to something like an active defense complex (KAZ) for tanks... The proposed missile defense complex should include retractable launchers with small-sized anti-missiles oriented in different directions to provide all-round defense of the aircraft. In the retracted position, the launchers do not increase the visibility of the wearer. It is quite possible that this solution will be implemented on promising bomber B-21 and on a promising sixth generation fighter, and MSDM or MHTK anti-missiles (in the aviation version) will act as destructive ammunition.


Image from Northrop Grumman's patent for a kinetic anti-missile defense system for stealth aircraft - launchers should house small anti-missiles and maneuvering decoys with electronic warfare (EW)

Based on the foregoing, it can be concluded that air-to-air anti-missile missiles will become one of the main elements of gaining air supremacy in the XNUMXst century, at least in its first half, and their development should become one of the main priorities of the Russian Air Force.
Author:
105 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Marachuh
    Marachuh 31 May 2021 18: 13
    +3
    Another option for placing a laser to destroy / blind enemy missiles and aircraft in the near zone. I wonder how effective a long-range missile with an electromagnetic charge can be.
    1. Victor Tsenin
      Victor Tsenin 31 May 2021 18: 22
      +1
      The laser is still much more versatile and promising, so it is wiser to develop reliable and inexpensive supercapacitors for a laser defense system.
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 31 May 2021 19: 57
        +2
        Here the laser is still much more versatile and promising.
        and more expensive, which the most advanced fiber system costs ... plus an additional target load, beam control and its power supply, even on a transport Boeing they carried it back in the late XNUMXs, a cryogenic cooling system for a pulsed carbon dioxide laser
        , and rather into the geometry of the information security, it cannot be shoved, plus the aerodynamics of the glider does not sleep, shove optics capable of distributing a beam even in 0,1 MW pulse in three-dimensional space into its cockpit, so-so idea for brainstorming ...
        1. Marachuh
          Marachuh 31 May 2021 21: 02
          +4
          The first computer occupied an entire room. And Beale himself did not believe in the future of home computers. And now my smartphone has 1000 times more powerful processor. The future does not stand still. And compact lasers ahead
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 31 May 2021 22: 15
            +2
            And Beale himself did not believe in the future of home computers.
            640 kb - enough for everyone !? good , I still remember ... heyday - 5,25 floppy disks ... yes
            And compact lasers ahead
            In the Chaos Universe !? and Filth ... good Even, they used kinetic ammunition and melee weapons (chain swords, all sorts ...), despite the roar of the Titans and the magic of the Eldar ... what
            1. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 00: 16
              0
              Quote: Intruder
              I still remember ... heyday - 5,25 floppy disks ...

              Are you familiar with 8 "floppy disks?
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 1 June 2021 10: 04
                +1
                Are you familiar with 8 "floppy disks?
                At work in the past, I came across an old HP desktop, where there were two such drives ... laughing, it stored any meteorological information .., really an iron box of the system unit, with a wall thickness of 3,4 mm. became ... where he came from and how the staff working at that time did not know anymore .. when he was written off in 2005, tears stood in my eyes, really !!!
                And 8-inch floppy disks were released in 1967. They appeared on the public sale in 1971. At first, their capacity was 81,6 kilobytes. The floppy disk held the same amount of data as 1000 punched cards. When new 8-inch floppy disks with a capacity of 240 kilobytes appeared, it seemed that this was the limit of perfection. No joke, there was as much data on a floppy disk as on 3000 punched cards! yes Recent modifications of 8-inch floppy disks already contained 1,2 megabytes. Such a colossal amount of data, which more than satisfied the needs of the absolute majority of "computer" users, was equivalent to 15000 punched cards! By the way, in the early 70s, the capacity of all storage media was measured by the number of punched cards that would be required to store an equivalent amount of data. Because everyone was familiar with punched cards, but only a few with high-tech magnetic data carriers. good
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 11: 39
                  +1
                  Yeah ... there were once "romantic times"! 8-inch floppy disks, "tape" compact cassettes in memory ... "huge" removable magnetic hard disks (I don't remember how many inches already ...), the information was output to punched tape ... then it was printed on paper in the "terminal" form on special "printers" ... a computer processor on two dozen boards .... terminals in the offices, connected to the "main machine" ... Unhappy youth! They can no longer understand the happiness of knowledge that we once experienced! request
                  1. Intruder
                    Intruder 1 June 2021 14: 48
                    +3
                    They can no longer understand the happiness of knowledge that we once experienced!
                    Just like us - Them !? wink They now have: technical processes and heat packs, the thickness and weight of the case, autonomy and mobility - such an era ..., plus all sorts of microwave channels are already in your pocket (hello - IMT-2020 modems, the size of a cent coin ...), we I never even dreamed of this ... video in 8k and communication via satellites .., broadcasts of the surface of Mars in the public domain and mapping of the Moon and Mars !!! good
          2. Intruder
            Intruder 31 May 2021 22: 23
            +3
            The first computer occupied an entire room.
            Floor, and an additional room for backup power supply with an ABP shield (a), and what punch cards were ... and then tapes and a streamer ... feast for the eyes ... just a technical genius !!!
            And now my smartphone has 1000 times more powerful processor
            Only it is controlled, not by your brain and finger, but by the manufacturer's firmware closed on all sides, but by the user of your processor in +100500 productive I didn’t think to hook it, you’re not selling another smart device to me in the trading floor !?) It just consumes digital content made by others .. Is that so !? And he clearly does not consider external ballistics or aspects of molecular transformations of aromatic hydrocarbons, right in the park by the pond! ??? drinks
        2. Shurik70
          Shurik70 31 May 2021 21: 03
          0
          The laser can be easily protected with a reflective surface. The Turkish laser could not shoot down the drones covered with aluminum foil. At the expense of "Peresvet" they are silent about it, but if such tests were carried out and were successfully shot down, they would probably boast of it. But they are silent. At the same time, the combat laser installation is quite large-sized, where then to put bombs on the plane if the laser takes up everything.
          And the anti-missile is compact.
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 1 June 2021 10: 10
            -1
            The laser can be easily protected with a reflective surface
            IR is the laser range and you will have to constantly polish the surface of such mirror protection and clean it from microparticles, which is impossible to do in flight ... negative It does not roll ... only in laboratory "greenhouse" conditions and will work effectively ... Few people have seen the lower cloud layer above the cities, gray with dust when the weather is warm with a high air temperature in the surface layer, or when the forest is on fire. ..the spectacle, as if cement was poured into a cloud yes !!!
            1. Shurik70
              Shurik70 1 June 2021 11: 16
              -1
              Quote: Intruder
              R is the range of the laser and you will have to constantly polish the surface of such mirror protection and clean it from microparticles, which is impossible to do in flight

              In flight, everything is effectively blown by the wind. There is both cooling and cleaning.
              It is no coincidence that the Turks set the target's speed limit "no more than 150 km / h". The reason can only be the cooling of the target by the air flow.
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 1 June 2021 11: 21
                -2
                There is both cooling and cleaning.
                It is no coincidence that the Turks set the target's speed limit "no more than 150 km / h". The reason can only be the cooling of the target by the air flow.
                Heat transfer does not always depend on the gas flow rate, there are several more parameters to be taken into account, the most primitive ones:
                - surface area;
                - thermal conductivity;
                - temperature difference;
                - specific thermal capacity;
                - and heat flows ... they are different so and so, especially in pulsed electronics or photonics !?
                well it is, so on the fingers! wink
                and cleaning.

                On complex aerodynamic surfaces, not everything is effectively blown by the oncoming air flow, a few microns of dust and dirt and for the IR range is no longer a mirror already ... and then, it is easier to install a corner reflector, form from an external structure, but forgiving aerodynamics ... everything is lost!
                1. Shurik70
                  Shurik70 1 June 2021 11: 35
                  +1
                  Quote: Intruder
                  Heat transfer does not always depend on the gas flow rate

                  So nobody argues with this.
                  But anyway, a mirror surface reflects more than a non-mirror surface.
                  And of course, if you hit with a gigawatt, no protection will save you. But now the power of Turkey's combat laser is only 2,5 kW, and the foil will be effective here.
                  1. Intruder
                    Intruder 1 June 2021 14: 33
                    -1
                    And of course, if you blow a gigawatt,
                    Only on the ground .., in the area of ​​the hydroelectric power station, there is power and cooling from the idle water discharge unit !? If you need a gigawatt laser ...
                    in 2009 Boeing - up to 100 kW. in impulse I already had and quite successfully put my own cryogenic cooling system into the transport ship, though not a very small design ... yes
                  2. Intruder
                    Intruder 1 June 2021 14: 34
                    -1
                    But now the power of Turkey's combat laser is only 2,5 kW, and the foil will be effective here.
                    Well, I don't know ... at what distance ... and what kind of foil with its thickness and weight !? laughing
            2. NIKN
              NIKN 1 June 2021 11: 26
              0
              The laser is not a panacea, it is. Conditions are required for its application. Our planes are all-weather, fly and use weapons in any visibility conditions. A breakthrough will come with advances in the field of high-energy weapons (electromagnetic and what else they will come up with). Today, I see the KAZ-type protection systems as promising, only with a range of application there is some question, the minimum should work at least 100-150 meters, and more differently, the fragments will hit the target with very high probability. Antimissiles have their own niche, although expensive, but not more expensive than the aircraft itself.
              With such a development of means of protection, in order to destroy the target, the need again arises for the rapprochement and conduct of the BMVB. Here not long ago they asked, will there be BMW fights in the future? Here is the answer.
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 1 June 2021 14: 42
                +1
                type KAZ, only with a range of use is a question, the minimum should work at least 100-150 meters, and more differently will hit the target with fragments with a very high probability.
                I agree, only better - up to 250 m!? And so that with a guarantee and counter-ammunition, with its trajectory correction and programmed detonation, ideally, of course ... wink Then there will be a sense, but again, how is it all, just such a KAZ, to fit into the geometry of an IS glider or even a strategist? An interesting task for the layout of the air carrier !?
                1. NIKN
                  NIKN 1 June 2021 15: 13
                  0
                  Quote: Intruder
                  fit into the geometry of an IS glider or even a strategist? An interesting task for the layout of the air carrier !?

                  It is easier with strategists (subsonic, more difficult on supersonic) like retractable turrets when there is a threat of attack. In IS and supersonic, yes, the task is more complicated, but I think with sufficient effectiveness of such protection, there will be a way to put together a combat unit and the implementation of BZ at stake, for which, in general, all the fuss ..
        3. Lighten
          Lighten 9 June 2021 08: 39
          0
          Laser technology has changed a lot even in the last 5 years.
    2. Shopping Mall
      31 May 2021 19: 02
      +6
      Quote: Marachuh
      Another option for placing a laser to destroy / blind enemy missiles and aircraft in the near zone.


      Lasers will work in combination with anti-missiles - they complement each other.

      There was a series of articles about lasers, in particular about lasers in the Air Force:
      Laser weapons: prospects in the air force. Part of 2
      https://topwar.ru/155386-lazernoe-oruzhie-perspektivy-v-voenno-vozdushnyh-silah-chast-2.html

      Laser weapons on combat aircraft. Is it possible to resist it?
      https://topwar.ru/161262-lazernoe-oruzhie-na-boevyh-samoletah-mozhno-li-emu-protivostojat.html

      As a consequence, the change in tactics:
      Where will military aviation go: will it cling to the ground or gain altitude?
      https://topwar.ru/162562-kuda-ujdet-boevaja-aviacija-prizhmetsja-k-zemle-ili-naberet-vysotu.html

      Quote: Marachuh
      I wonder how effective a long-range missile with an electromagnetic charge can be.


      Difficult question. You can protect yourself from EMP ammunition (from one of my articles):

      The disadvantages of EMP ammunition include the fact that there are effective ways to protect against this type of impact. For example, the means of opening circuits in the event of strong induction currents are zener diodes and varistors. Also, RLGSN can be made on the basis of EMP-resistant low-temperature co-fired ceramics (Low Temperature Co-Fired Ceramic - LTCC).
    3. Intruder
      Intruder 31 May 2021 19: 44
      -2
      I wonder how effective a long-range missile with an electromagnetic charge can be.
      with explosive magnetic generator RFEMI, more precisely wink ... and so, there is an interesting book on this topic: A.B. Prishchepenko 2008 "Explosions and waves Explosive sources of electromagnetic radiation in the radio frequency range" textbook, besides ... good
    4. Trapp1st
      Trapp1st 1 June 2021 10: 48
      0
      Another option to place a laser to destroy / blind missiles
      A combined option is desirable, since propagating in the medium, the light is absorbed and scattered by the substance, at the interface between the media it undergoes refraction and / or reflection, which can make it ineffective in poor weather conditions and / or cloudiness ...
  2. KCA
    KCA 31 May 2021 18: 17
    0
    The seeker of the V-V rocket is not covered by any armor cap, and hitting it with the smallest splinter, not to mention prepared rods or other striking elements, will disable the rocket, why should we block hit2kill?
    1. Shopping Mall
      31 May 2021 19: 04
      +5
      Quote: KCA
      The seeker of the V-V rocket is not covered by any armor cap, and hitting it with the smallest splinter, not to mention prepared rods or other striking elements, will disable the rocket, why should we block hit2kill?


      The probability of a fragment or a rod hitting a sufficiently small and high-speed target is small. The warhead is reduced, its place is taken by a gas-dynamic control belt, which provides a direct hit.
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 31 May 2021 19: 48
        -2
        The warhead is reduced, its place is taken by a gas-dynamic control belt, which provides a direct hit.
        The pure "HtK" method is generally in the field of "evil kinetics" of physical damage by elements of the anti-missile structure itself, there is no warhead as such .., and it makes sense to fence in a garden, if the very idea of ​​high-altitude maneuvering, with the help of gas-dynamic control from a belt of impulse taxiways, at any height of the atmosphere, up to vacuum ...!?
      2. KCA
        KCA 31 May 2021 23: 02
        0
        This is a question of the distance from the detonation site to the target, if instead of h2k the HE of the anti-missile warhead is detonated at a distance of a meter from the missile, the chance of defeat will be almost 100%, and the blast wave will most likely deflect the missile off course so that no main control surfaces can return to attack trajectory
        1. Shopping Mall
          1 June 2021 08: 13
          +2
          Quote: KCA
          This is a question of the distance from the detonation site to the target, if instead of h2k the HE of the anti-missile warhead is detonated at a distance of a meter from the missile, the chance of defeat will be almost 100%, and the blast wave will most likely deflect the missile off course so that no main control surfaces can return to attack trajectory


          The question is that warheads take up a lot of space. One of the goals of the hit-to-kill implementation is the rejection of the warhead, due to which the range increases, the dimensions decrease.
          1. KCA
            KCA 1 June 2021 08: 27
            +1
            But while the implementation is lame, two SM-6s flew past the target, the time and place of launch, the trajectory was known, and the target was ballistic, not maneuvering, not the most difficult, and the V-B missile would probably be at least a fraction of a degree, but steer. changing trajectory
            1. Shopping Mall
              1 June 2021 08: 31
              +1
              Quote: KCA
              But while the implementation is lame, two SM-6s flew past the target, the time and place of launch, the trajectory was known, and the target was ballistic, not maneuvering, not the most difficult, and the V-B missile would probably be at least a fraction of a degree, but steer. changing trajectory


              The road by walking hi
        2. Intruder
          Intruder 1 June 2021 10: 14
          -1
          will be detonated at a distance of a meter from the rocket, the chance of defeat will be almost 100%, and the blast wave is likely to deflect the rocket off course like this
          The probability of rejection is always less than 0,9 - for OFBCH than for HTK method !!! And if, interception in the stratosphere, at an altitude above 25-30 km. (And in a vacuum there is none at all ... stop ), the shock wave is there ... is already minimal for that amount of high-explosive charge in the warhead, only hope for a fragmentation flow ???
          1. KCA
            KCA 1 June 2021 11: 41
            +1
            An article about anti-missiles В-В, which 30 km? Ballistic missiles have emerged already in the discussion
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 1 June 2021 14: 53
              0
              An article about anti-missiles В-В, which 30 km?
              And the groundwork for the future, and if the carrier goes to the ceiling, the 5th generation had something, or not recourse ... and from there it will launch !?
      3. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 1 June 2021 08: 47
        +2
        Quote: AVM
        The probability of a fragment or a rod hitting a sufficiently small and high-speed target is small.
        Honestly, I don't quite understand, is it more likely to be hit by a single object than by many small ones? Well, let there be a 1-2 meter miss, in the case of the HTK this is all, a miss, in the case of the PF-battles, even a low-power part is a defeat of the target. Maybe all the same it is worth combining the principles of defeat, don't you think? Well, the method of breaking through such a defense suggests itself: a normal missile with several mini-missiles as a warhead.
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 1 June 2021 15: 00
          0
          in the case of the HTK, this is all, a blunder; in the case of the OF-battles, even a low-power unit is the defeat of the target.
          Well, there is, and this ... then, as in the good old days, we throw a couple of CUDA at once, and at the OFBCH, the trajectory vectors have changed for the duration of the convergence with the target and the fragmentation stream after the detonation "left", well, several GP-elements got in, the skin was cut in different places, without touching anything critical !?
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 1 June 2021 15: 15
            +1
            Quote: Intruder
            Well, a few GP-elements were hit, the skin was cut in different places, without touching anything critical !?
            From a couple of meters, the shock wave will also help, I think an air-to-air rocket does not need much to unwind it from its own speed.
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 1 June 2021 16: 06
              0
              the shock wave will help, I think an air-to-air rocket does not need much to unwind it from its own speed.
              Eh, if only everything was so simple with shock waves at a speed higher than one Mach. Then no one would bother with all sorts of HtK and CUDA (mi) ... yes
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 1 June 2021 16: 22
                0
                Quote: Intruder
                Eh, if only it was that easy with shockwaves at speed,

                It can be difficult with waves, but with the density of the layout and the thickness of the skin and the aerodynamic instability of the damaged air-to-air missile, everything seems simple to me.
  3. Aag
    Aag 31 May 2021 18: 20
    0
    Sorry, I didn't finish the article: the question arose at the level: "... First of all, this refers to the warheads of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which can be guaranteed to be destroyed only with a direct hit or with a nuclear warhead (YABC). "
    Where does the information, conclusions, sources come from ...? And this is only about a pure ballista ... And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
    Without malice ..., - purely to replenish obsolete (maybe knowledge). hi
    1. Shopping Mall
      31 May 2021 19: 11
      +5
      Quote: AAG
      Sorry, I didn't finish the article: the question arose at the level: "... First of all, this refers to the warheads of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which can be guaranteed to be destroyed only with a direct hit or with a nuclear warhead (YABC). "
      Where does the information, conclusions, sources come from ...? And this is only about a pure ballista ... And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
      Without malice ..., - purely to replenish obsolete (maybe knowledge). hi


      Information about the need for a direct hit is in many descriptions of missile defense systems designed to intercept ballistic missiles. The fragments do not guarantee the detonation of a warhead, especially a nuclear warhead.

      Hit-to-kill is well written in the English Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-to-kill
      1. Aag
        Aag 31 May 2021 19: 35
        0
        Quote: AVM
        Quote: AAG
        Sorry, I didn't finish the article: the question arose at the level: "... First of all, this refers to the warheads of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), which can be guaranteed to be destroyed only with a direct hit or with a nuclear warhead (YABC). "
        Where does the information, conclusions, sources come from ...? And this is only about a pure ballista ... And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
        Without malice ..., - purely to replenish obsolete (maybe knowledge). hi


        Information about the need for a direct hit is in many descriptions of missile defense systems designed to intercept ballistic missiles. The fragments do not guarantee the detonation of a warhead, especially a nuclear warhead.

        Hit-to-kill is well written in the English Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit-to-kill

        Thank you for the answer, for the active dialogue with the commentators!
        But! If we are talking about ICBMs, how much will it be enough to lower the CEP (for the purposes, -SHPU (?), - PGRK (?)) ... Even without detonating the BB ... it is more difficult to get into them, however - it is easier to "confuse" them, all other things being equal, - enough less impact.
        What am I wrong about?
        1. Shopping Mall
          31 May 2021 19: 58
          +3
          Quote: AAG
          ... But! If we are talking about ICBMs, how much will it be enough to lower the CEP (for the purposes, -SHPU (?), - PGRK (?)) ... Even without detonating the BB ... it is more difficult to get into them, however - it is easier to "confuse" them, all other things being equal, - enough less impact.
          What am I wrong about?


          If the goal is silos, perhaps. But if the target is the city? How far does the BB deviate?
          1. Aag
            Aag 31 May 2021 20: 52
            +2
            In this situation, of course, I agree.
    2. Intruder
      Intruder 31 May 2021 20: 22
      -1
      And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
      for this, in another country, they came up with: S-200 Angara / Vega / Dubna (according to NATO classification - SA-5 Gammon), with a TA-18 SBCH, for hitting group targets (for example 5V28N (V-880N)) with a radiant and hot ...! wink
      And there, even before the heap, you can create an EMP as well, so that you can shove the maneuvering BB around the "brains", by the way ... good
      1. Aag
        Aag 31 May 2021 20: 55
        +1
        Quote: Intruder
        And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
        for this, in another country, they came up with: S-200 Angara / Vega / Dubna (according to NATO classification - SA-5 Gammon), with a TA-18 SBCH, for hitting group targets (for example 5V28N (V-880N)) with a radiant and hot ...! wink
        And there, even before the heap, you can create an EMP as well, so that you can shove the maneuvering BB around the "brains", by the way ... good

        So I'm talking about that, there is no need for an accurate hit, contact ...
        1. Mooh
          Mooh 31 May 2021 23: 42
          +3
          I do not differ in deep knowledge on the issue, but nevertheless I will express myself. Our former friends, and now partners, have been bothering with the topic of HtK for a very long time and very deeply. Almost all interceptor missiles are built according to this principle. I don’t know the inside story, but I think it’s not without reason. Too much funds were driven in for the disinformation campaign, so they unequivocally came to the conclusion that contact interception is more effective. Why? HZ. At first glance, they are wrong, a powerful warhead rules in terms of the likelihood of defeat, but apparently smart people made smart calculations and made conclusions that convinced less smart people to give money for this whole circus. It remains to wait 5-10 years, when the conclusions of smart people will appear in the open press and everything will become clear.
        2. Shopping Mall
          1 June 2021 08: 15
          +2
          Quote: AAG
          Quote: Intruder
          And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
          for this, in another country, they came up with: S-200 Angara / Vega / Dubna (according to NATO classification - SA-5 Gammon), with a TA-18 SBCH, for hitting group targets (for example 5V28N (V-880N)) with a radiant and hot ...! wink

          So I'm talking about that, there is no need for an accurate hit, contact ...


          The problem with special ammunition is that after the first of them is detonated, the radars will lose all other targets due to EMP.
          1. Aag
            Aag 1 June 2021 09: 46
            0
            Quote: AVM
            Quote: AAG
            Quote: Intruder
            And if a maneuvering BB (warhead)?
            for this, in another country, they came up with: S-200 Angara / Vega / Dubna (according to NATO classification - SA-5 Gammon), with a TA-18 SBCH, for hitting group targets (for example 5V28N (V-880N)) with a radiant and hot ...! wink

            So I'm talking about that, there is no need for an accurate hit, contact ...


            The problem with special ammunition is that after the first of them is detonated, the radars will lose all other targets due to EMP.

            Surely the developers of the S-200 knew about that)).
            Warheads were also high-explosive fragmentation ...
            hi
          2. Intruder
            Intruder 1 June 2021 16: 11
            0
            all other targets due to EMP.
            then, "... we are all in paradise - and let the rest suffer and die, for several months ...", so said Himself !!! Well, or so ... wink
  4. lucul
    lucul 31 May 2021 18: 45
    -6
    The answer is active defense systems of promising combat aircraft, one of the key elements of which will be promising small-sized anti-missiles В-В, ensuring the destruction of В-В missiles of the enemy with a direct hit (hit-to-kill).

    Mmmmm ..... to do this, you need the maneuverability of an anti-missile, well beyond the maneuverability of an air-to-air missile. And it will be not just expensive, but prohibitively expensive.
    1. Shopping Mall
      31 May 2021 19: 15
      +3
      Quote: lucul
      The answer is active defense systems of promising combat aircraft, one of the key elements of which will be promising small-sized anti-missiles В-В, ensuring the destruction of В-В missiles of the enemy with a direct hit (hit-to-kill).

      Mmmmm ..... to do this, you need the maneuverability of an anti-missile, well beyond the maneuverability of an air-to-air missile. And it will be not just expensive, but prohibitively expensive.


      And what are her maneuvering capabilities in the final section? Any anti-missile maneuvering of a B-B missile will lead to a sharp loss of its speed and maneuverability, which means that the target can evade it. Or it will give time for laser self-defense systems to deal with it (V-V missile).


      First of all, the target is long and medium-range B-B missiles. For them, protection against V-V anti-missiles immediately means a decrease in the actual firing range. For us, this is especially true with our huge, but low-maneuverable RVV-BD, which we love to boast about.

      missiles with ramjet engines will have better chances, but the range will still drop.
      1. lucul
        lucul 31 May 2021 19: 42
        -2
        And what are her maneuvering capabilities in the final section?

        It all depends on the launch range, if the missile has a range of 300 km, and an enemy plane was found at 100 km and launched at it, then the rocket has enough fuel to maneuver.
        Or it will give time for laser self-defense systems to deal with it (V-V missile).

        Forget about lasers, for a laser to be able to cut something, a megawatt power source is required, which is not on the plane and is not expected.
        First of all, the target is long and medium-range B-B missiles.

        Yes, I do not argue with the very idea and concept of using interceptor missiles, it is correct. It's just that modern V-V missiles have an overload capacity of 60G, and an anti-missile, to destroy such a missile, requires at least one and a half times overload advantage, and better generally, 2-3 times. And this is very expensive.
        1. Shopping Mall
          31 May 2021 20: 19
          +2
          Quote: lucul
          It all depends on the launch range, if the missile has a range of 300 km, and an enemy plane was found at 100 km and launched at it, then the rocket has enough fuel to maneuver.


          Yes, but she lost 200 km of range, which in itself is not bad. There is another question here - when an anti-ship missile system hits a ship, or an anti-ship missile system hits a ground object, they can maneuver in the final section in order to reduce the likelihood of hitting the air defense missile system. It will be even easier to destroy an anti-ship missile or anti-ship missile in the middle section of the flight, where they do not maneuver (and they will not be able to rush during the entire flight, then their range will be 50 km.

          Ballistic / quasi-ballistic missiles are even easier - gravity is on their side. And their goals are relatively sedentary. But even they maneuver only in the final section.

          With V-V missiles, everything is different. Their target is high-speed, possibly maneuverable. At what distance should the V-V missile begin to maneuver to evade the V-V anti-missile? Some CUDA will be able to work on a B-B missile already at 20 km, shorter-range anti-missiles at a distance of up to 5 km. Those. it is necessary to maneuver from 20 km, and from 20 km twice as fast.

          The overload of rockets with a gas-dynamic belt can be 60G, rather more. The MIM-109 / PATRIOT PAC-3 40 G air defense missile system, the KM-SAM 50 G air defense missile system, the A-235 Nudol 53T6M anti-missile missile have permissible longitudinal overloads 210 G, lateral 90 G.

          How long and with what overload can a V-V missile maneuver so as not to lose its purpose and energy?

          Quote: lucul
          Or it will give time for laser self-defense systems to deal with it (V-V missile).

          Forget about lasers, for a laser to be able to cut something, a megawatt power source is required, which is not on the plane and is not expected.


          The laser does not need to cut anything, it is enough to damage the seeker or the steering drive unit. During the tests, mortar mines and Grad shells were hit by 50 kW lasers, but this is the minimum, for normal operation, 150 kW are needed, and this is now being guided by.

          Quote: lucul
          First of all, the target is long and medium-range B-B missiles.
          Yes, I do not argue with the very idea and concept of using interceptor missiles, it is correct. It's just that modern V-V missiles have an overload capacity of 60G, and an anti-missile, to destroy such a missile, requires at least one and a half times overload advantage, and better generally, 2-3 times. And this is very expensive.


          Everything is true, but I strongly doubt that the B-B rocket will be able to maneuver at 60G for a long time. If the aircraft is directing the anti-missile at the optimal moment in time, then the V-B missile must understand that an anti-missile is approaching it - I doubt that its seeker will be able to see a small-sized anti-missile against the background of electronic warfare.
          1. lucul
            lucul 31 May 2021 20: 31
            -2
            shorter-range anti-missiles at a distance of up to 5 km

            This is what we need to build on - an anti-missile with an overload capacity of up to 100G, but with a flight range of no more than 5 km. A person at such a distance will not have time to react (launch) in a timely manner, but the AI ​​will not. This is what we need to build on - this is the only way to make the anti-missile system affordable.
            1. Shopping Mall
              31 May 2021 20: 34
              +4
              Quote: lucul
              shorter-range anti-missiles at a distance of up to 5 km

              This is what we need to start from - anti-cancer with an overload capacity of up to 100G, but with a range of damage of no more than 5 km. A person at such a distance will not have time to react, but the AI ​​is completely. It is from this that we need to build on - this is the only way to make an anti-missile system affordable.


              In fact, this is what they want - cheap anti-missile missiles with a range of 5 km, 3 pcs. instead of one AIM-9X. And missiles of the CUDA type will be primarily for the destruction of enemy aircraft, but with the possibility of intercepting B-B missiles.

              There is a suspicion that the F-15 EX pilot with expensive CUDA missiles, into which the enemy's B-B missiles fly, will not save money))
          2. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 01: 30
            0
            Quote: AVM
            It is necessary to understand that a V-V rocket is approaching an anti-missile - I doubt that its seeker will be able to see a small-sized anti-missile against the background of electronic warfare.

            And yet the RVV will be able to see the interceptor missile if you help it!
            MNTK is equipped with ARL.GSN ... which means that it can be detected by a radio frequency sensor (I do not think that it will have "agromous" dimensions ...), against MSDM-IR and UV detection sensors ...
            1. Shopping Mall
              1 June 2021 08: 17
              +1
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Quote: AVM
              It is necessary to understand that a V-V rocket is approaching an anti-missile - I doubt that its seeker will be able to see a small-sized anti-missile against the background of electronic warfare.

              And yet the RVV will be able to see the interceptor missile if you help it!
              MNTK is equipped with ARL.GSN ... which means that it can be detected by a radio frequency sensor (I do not think that it will have "agromous" dimensions ...), against MSDM-IR and UV detection sensors ...


              In conditions of interference, it is far from a fact. In addition, in this case, the main radar can begin to simulate the operation of the ARLGSN from 50 km and the V-B rocket will spend all the fuel evading the "virtual" anti-missile.
          3. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 01: 47
            0
            Quote: AVM
            it is necessary to maneuver from 20 km, and from 20 km twice as fast. How long and with what overload the V-V missile can maneuver so as not to lose the target

            And the fig to maneuver from 20 km, if the enemy has "5 km-e" anti-missile? Can't you finally maneuver to "maybe"? We'll have to create and develop an anti-missile detection and warning subsystem! And how is it better to do it: to place the sensors on the RVV or on a fighter with the equipment for transmitting data to the RVV - let the military technicians decide!
            By the way, how "long" ... While there is a threat from an anti-missile, but no more! No need to maneuver "all the time"!
            1. Shopping Mall
              1 June 2021 08: 29
              +1
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Quote: AVM
              it is necessary to maneuver from 20 km, and from 20 km twice as fast. How long and with what overload the V-V missile can maneuver so as not to lose the target

              And the fig to maneuver from 20 km, if the enemy has "5 km-e" anti-missile? Can't you finally maneuver to "maybe"? We'll have to create and develop an anti-missile detection and warning subsystem! And how is it better to do it: to place the sensors on the RVV or on a fighter with the equipment for transmitting data to the RVV - let the military technicians decide!
              By the way, how "long" ... While there is a threat from an anti-missile, but no more! No need to maneuver "all the time"!


              5-kilometer is MNTK. CUDA can attack at a much greater distance - probably up to 60 km or more. The maximum range will be determined by the detection range of the V-B missile of the carrier's radar. For the R-77, it will be less, and the hefty R-37 can see it for 50 km.

              On the other hand, it is much more difficult for an attacking aircraft to detect attacking interceptor missiles - they are smaller, closer to the source of interference (the defending aircraft) - three MNTKs instead of one AIM-9X - look how little they are.

              In general, interceptor missiles will not "cover" air-to-air missiles, but they will have a huge impact on long-range aerial combat. Do not forget about laser self-defense systems - many still consider them unrealistic, but PMCM their appearance is inevitable. First, against missiles with an optical seeker (5-15 kW), and then against the rest (100-150 kW). Defending missiles against LW - increased mass, loss of speed - therefore, an easier target for anti-missiles.

              In general, B-B missiles will have to undergo major changes to remain effective.
              1. Nikolaevich I
                Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 13: 38
                0
                Quote: AVM
                Do not forget about laser self-defense systems - many still consider them unrealistic, but PMCM their appearance is inevitable

                And yet ... the existing problems with LR give RVV "owners" several years of relatively quiet life! And laser weapons are not "wunderwaffle"! And why should certain protective measures significantly increase the weight of the missiles? 1. rocket body made of light and heat-resistant ceramics or carbon composites + rocket rotation around the longitudinal axis ... 2. coating the Thin-walled Carbon-Fiber Shell (TUK) with an aerosol mixture of carbon nanotubes and ceramics + rocket rotation ... 3.coating the TUK hull with a special ablative composition with hydrocarbon + rocket rotation ... such measures can only slightly increase the weight, although this is not necessary ( !) ... there may be some increase in the "thickness" of the missiles! Considering the fact that at "first" the laser "guns" will not have "terrible" power and will not be "long-playing", then this is a few more years of "head start"!
                To protect the optical seeker from laser radiation, there is a "laser shutter". developed in the SSGA ... So ... as the saying goes: "Eh, Marfusha, should we live in sorrow!?" wink
                1. Shopping Mall
                  1 June 2021 15: 11
                  0
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  Quote: AVM
                  Do not forget about laser self-defense systems - many still consider them unrealistic, but PMCM their appearance is inevitable

                  And yet ... the existing problems with LR give RVV "owners" several years of relatively quiet life! And laser weapons are not "wunderwaffle"! And why should certain protective measures significantly increase the weight of the missiles? 1. rocket body made of light and heat-resistant ceramics or carbon composites + rocket rotation around the longitudinal axis ... 2. coating the Thin-walled Carbon-Fiber Shell (TUK) with an aerosol mixture of carbon nanotubes and ceramics + rocket rotation ... 3.coating the TUK hull with a special ablative composition with hydrocarbon + rocket rotation ... such measures can only slightly increase the weight, although this is not necessary ( !) ... there may be some increase in the "thickness" of the missiles! Considering the fact that at "first" the laser "guns" will not have "terrible" power and will not be "long-playing", then this is a few more years of "head start"!


                  Perhaps, but prices will rise)

                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  To protect the optical seeker from laser radiation, there is a "laser shutter". developed in the SSGA ... So ... as the saying goes: "Eh, Marfusha, should we live in sorrow!?" wink



                  Do you mean thermo-optical shutters? I wrote about them in the article:
                  Great extinction. Why can certain types of weapons disappear?
                  https://topwar.ru/173207-velikoe-vymiranie-pochemu-mogut-ischeznut-otdelnye-tipy-vooruzhenij.html

                  It seems to me that there is a little slyness there. They speak of high withstand power density, but they do not speak of full withstand power.

                  It's like the difference between a wasp sting, an awl and a crowbar. The specific pressure of a wasp sting is an order of magnitude higher than that of an awl, and two orders of magnitude higher than that of a scrap. However, a beekeeper's suit will not protect from either an awl or a scrap.

                  So here, the thermo-optical shutter will withstand a low-power LO (even if it has a high specific power), but when using a LO with a power of 50 kW or more, which knocks down unguided mines and projectiles, it will instantly fail - it will lead the structure, it will be completely destroyed reflective module.
                  1. Nikolaevich I
                    Nikolaevich I 2 June 2021 15: 21
                    0
                    Quote: AVM
                    Do you mean thermo-optical shutters?

                    It seems that "yes" ... In the journalistic "note" there was neither a description of the action, nor a scheme ... (they say, the Ministry of Defense became interested ...). But from the "side" information, it became clear that these were thermo-optical shutters, but improved ... fellow Improved performance ... self-tightening of the "hole" ....
                    By the way, thank you for the link to the article ... I read it with interest ... hi
              2. Nikolaevich I
                Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 14: 04
                0
                Quote: AVM
                5-kilometer is MNTK. CUDA can attack at a much greater distance - probably up to 60 km or more. The maximum range will be determined by the detection range of the V-B missile of the carrier's radar. For the R-77, it will be less, and the hefty R-37 can see it for 50 km.

                And will all the anti-missile missiles of the above types be able to sharply deploy 180 degrees? and catch up with RVV? An anti-missile, at least 5 km-I, at least 20 km-I will "try" to shoot down the RVV when approaching ... or on a head-on course, or in pursuit! When approaching an interceptor missile, the RVV must maneuver ... but then what difference does it make what it will be? Or the 5 km MNTK, or the 20 km CUDA ... maneuvering will start anyway, for example, at a distance of 0,5-1 km RVV from the anti-missile! Well, an anti-missile missile will miss ... so I ask: is any of the aforementioned anti-missile missiles capable of turning around and catching up with the RVV? Considering the "nuances" of the performance characteristics of interceptor missiles ... Is it difficult for an RVV carrier fighter to detect an interceptor missile in time? Let RVB do it! For example, a "Chinese log" is equipped with an ARL.GOS with AFAR ... This GOS is capable, "thanks" to the AFAR, to track an air target, and to detect and track an anti-missile! And if more RVV will be equipped with a gas-dynamic "belt" of lateral control and, "thanks", a small-sized warhead "hit-to-kill". "lose weight", then .........
                1. Shopping Mall
                  1 June 2021 15: 17
                  0
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  Quote: AVM
                  5-kilometer is MNTK. CUDA can attack at a much greater distance - probably up to 60 km or more. The maximum range will be determined by the detection range of the V-B missile of the carrier's radar. For the R-77, it will be less, and the hefty R-37 can see it for 50 km.

                  And will all the anti-missile missiles of the above types be able to sharply deploy 180 degrees? and catch up with RVV? An anti-missile, at least 5 km-I, at least 20 km-I will "try" to shoot down the RVV when approaching ... or on a head-on course, or in pursuit!


                  I do not think that there will be a "turn and catch up", most likely only at the meeting point.

                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  It is when approaching the RVV anti-missile that it must maneuver.
                  When approaching an interceptor missile, the RVV must maneuver ... but then what difference does it make what it will be? Or the 5 km MNTK, or the 20 km CUDA ... maneuvering will start anyway, for example, at a distance of 0,5-1 km RVV from the anti-missile!


                  If the issue of detecting anti-missile missiles is resolved, then yes.

                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  Is it difficult for an RVV carrier fighter to detect an antimissile in time? Let RVB do it! For example, a "Chinese log" is equipped with an ARL.GOS with AFAR ... This GOS is capable, "thanks" to the AFAR, to track an air target, and to detect and track an anti-missile! And if more RVV will be equipped with a gas-dynamic "belt" of lateral control and, "thanks", a small-sized warhead "hit-to-kill". "lose weight", then .........


                  Depends on how wide (AFAR) it will have a viewing angle, and so, it is quite possible.
      2. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 01: 06
        0
        Quote: AVM
        And what are her maneuvering capabilities in the final section?

        What will they do! Are you implying that by the "last mile" the engine in the RVV has already "burned out" and therefore doubt its "maneuverability"? But with your doubts you are pushing the "world" military-industrial complex to the accelerated development of the "subclass" of RVV with GDPU (gas-dynamic transverse control)! In this case, RVV even with a "burnt out" engine will have good maneuverability ...
        Quote: AVM
        Any anti-missile maneuvering of a B-B missile will lead to a sharp loss of its speed and maneuverability,

        A. in the presence of a gas-dynamic belt of lateral control ... will it lead to a "sharp loss"?
        Quote: AVM
        defense against anti-missile B-B immediately means a decrease in the real firing range

        We will have to develop the RVV "subclass" with not only the GDPU, but also with the hit-to-kill principle! This will reduce the size and weight of the warhead and take the vacant space for the GDPU ... while maintaining the same weight and size characteristics and flight range. .. Perhaps it will be possible to use "sniper" fragmentation-beam "small-sized" warheads of the 9M96 type ...
        1. Shopping Mall
          1 June 2021 08: 35
          0
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Quote: AVM
          And what are her maneuvering capabilities in the final section?

          What will they do! Are you implying that by the "last mile" the engine in the RVV has already "burned out" and therefore doubt its "maneuverability"? But with your doubts you are pushing the "world" military-industrial complex to the accelerated development of the "subclass" of RVV with GDPU (gas-dynamic transverse control)! In this case, RVV even with a "burnt out" engine will have good maneuverability ...
          Quote: AVM
          Any anti-missile maneuvering of a B-B missile will lead to a sharp loss of its speed and maneuverability,

          A. in the presence of a gas-dynamic belt of lateral control ... will it lead to a "sharp loss"?


          Any change in trajectory will result in a loss of speed. The gas-dynamic belt increases the turning speed and is guaranteed to do so in a rarefied atmosphere, where the aerodynamic rudders are less efficient.

          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          We will have to develop the RVV "subclass" with not only the GDPU, but also with the hit-to-kill principle! This will reduce the size and weight of the warhead and take the vacant space for the GDPU ... while maintaining the same weight and size characteristics and flight range. .. Perhaps it will be possible to use "sniper" fragmentation-beam "small-sized" warheads of the 9M96 type ...


          That's right, I'm not saying that the V-B missiles are the end, it's just that they, too, will have to change. But the "clumsy logs" have no prospects.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 11: 53
            0
            Quote: AVM
            Any change in trajectory will result in a loss of speed. The gas-dynamic belt increases the turning speed and is guaranteed to do so in a rarefied atmosphere, where the aerodynamic rudders are less efficient.

            As such, there may not be a reversal! Depends on where the gas-dynamic "belt" is! If it is shifted to the "nose", then the turn will be ... if in the "center of mass", then the longitudinal axis of the rocket with each "point" moves up, down, left, right in space "perpendicular" to the previous position in time! There will be no reversal, in the usual sense!
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 31 May 2021 19: 17
      0
      Quote: lucul
      The answer is active defense systems of promising combat aircraft, one of the key elements of which will be promising small-sized anti-missiles В-В, ensuring the destruction of В-В missiles of the enemy with a direct hit (hit-to-kill).

      Mmmmm ..... to do this, you need the maneuverability of an anti-missile, well beyond the maneuverability of an air-to-air missile. And it will be not just expensive, but prohibitively expensive.

      Therefore, in our country, such tests were carried out only as an expansion of the missile defense capabilities.
      1. lucul
        lucul 31 May 2021 19: 53
        -1
        Therefore, in our country, such tests were carried out only as an expansion of the missile defense capabilities.

        Well, it means you think sensibly, although this is a promising direction in the future.
    3. psiho117
      psiho117 31 May 2021 19: 33
      0
      Quote: lucul
      And it will be not just expensive, but prohibitively expensive.

      No more expensive than the loss of the pilot-plane complex, which will cost the American taxpayers at least 1 lard bucks - or even more.
      In addition, due to the mass series, the price will drop several times - and there will definitely be demand.
      1. lucul
        lucul 31 May 2021 19: 35
        -3
        No more expensive than the loss of the pilot-plane complex, which will cost the American taxpayers at least 1 lard bucks - or even more.

        I did not say that it does not make sense - I say that it is very expensive to use anti-missile missiles with an overload capacity of 50-70G.
    4. Intruder
      Intruder 31 May 2021 19: 50
      0
      And it will be not just expensive, but prohibitively expensive.
      And an anti-missile carrier with a pilot is in any way extremely expensive even dozens of CUDAs, if they help him survive ... in an unequal air battle ... wink
      1. lucul
        lucul 31 May 2021 19: 52
        -1
        And an anti-missile carrier with a pilot is in any way extremely expensive even dozens of CUDAs, if they help him survive ... in an unequal air battle.

        No question - the enemy can also release cheap simulators of missiles, to which your anti-missiles will react)))
        Every flight will be golden.
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 31 May 2021 20: 12
          0
          No question - the enemy can also release cheap simulators of missiles, to which your anti-missiles will react)))
          Maybe an eternal struggle: a sword and a shield, right !? laughing But there is still a possibility theory yes and the belief "in the correct angle of inclination of the armor" .... drinks
          Every flight will be golden.
          Duc, and he is now for 4-5 generations, not silver ... that's it !!! crying Therefore, we argue and discuss ... everything and everyone: about screw drones, loitering ammunition and other products .., without a person at all, in the mode of maximum possible autonomy and economy, today is a "crazy day"!
        2. Shopping Mall
          31 May 2021 20: 31
          +2
          Quote: lucul
          And an anti-missile carrier with a pilot is in any way extremely expensive even dozens of CUDAs, if they help him survive ... in an unequal air battle.

          No question - the enemy can also release cheap simulators of missiles, to which your anti-missiles will react)))
          Every flight will be golden.


          It will not work out. Cheap simulators will not aim at the attacked aircraft - it is not stationary, but maneuvering, and if they fly not to the target, the radar of the defending aircraft will filter out false targets. In addition, they cannot be made small - there will be no necessary flight range, but if you make them large, they will take the place of B-B missiles in the plane, and there are very few of them, at least in the 5th generation.
          1. lucul
            lucul 31 May 2021 20: 37
            -1
            then the radar of the defending aircraft will filter out false targets

            The question is that the aircraft's radar can only see ahead well. And if it arrives from the side, at an angle of 90 degrees, or even from above, where there are radar dead zones, then the aircraft will be shot down.
            1. Shopping Mall
              31 May 2021 20: 41
              +1
              Quote: lucul
              then the radar of the defending aircraft will filter out false targets

              The question is that the aircraft's radar can only see ahead well. And if it arrives from the side, at an angle of 90 degrees, or even from above, where there are radar dead zones, then the aircraft will be shot down.


              In the F-35, the OLS seems to see missiles from all directions, moreover, the pilot actually "visually" sees the approach of the missile, i.e. its trajectory is being tracked.

              This is not the decline of the V-V missiles, they just change a lot too. There will be an article about this.
              1. lucul
                lucul 31 May 2021 20: 44
                -1
                The F-35 OLS seems to see missiles from all directions

                The OLS will not see anything in the clouds and fog, but the issue needs to be worked out.
            2. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 01: 56
              0
              Quote: lucul
              The question is that the aircraft's radar can only see ahead well. And if it comes from the side,

              The Su-57, for example, has (according to the reports ...) antenna arrays distributed over the airframe ... you can use the Israeli solution with their "transparent" tank armor ...
        3. bk0010
          bk0010 31 May 2021 20: 37
          +1
          Quote: lucul
          No question - the enemy can also release cheap simulators of missiles, to which your anti-missiles will react)))
          Forgive me, these simulators need to fly 200 km at a rocket speed, get out into the area about 3 km from the plane. What will you save on so that they are cheap? Explosives?
          1. lucul
            lucul 31 May 2021 20: 42
            -1
            Forgive me, these simulators need to fly 200 km at a rocket speed, get out into the area about 3 km from the plane. What will you save on so that they are cheap? Explosives?

            Here it is enough to make the ejection of the simulators remote at the pilot's discretion (AI). When the missile approaches the target, it can throw 5-6 simulators.
            By what discretion? Yes, because it is not known when the anti-missile (SAM) will hit the target, maybe at a long range, and maybe even close, therefore it is recommended to launch simulators automatically in case of a threat.
            1. bk0010
              bk0010 31 May 2021 20: 43
              0
              Then do the anti-missile defense.
              1. lucul
                lucul 31 May 2021 20: 45
                -1
                Then do the anti-missile

                Be that as it may, but the prices for future developments and products are simply space)))
  5. AAK
    AAK 31 May 2021 20: 17
    +2
    Now, according to the "armor-projectile" law, it is up to equipping the air defense missile system and the VV-BD missile system with its own interceptor missiles to combat interceptor missiles ... :)))
  6. bk0010
    bk0010 31 May 2021 20: 33
    0
    The range of the MNTK anti-missile is 3 kilometers
    Maybe it's easier to shoot with a cannon. Screw the ship's Volcano to the plane.
    1. Shopping Mall
      31 May 2021 20: 39
      +1
      Quote: bk0010
      The range of the MNTK anti-missile is 3 kilometers
      Maybe it's easier to shoot with a cannon. Screw the ship's Volcano to the plane.


      Even on ground-based air defense systems, they are of little use. The chances can be increased by shells with remote detonation, or generally controlled, at the latter and at a price like MNTK.

      About them it was here:
      30-mm automatic guns: sunset or a new stage of development?
      https://topwar.ru/154649-zakat-jery-30-mm-avtomaticheskih-pushek-ili-novyj-jetap-razvitija.html
      1. bk0010
        bk0010 31 May 2021 20: 42
        0
        Quote: AVM
        Even on ground-based air defense systems, they are of little use. Chances can be increased by projectiles with remote detonation
        Ground-based air defense systems have a fundamentally different situation: there the target flies past and far, and in the case of a missile, it will itself be guaranteed to approach the aircraft. The Americans made a radio fuse (not to be confused with remote blasting, there is completely different money) back in the days of WWII, it proved to be an inexpensive and effective product.
      2. lucul
        lucul 31 May 2021 20: 47
        -1
        The chances can be increased by shells with remote detonation, or generally controlled, at the latter and at a price they will be like MNTK

        Previously, it was impossible - a person could not calculate it. And now the computer will be able to do it, with projectiles with remote detonation.
  7. Alexander Koshkin
    Alexander Koshkin 31 May 2021 20: 49
    +1
    This is a completely new air supremacy strategy! In fact, it is diametrically opposed to the stealth strategy! Interestingly, prototyping is on a broad front! I would like to think that our developments are at the proper level ...
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 31 May 2021 21: 02
      0
      Quote: Alexander Koshkin
      This is a completely new air supremacy strategy! In fact, it is diametrically opposed to the stealth strategy!

      Why's that? A "noticeable" target will be noticed, attacked, and taken out from a greater range, even if it is packed with interceptor missiles - a banal law of large numbers.
      So stealth is still needed, and the presence of antimissiles does not cancel it.
      1. Shopping Mall
        31 May 2021 22: 18
        +2
        Quote: psiho117
        Quote: Alexander Koshkin
        This is a completely new air supremacy strategy! In fact, it is diametrically opposed to the stealth strategy!

        Why's that? A "noticeable" target will be noticed, attacked, and taken out from a greater range, even if it is packed with interceptor missiles - a banal law of large numbers.
        So stealth is still needed, and the presence of antimissiles does not cancel it.


        There is some contradiction in existing machines. Inconspicuous aircraft carry little ammunition, generation 4 ++ is not negligible, but can carry dozens of anti-missiles.

        When such an unobtrusive aircraft and a 4 ++ aircraft with anti-missile missiles, and especially with an outboard container with a laser self-defense system, meet, the big question is "who will win."

        On the other hand, "the wolf is strong in its pack." The same inconspicuous aircraft can be accompanied by one or several unmanned platforms - weapons carriers.

        But, in my opinion, an increase in the size of tactical combat aircraft - something like the advanced PAK-DP - has great prospects. Stealth goes well with large dimensions - the B-2 confirms this. At the same time, a large-scale tactical aircraft can have a radar with a large number of APMs, laser self-defense weapons, a large arsenal of anti-missiles and V-V missiles. In general, something like the flying destroyer Dering.
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 31 May 2021 22: 27
          0
          Quote: AVM
          In general, something like the flying destroyer Dering.

          It is quite possible that the concept of an aircraft-arsenal of the United States is now just being worked out on transport workers.
          True, in the Navy this concept for some reason did not take off - but they predicted it hoo.
          In addition, for a "big" and expensive target - they will not regret the same missile - and I am sure that the special. interceptor missiles for such aircraft will be developed quickly.
          A banal hypersonic penetrator with RBCH - he doesn't care about the laser, and hesitates to intercept 5-7 hypersonic elements.
          The same inconspicuous aircraft can be accompanied by one or several unmanned platforms - weapons carriers.

          This option seems to me to be more promising - an arsenal UAV, with reduced capabilities, but with expanded weapons, guided and controlled from the "lead" or AWACS aircraft
  8. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 31 May 2021 22: 37
    0
    In general, this is a new round of the battle between armor and a projectile. Let's take a look.
  9. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 1 June 2021 02: 07
    +1
    The idea of ​​interceptor missiles is good ... but these interceptors still need to be completed and then tested! For there is a saying: "Household payments often do not coincide with the market price!" When developing the B-1 bomber, the Americans wanted to equip it with anti-missile missiles to protect it from RVV and anti-aircraft missiles ... They must be small and the B-1 could take a lot of them; but the "trick" failed!
    1. Shopping Mall
      1 June 2021 08: 43
      +1
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      The idea of ​​interceptor missiles is good ... but these interceptors still need to be completed and then tested! For there is a saying: "Household payments often do not coincide with the market price!" When developing the B-1 bomber, the Americans wanted to equip it with anti-missile missiles to protect it from RVV and anti-aircraft missiles ... They must be small and the B-1 could take a lot of them; but the "trick" failed!


      It is suspected that this will be implemented in the B-21. This often happens - an idea is ahead of its time, technologies do not allow implementation, developments are postponed (we often regard this as a waste of money / sawing, etc.), and then - technologies "ripen", the developments are extracted and applied in new products.
  10. riwas
    riwas 1 June 2021 06: 34
    +1
    The attack is most often carried out in the rear hemisphere. To protect against it, the rocket must turn 180 degrees. But another option is possible. A glider with steerable planes and air brakes, guidance with a homing head in the rear, which can be infrared, semi-active laser, passive or semi-active radar, tele-guidance. It is possible to install a small side engine to compensate for the rapid loss of speed when approaching a rocket flying from above. In order to increase efficiency, it is proposed to make the "glider" in the form of a "flying wing", and in it, as a "power", bearing element, use a warhead such as the M18 Claymore antipersonnel mine directed action. Before detonating a warhead, at the command of a radio fuse (or laser), the "glider" is oriented along the roll in order for the fragments to cover the target.
  11. ares1988
    ares1988 1 June 2021 06: 58
    +1
    In the 3rd photo, after all, it is not quite a pivot, but an inseparably pivot warhead from the Talos air defense system. Those. together the rods around the explosive were laid "accordion", which, when detonated, "unfolded" into a ring.
  12. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 June 2021 09: 55
    +1
    Anti-missiles were rushing over missiles and anti-missiles ... (c).
  13. Sergey Kyulyan
    Sergey Kyulyan 1 June 2021 15: 45
    0
    As I understand everything rests on a compact and powerful source of energy. If there was such a missile, it would be possible to equip the anti-missile with an EM warhead, thereby increasing the area of ​​destruction and reducing the requirements for accuracy. But what is not, that is not.
  14. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 1 June 2021 22: 59
    0
    Missiles similar to MSDM - mini missiles - are being actively developed for drones.
    They can also be used as a missile defense aircraft against explosive missiles.
    Interceptor drones for striker and reconnaissance drones are coming soon -
    also the use of mini-explosive missiles.
  15. Conjurer
    Conjurer 2 June 2021 10: 57
    0
    It is clear that with an increase in the likelihood of hitting maneuvering targets with modern missiles (not only air-to-air), individual defense means will be required for aircraft (not only for fighters and bombers). Anti-missiles are a head-on decision, that is, the most primitive. And its problem is that you need to aim at a target that is much smaller and much more maneuverable than the protected object. That is, you just crawled out with modern technologies to an acceptable probability of hitting an aircraft, but you need to hit an immeasurably more difficult target. What will be the probability of defeat, more precisely, what will be the consumption of interceptor missiles to defeat it at the current level of technology? Large. Most likely, all your ammunition will be anti-missiles in this situation.
    On the other hand, it is clear that you need to defend yourself in the near zone (there are no problems with the accuracy of determining the parameters of movement, and the lead can be calculated much more reliably, and you cannot shoot down your missiles (in the sense that they are not flying at you)) and you just need to lead away missile from the course and damage, so that it could not aim further.
    In such a formulation of the question, many different methods come to mind, and already introduced and implemented in other areas of military technology, and no one forbids combining them.
    Anti-missiles are head-on, the most primitive and the most resource-intensive.
  16. Max PV
    Max PV 3 June 2021 17: 33
    -1
    I disagree about the low vulnerability of air-to-air missiles in case of fragmentation. Yes, TTRDs are not particularly sensitive to shrapnel damage, and the small size of warheads and control systems make the probability of fragmentation damage, in the case of conventional anti-missile fragmentation warheads, extremely low. But in almost all air-to-air missiles there are such fragile and sensitive parts as the fairing, which is also manufactured by the seeker. The same IR seeker will disable even a shot from the air. This means that fragmentation warheads can be used against air-to-air missiles, reducing the cost of the control system due to the lower cost, but switching from the GGE weighing in grams to the GGE weighing about 0,05-0,12 g, with an increase in their number in the warhead 30-100 times, which will proportionally increase the likelihood of defeat. In addition, such warheads will work well for UAVs, for many of which penetrations of the hull, even multiple ones, are not critical, but with a 3-4mm hole in the "brains" or in the battery, they will be guaranteed to be incapacitated. And it is not necessary to assume that 0,05 g is small, at a speed of 1800-2000 m / s (the normal speed of dispersal of fragments of an OBCH with GGE), it will have an energy of 81-100 J, and will pierce, in the case of a steel ball with a diameter of 2,25 mm , 3-4 mm of armor steel, which strength is not possessed by any seeker of an air-to-air missile or the body of a light UAV.
  17. rtutaloe
    rtutaloe 9 June 2021 07: 58
    0
    Oh, these dreams and fantasies to me. If I understand correctly, the Israeli interceptor missiles are sharpened to counter surface-to-air missiles, which are large enough. In addition, when you carry an anti-radar missile and enter the radar coverage area, then if it is not an S-300 or an S-400, you have a pretty good idea of ​​where they will be firing at and where the anti-missiles should be directed. Shoot down a small missile like AIM 120 with an anti-missile? Yes, yes, by the year 3000, anti-missiles will learn to hit such small targets at a distance of 60 km. And also lasers. ) The main thing is to believe. ) Maybe it's better to use level 80 magic right away? ))) In addition, amraam flies in the first section, guided by the data of the inertial guidance system, and the F-35 and F-22 radars interrogate the field of view with short pulses, which by themselves are not noticeable to the target, and when fired, they still do not illuminate the target for amraham. Therefore, the warning system about irradiation and a shot on the target does not work. Amraam turns on its radar from a distance of 10-15 km from the target, and given its power, this is not very conducive to warning about radiation at the target. Further, amraam has a very small ESR, and the radiation in the infrared spectrum is much less than that of an aircraft engine. So I wish you good luck in the distant future to learn how to find it. And yet, if the United States has a 7 nm production process in the field of computer technology, then Russia has a minimum of 120 nm. And these are the dimensions of the calculators, which will determine the size of the anti-missile. So I wish you good luck in assimilating money in the development of interceptor missiles. And something seems to me questionable about the reality of overloads in 60G. 12-14 is clear, but 60 odd is hard to believe. Where are the sources of such information? And yet, how much time do they invent and develop the Su-57? When will we reach parity in 5th generation aircraft with NATO? Well, at this rate, by the year 3000 we will have the first sketches of antimissiles. )) Although, of course, there is a realistic option: next year aliens will arrive and give us everything. )
  18. VasYok
    VasYok 12 June 2021 17: 23
    -1
    Why build such a garden with anti-missiles? When everything is solved much easier and more efficiently. Due to small-sized thermobaric grenades fired into the rear hemisphere towards the attacking V-B missile, which itself initiates the detonation of the gas-air mixture.