The beginning of the tests of the Club-K missile system

98
A few years ago, the media around the world distributed news about the achievement of the Russian defense industry: at the LIMA-2009 cabin in Malaysia, the Club-K missile system was announced. The press, military experts and lovers of military equipment became interested in him because of the original execution of the launcher. Unlike other rocket complexes of the Club family that use Caliber line missiles, the Club-K does not have a self-propelled base. In the stowed position, the launcher looks exactly like a standard 20- or 40-foot container. It is assumed that this decision will help to significantly increase the combat potential of the complex.



The first reports of the work on the Club-K project were accompanied by an animated video, which demonstrated the general principles of operation and the advantages of container-based rockets. However, it was only computer animation. Existing samples of the container-launcher was demonstrated later, in 2011, at the IMMS-2011 cabin. Then at the exhibition site two containers were shown at once, differing from each other in size and, obviously, in the composition of the equipment. However, the samples shown were probably not even prototypes.

22 August on the official website of the group "Morinformsystem-Agat" appeared information about the beginning of the test complex Club-K. A short video was attached to a short press release with one of the first launches. As always happens in such cases, the verification of the new complex began with throwing tests. It is reported that the X-35UE cruise missile was used as a test ammunition. The video shows how the rocket turns on the engine and successfully exits the transport and launch container located inside the launch complex. The latter, judging by the size, was mounted in an 20-foot ISO container. On the last frames of the published video, the rocket’s flight trajectory is noticeably noticeable; it goes somewhere upwards. However, this is not a problem - the essence of the throwing tests is to check the operation of the systems at the initial stage of launch, when the rocket leaves the transport and launch container. Therefore, with regard to the flight path, the main thing is that the rocket fell in the right area and no one was hurt.

For some unknown reason, the press release published in August was widely distributed only after two weeks. Nevertheless, even this lag did not prevent the discussion to revive again regarding the prospects and characteristics of the Club-K complex. The main subject of discussion is the original placement and a kind of disguise of the launcher. The possibility of hidden transfer by any suitable transport over any distances, as well as the possibility of launching almost without any special training, is called its positive sides. It is alleged that the container with the rockets can be installed on the platform of a car, train or cargo ship, and the complex will retain all its capabilities. At the same time, some experts have doubts about the feasibility of masking the launcher under a standard cargo container. For example, the argument is made about the complexity of “introducing” a container launcher into commercial cargo turnover without the risk of its detection or the legal side of installing Club-K complexes on merchant ships.



However, all doubts and criticisms seem to be of little interest to the developer. At the end of August, the first throw tests of the X-35UE rocket were conducted, and in the near future it is planned to carry out the same work with other types of missiles, primarily with 3М-54Е and 3М-14Э. The use of these munitions will provide the necessary combat characteristics of the complex. Thus, the range of 3М-54Е and 3М-14Э missiles is equal to 220 and 300 kilometers, respectively. With a speed of about 850-900 km / h, the missiles deliver a high-explosive fragmentation warhead, penetrating a high-explosive or cassette warhead, weighing 200 and 450 kg, respectively. All missiles of the Caliber family are equipped with an inertial guidance system, and the 3М-54Э and 3М-14Е scheduled for testing also have a radar one. Such a system allows a rocket to relatively easily detect and attack a target: the intended location of the last missile is launched using inertial navigation, and then the radar homing system is activated, which detects the necessary object. It is worth noting that when navigating without using satellite systems, a number of special equipment is required to accurately determine the coordinates of the launcher, the programming of the rocket electronics, etc. For this purpose, the Club-K complex includes combat control modules (MOBU) and power supply and life support (MES). As follows from the available data, in the case of the 40-foot container-based rocket complex, all the modules, including the rocket launcher, are located in a single design. At the same time, the MOBU and MEA can, if necessary, be mounted in separate ISO containers.

Meanwhile, work on the project is still in the initial stages of testing. The technical details of the first launch launches have not yet been announced - representatives of the Morinformsystem-Agat concern have limited themselves to the short phrase “successfully”. Probably, the positive end of the first test launches will have a beneficial effect on the pace of implementation of the entire program, which means that soon there will be new reports on its progress, or even news of the signing of supply contracts.

The beginning of the tests of the Club-K missile system



On the materials of the sites:
http://concern-agat.ru/
http://rg.ru/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://arms-expo.ru/






Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    12 September 2012 09: 30
    it’s a pity that Russia adheres to restrictions on the distribution of missiles, the conditional opponent won out trivially handed out tomahawks that fly over 300 km to all their allies!
    1. Windbreak
      -2
      12 September 2012 10: 30
      To all its allies? Tomahawks are in service only with the USA and Great Britain
      1. +3
        12 September 2012 11: 49
        Spain was forgotten by my dear foreign comrade, as well as the possibility of installing USK with tomahawks on Japanese ships, the Netherlands, etc., that is, on all NATO ships
        1. Windbreak
          0
          12 September 2012 15: 20
          Spain only planned to buy, but refused. The theoretical possibility of equipping ships with missiles is not
          Quote: Civil
          , the conditional adversary gave out a little hesitantly distributed tomahawks that fly over 300 km to all their allies!
          1. Bashkaus
            +2
            12 September 2012 19: 24
            She refused to give up, and in the event of a large batch, the Americans themselves will give her the tomahawks, and even pay from the top. The main thing is that I would get into the PU. And so they are peaceful and fluffy, only in Britain and the United States (
        2. Auchan
          -23
          12 September 2012 15: 21
          Quote: Civil
          as well as the ability to install USK with tomahawks on Japanese ships

          There is no such possibility - Japan is deprived of offensive weapons, according to their constitution.



          In general, the idea of ​​a "standard 40-foot container" is puzzling. A beautiful solution, but absolutely useless - there is no real application for the system.

          Install a couple of such complexes on a civilian container ship. So, what is next? Who to shoot at? Who will issue the target designation for 300 km? The container ship is not protected by anything - it is itself an easy target.

          Use this thing in the army and navy? But on warships this masquerade is completely useless.
          To be honest, the container-type launcher first appeared in the US Navy 30 years ago and was called ABL - it housed 4 tomahawks + the installation was armored

          Urya will put me a minus, but if you think seriously - why such a masquerade?

          1. Passing
            +12
            12 September 2012 15: 58
            Quote: Auchan
            why such a masquerade

            For export of course. An ideal weapon for weak countries. There is such a container anywhere, and no intelligence will ever determine whether this country has RCCs or not, and if there is exactly where they are, where to send their planes to suppress.
            By designation, this system's task is not to sink enemy ships on the expanses of the ocean, but to sink ships approaching the shore, such as all kinds of landing, transport and artillery ships, and the control center can provide a network of inconspicuous men distributed along the shore, equipped with binoculars, a smartphone with GPS and a compass , and the simplest skills of determining the range by the size of the observed target. This is the most primitive option, and there are compact laser systems that do it all automatically, there are numerous navigation radars on all kinds of civilian boats and boats, you can even use a vessel with a neutral flag to control the water area. In short, the Central Administration in the coastal zone is not a problem, it would be a desire and a little quick wits.
            1. Auchan
              -11
              12 September 2012 17: 08
              Quote: Passing by
              An ideal weapon for weak countries.

              For weak countries there is no perfect weapon. Iraq with thousands of tanks and SCADs was rolled out in two weeks.

              Quote: Passing by
              such as all kinds of landing, transport and artillery ships

              Landing ships land on a completely cleaned shore.

              Quote: Passing by
              equipped with binoculars, a smartphone with GPS and a compass

              The man will not have any smartphone in view of the destroyed mobile communication towers and disabled GPS (amers did this primarily during the attack on Yugoslavia)

              Quote: Passing by
              This is the most primitive option, and there are compact laser systems that do it all automatically, there are numerous navigation radars on all kinds of civilian boats and boats, you can even use a vessel with a neutral flag to control the water area. In short, the Central Administration in the coastal zone is not a problem, it would be a desire and a little quick wits.

              All this mess will be easily drowned out and destroyed by aircraft long before the landing ships approach. As happened in Iraq and Libya.
              1. alex21411
                +2
                12 September 2012 18: 40
                Have you even understood what nonsense you are carrying ??? Are you an instigator or an idiot ??? Answer truth...
              2. Passing
                +7
                12 September 2012 18: 42
                Quote: Auchan
                Iraq with thousands of tanks and SCADs rolled out in two weeks

                That’s the point, Iraq fought according to the classical canons - open confrontation, force on force, naturally lost.
                Quote: Auchan
                Landing ships land on a completely cleaned shore.

                Stripped from whom? From fishermen, from peasants, from schoolchildren? Will all civilians be driven to concentration camps or burned with napalm? belay
                There will be no clearly distinguishable gunners; there will be observers disguised as civilians. Observers along the coast, installing RCC anywhere, range allows.
                Quote: Auchan
                The man will not have any smartphone in view of the destroyed mobile communication towers and disabled GPS (amers did this primarily during the attack on Yugoslavia)

                By communication - where will the wired phones go? And in general, what prevents the use of modern radio stations with encryption, frequency hopping and broadband signal? The option about "finding and bombing" does not work, firstly it is difficult to track such a radio station, secondly, it is no less difficult to suppress it, and thirdly, there you just need to transmit the coordinates of the target, even if they do the finding, it will be just too late, the coordinates are transmitted.
                About disabling GPS - it seems to me that this is a bike, you can’t disable the GPS for a particular country, if only for a whole part of the world. Well, they’ll even turn it off, there is also Glonass, soon there will be a European system, there will be a Chinese one. Choose for every taste. And even if all signals, any satellites are suppressed, there remains a banal map of the area and triangulation from two observers, in short, determining the coordinates is not a problem.
                Quote: Auchan
                All this mess will be easily drowned out and destroyed by aircraft long before the landing ships approach.

                How so destroyed ??? What, all the same, all-all fishing trawlers, all-all private boats, all-all merchant ships? And even a ship of neutral powers? How terrible it is to live, the Americans will come and they will soak everyone and burn them all with napalm! belay
                Quote: Auchan
                As happened in Iraq and Libya.

                It is precisely because of the absence of an invulnerable, due to secrecy, ship destruction system.
                1. Auchan
                  0
                  13 September 2012 00: 57
                  Quote: Passing by
                  Stripped from whom? From fishermen, from peasants, from schoolchildren?

                  From containers with clubs
                  Everyone here says how good it is to disguise as containers, there are millions of them around the world. But millions of containers are only in NATO countries, Japan and China. In rogue countries, this is not the most common thing.

                  Quote: Passing by
                  By communication - where will the wired phones go? And in general, what prevents the use of modern radio stations with encryption, frequency tuning and a broadband signal?

                  All this special forces will break a week before the invasion. As it was during the assault on Amin’s palace, even before the assault all wired communications banged
                  And where did the peasants and fishermen get such equipment? They will surrender it faster to non-ferrous metal scrap than they will fight with it.
                  Quote: Passing by
                  About disabling GPS - it seems to me that this is a bike, you can’t disable the GPS for a particular country

                  During the bombing of Yugoslavia, GPS was completely turned off worldwide
                  Quote: Passing by
                  there remains a banal map of the terrain and triangulation from two observers; in short, the coordinates are not a problem to determine.

                  The population will not bother with this bombing, will run away and hide
                  Quote: Passing by
                  What, all the same, all-all fishing trawlers, all-all private boats, all-all merchant ships?

                  During a desert storm, amers and Britons shot everything larger than a boat in the bay - for this there are excellent small anti-ship missiles SiSqua
                  Quote: Passing by
                  And even a ship of neutral powers?

                  These will leave the area long before the invasion. If they do not leave, they will be boarded.
                  Quote: Passing by
                  It is precisely because of the absence of an invulnerable, due to secrecy, ship destruction system

                  Libya was also rolled out in 1986 - when the amers had not yet used Tomahawks and modern technology. Conventional subsonic deck bombers killed all Kvadrat and S-200 air defense missile systems and sank 3 missile boats that rushed to approach the squadron
                  1. Passing
                    +2
                    13 September 2012 02: 40
                    Quote: Auchan
                    From containers with clubs

                    But they will not be in the landing zone! They can be 100 km from the coast, 200 km from the coast, it is simply unrealistic to find them.
                    Quote: Auchan
                    In rogue countries, this is not the most common thing.

                    That's a moot point. But even so, the point is not that the missiles are in a sea container, the point is that they are supermobile and unidentifiable at the deployment stage, quietly brought, sheathed with plywood under a shed or a slum house, and without a prompt from local residents, hell who will understand that this is the position RCC.
                    Quote: Auchan
                    And where did the peasants and fishermen get such equipment?

                    The equipment is naturally breech. Both peasants and fishermen must be quoted. I say - observers are disguised as civilians. Say, in a threatened period, a relative who has served in the army arrived, sits at home, walks along the shore, or bought a house, made a disguised observation post out of it, or even real peasant fishermen sit on an unofficial salary, such as if they work out for a good bonus , yes it is full of options, there are no problems here.
                    Quote: Auchan
                    Libya was also rolled out in 1986.

                    I didn’t understand this argument, but I’m talking about the fact that weak countries need exactly a covert weapon, when, until the last moment, a strong adversary simply does not see targets for a strike, and accordingly he cannot calculate, plan, choose a convenient time to strike. Those. the situation becomes mirror-like, not the weak side will be under the threat of a sudden blow, but exactly the opposite, the attackers will be under the pressure of a "dastardly" blow in the underbelly.
                    1. Auchan
                      +1
                      13 September 2012 14: 05
                      Quote: Passing by
                      But they will not be in the landing zone! They can be 100 km from the coast, 200 km from the coast

                      then again the problem of communication and target designation rises to its full height
                      Quote: Passing by
                      That's a moot point

                      There is no doubt - look at who owns the container ships and the largest companies, and their main trade routes. USA, China, Taiwan, Japan, Europe. Container ships bypass the DPRK, Mozambique and Venezuela.
                      Quote: Passing by
                      the fact is that they are supermobile

                      No more than the usual OTP complex
                      Quote: Passing by
                      quietly brought, sheathed with plywood under a shed or a slum house

                      Old practice, as they did in Vietnam. To do this, you do not need to buy expensive PU for 15 million bucks - in Pakistan, harpoon naval missiles are easily re-glued into tactical ground missiles bypassing the license. Harpoon weighs only 700 kg, and a hefty Club rocket - more than 2 tons !!!

                      The Russian wunderwaffe has no chance in the world market - 3 years have already passed, and despite the tough PR - not a single order or serial model.
                      Quote: Passing by
                      real fishermen-peasants are sitting on an unofficial salary, such as if they will work for a good bonus, but full of options, there are no problems.

                      You are an idealist. In rogue countries, the grandmother will simply plunder, and the population will scatter after the first bombing. That is why they are called "third world countries" there is an uncontrollable state and no one cares about it

                      Quote: Passing by
                      I'm talking about the fact that weak countries need secret weapons

                      Weak countries need to become strong countries, and weapons are the last argument
              3. +8
                13 September 2012 06: 55
                That's right, Auchan - throw everything out and take a wooden club. And gather all your like-minded people in one place and fence this place around and leave you a local network to communicate with yourself. Remember the Caribbean crisis, or rather the photos of our ships bound for Cuba. What do we see on the deck? That's right - sheathed equipment, but it would have been half a dozen 40 feet. containers, which is better? You have no idea why at 90 the Americans insisted on removing the BRZD from duty. The most important answer is that it is practically impossible to track it, also with a container system. And you are exaggerating everything about target designation. An example from Yugoslavia - remember the shot down 117? Do you know who brought him down and how? And the commander of the air defense regiment of Yugoslavia brought it down every day and listened to where the "buzz", while the regiment almost did not exist and .... there are many more details, such as that in the regiment 125 there was also a reconnaissance station "sky" of the meter range, and stealth is invisible only in the millimeter range, and for this reason we have a "sky - sv" station. Target designation can always be given - an example is the joint exercises of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the USA and Germany, simulation of combat actions on electronic maps, you need to complete a firing mission to defeat and destroy a moving column of armored vehicles of "terrorists", the column enters the forest and becomes invisible to air reconnaissance means and observing, the officers of the "friendly" army sit and wait for the column to appear. Our officer poking around a little in his mind and estimating something on a paper map gives a target designation to the firing dvizion to open fire. The verdict of the computer and the parsing group - the target is destroyed. Slight confusion in the camp of "friends" - it was 2008. Maybe there are no such officers left after the wooden reform, although one would like to hope that all the same they still exist. And on the topic - the complex is promising and needed. The hedgehog needs to calculate what is cheaper and more efficient - to put all sorts of shelves in Kaliningrad or poke containers in ports in the west of the country. Although both are needed and without conditionally important. You can also bury the canteiner to a certain depth, throw it out (place it) on any landfills that the enemy will disdain to bomb, or, on the contrary, send a 40 ft. Cloud. empty containers in various interesting places so that our "friends" 's cc will run out of tomahawks faster - in general, you can create so many interesting things with this system !!!!! ))))))))
          2. +3
            12 September 2012 18: 01
            If you seriously think about it, you can always need a perfectly camouflaged missile system. Who to shoot at? And who not to shoot at? There would be enough ammunition — at least plenty — who would give target designation? Yes, our design bureaus work very closely on this, although today this problem is solved. In my opinion, you are 2 years behind.
            1. Auchan
              -5
              12 September 2012 18: 35
              Quote: 1976AG
              Who to shoot at? What’s not at anyone?

              Give at least one real example.

              Quote: 1976AG
              Goals - more than enough - there would be enough ammunition!

              Ammunition costs $ 1 million. don't shoot much

              Quote: 1976AG
              Yes, our design bureaus work very closely on this, although today this problem is solved

              The solution is known - an airplane or a satellite. There is neither one nor the other
              1. +1
                12 September 2012 19: 33
                Do you need to set specific goals? Are you serious?
                Ammunition is expensive? You can try to solve the same problem with Kalash!
                Neither one nor the other? And here you are mistaken!
                1. 0
                  12 September 2012 20: 07
                  Quote: 1976AG
                  Ammunition is expensive? You can try to solve the same problem with Kalash!


                  As for the cost of ammunition in a local war, there are no other options left besides tactical aviation

                  The cost of cruise missiles Club and Tomahawk $ 1,5 million. At the same time, the cost of the 1 hour of the flight of the F-15E Strike Eagle bomber is estimated at $ 15 thousand, the cost of a laser-guided bomb - from $ 19 thousand
                  Those. a bomber’s sortie costs 50 times cheaper, while the aircraft performs its task better and more efficiently - it has fewer errors, higher speed on the PMV, it can be on duty in the air.
                  1. 0
                    12 September 2012 21: 22
                    How does it all work out for you - I calculated on the calculator which is cheaper and chose the method of hitting the target !!!!!!!!!!! I agree that tactical aviation has its advantages, but how many airplanes do we have that are capable of effectively fulfilling the task in modern conditions? Even by 2020 there will be clearly not enough of them. Not to mention the fact that they can be destroyed at the base or upon approaching goals. A war is war and expecting that everything will go on as if naive, and the degree of stealth on planes and missiles you yourself understand is very different. So the calculator is not a good adviser here.
                    1. 0
                      12 September 2012 23: 47
                      Quote: 1976AG
                      How everything just works out for you - I calculated on the calculator which is cheaper and chose the method of hitting the target!

                      I directly pointed to the specifics of hostilities:
                      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                      Regarding the cost of ammunition in local war





                      Quote: 1976AG
                      how many airplanes do we have that are capable of performing the task effectively

                      During the "Desert Storm" aviation carried out 70 thousand sorties.
                      Quote: 1976AG
                      and the degree of stealth in aircraft and missiles you understand is very different

                      They have a different price at times 50.
                      Therefore, the Tomahawks are used only for the destruction of key air defense points and specially protected military installations.
                      All other work in the local war is carried out by aviation.
                      Use cruise missiles from the bulldozer does not make sense - only in combination with other means
                      1. +1
                        13 September 2012 09: 18
                        I noticed that you had in mind a local conflict, but when a conflict with another state, local or not, can be clarified only at the end, but I did not mean that it should be used at every opportunity - this is absurd! This is the specificity of this beautifully disguised complex in order to use it only as a last resort. Here I absolutely agree with you.
                      2. +1
                        13 September 2012 13: 24
                        Quote: 1976AG
                        This is the specificity of this beautifully disguised complex in order to use it only as a last resort


                        Why mask a cruise missile on a civilian container ship if an entire squadron of warships is involved in the operation?

                        Complex "Club" makes sense only in defense, but there are many questions
                      3. 0
                        13 September 2012 14: 06
                        First of all, I had in mind the defense, and secondly, the complex can be equipped not only with anti-ship missiles and here in this variant the range of application is much wider, but with the anti-ship missiles it is also an opportunity to quickly deploy, or rather toss in a threatened direction. Any military operation begins after a thorough reconnaissance and striking at the identified targets, but just to identify it is the problem.
                  2. psdf
                    0
                    13 September 2012 17: 08
                    At the same time, calculate the cost of the service infrastructure, construction of places of basing, etc. And then calculate the cost of the transfer, security measures, etc.
                    1. 0
                      13 September 2012 18: 44
                      I don’t understand where the containers are based? Securing what? Rusty containers?
              2. +2
                13 September 2012 07: 15
                Ashan, don't you respect our intelligence at all? I myself am a former intelligence officer and I know it is "offensive" to see people living in the 19th century on the site. You tell us so that on one clear March .... July .... January ... morning we will wake up in gentle bliss, arriving and find at our side a flock of ovs with their ships tamahawks, etc. And what about the threatened period? Now you will again talk with Iraq and Yugoslavia (by the way, you have not finished with Iraq) Nobody will fight like this with Mother Russia, there will be an information war first, then all sorts of calls for overthrow, the arrival of different Western ones and then the call of the "liberators" Russian land (I paint this kryony primitively, so as not to incur anything bad). So it can take time from several months to several years - will we have time to prepare? I think yes. And the cost will not play a special role, and the availability of personnel will be found right now, I would like to see preparation - in advance, and not like in 41. This system is needed not so much for a small country (although if they buy - a flag in hand) as for us at all will interfere. I’m still thinking - and how our fathers (please do not confuse them with grandfathers) used to launch rockets without GPS a..yay ... yay, a .. yay ... yay ... Poor - probably by hand! Do not be afraid here, everything will be fine (I would like it to be faster).
              3. _CAMOBAP_
                0
                13 September 2012 18: 37
                Give me the LPR-1 (it was already adopted twenty years ago) and I will give the most accurate target designation. And neither a second person is needed, nor, moreover, a third. Range measurement range is 20km, in angle - five thousandths (I could be wrong here, it was a long time ago)
          3. Bashkaus
            +1
            12 September 2012 19: 25
            HA, listen to you, so let's draw all of our mobile poplars at the prompt of McFaul on the roofs of the target, so that it would be easier to find them from the satellite in the taiga, and then shandarahnut ...
          4. vpm
            vpm
            +4
            12 September 2012 21: 31
            Urya will put me a minus, but if you think seriously - why such a masquerade?

            Cons put because you are nonsense, but what is needed here is why:
            According to the British newspaper, the Club-K containerized missile system, according to the expectations of military experts, will completely change the rules of warfare. A compact container can be installed on ships, trucks, railway platforms, and due to the excellent masking of the missile system, the enemy will have to conduct much more thorough reconnaissance when planning an attack.

            If Iraq had Club-K missile systems in 2003, a US invasion of the Persian Gulf would be impossible: any cargo ship in the Gulf would be a potential threat, I am sure the author of The Daily Telegraph.

            And how many container ships are in the Persian Gulf at one time, and how many need to be checked or bombed if it is impossible before one is destroyed? Amer fishing boats are shooting at such a betrayal, and what can we say about the time when two or three such containers will appear in the region, a fishing cart or commercial transportation in the region or any plans for invasion anywhere.
    2. +6
      12 September 2012 23: 36

      Which kitten has the ball? laughing laughing laughing
      1. with
        +3
        12 September 2012 23: 42
        Quote: lelikas
        Which kitten has the ball?


        Ah yes, Lelikas, and yes ..... son !!!)) good drinks


      2. +1
        13 September 2012 07: 20
        In the right, oh there is no in the left, the dai confused at all (((((((((
      3. +1
        13 September 2012 11: 38
        Asche and it happens laughing

        1. +1
          13 September 2012 14: 00
          Seals were looking for Clabs - not found belay
      4. Van
        +1
        13 September 2012 22: 24
        Quote: lelikas
        Which kitten has the ball?

        I won’t say exactly which one, but I think that in the upper ranks for sure. laughing
  2. +2
    12 September 2012 09: 47
    yes, sometimes our honor plays a trick on us ...
    1. +1
      12 September 2012 10: 09
      it’s not a matter of honor, it’s a direct aiding to the enemies of the Fatherland.
      1. +1
        13 September 2012 07: 22
        Cat aide !!!! People on the site are the enemy !!! And so the cat is cool - you have to teach your own to play such games)))))))
  3. +8
    12 September 2012 10: 01
    I agree with those who have spoken, but the fact that our leadership is trying in vain to keep a clean game with impudent Saxons. Sell ​​these complexes to the molded friends of the mattress covers with the capitals in Tehran and Damascus, and then let them in Lashar pulling Lazar over untimely deceased ...
    1. +3
      12 September 2012 10: 54
      If they are disguised as a regular container, then perhaps these missiles are already in Damascus and Tehran, it is not so easy to detect them .... although of course these are speculations.
    2. 0
      13 September 2012 00: 54
      I would call this country Angloamerica ... It is not yet known, then it may turn out that the tail wags the dog ...
  4. +2
    12 September 2012 10: 03
    An interesting idea with placing missiles in a container, but honestly I don’t see how they can be used for flying aircraft. To carry only in their own country, then the range is lost, which is already not very large. It’s easier to launch a rocket from an airplane ... you won’t send such a cntr for a hill, they’ll have a very good chance that they will find out ... only in the threatened period to load on their merchant ships and to the coast of the enemy ... but who will let them go there? If you load on other people's merchant ships - but where then is the guarantee that the cntr will be put on the upper tier of the deck, and not put it in the hold? Yes, and modern logistics, such a science that allows you to track any country from where to where ...
    In short, somehow it’s hard for me to realize what this is really for ...
    If only relying on foreign buyers from small countries, where rolling the CTR in a circle, you can finish shooting from anywhere in the country to any point in a neighboring country ... the same "big" as the first laughing
    1. +8
      12 September 2012 10: 42
      The container option appears to be more suited to relatively small countries. But its application is quite logical. This complex is universal. It can work both on stationary objects and on ships. How does the United States act in "democratizing" countries? The first preemptive (disarming) strike is delivered. Naturally, given their capabilities, it is quite easy to detect elements of the military infrastructure. Containers are more complicated. Here satellites can do little to help. And the ships of the "democratizers" will have to approach the shores. And here you can get it from the quay wall of the port. And if you still have such luck on a container ship, and send it to the sea ... The Americans, of course, can detect a large ship. But it is difficult to unequivocally define him as hostile. Attack first? What if "civilian"? Image loss is a serious argument. Plus, Americans are very sensitive to losses and don't like to take risks. That is, the container option will not allow the war to be won. But it can be a psychological deterrent. Moreover, states like to fight among themselves even without the United States.
      1. Darck
        -3
        12 September 2012 11: 00
        Bronis, If there is a war, then the infrastructure will be covered up first, drones and tomahawks will sink the ship, they will say there were weapons, then go and prove the victory is important and this will make the image of the country. By the way about containers.
        1. +1
          12 September 2012 13: 15
          In general, the NLOS-LS system development program shown in the video clip is closed due to a number of technical problems identified during its testing and the high cost of the system. Details on the site. http://defensetech.org/2010/04/23/army-cancels-nlos-ls-missile-system/
          Those. it was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines .....
          Although the concept itself and its execution were impressive. Please note that the launcher complex was removed from the launcher at a decent distance so as not to expose people to the risk of retaliation. At the same time, missile control could be carried out both with launchers and advanced observers or personnel serving the launcher.
          1. Darck
            0
            12 September 2012 13: 52
            gregor6549, Yes, many developments were closed due to such shortcomings (more precisely, they were frozen) and then opened again. I think this will not be an exception, the system is very cool, what I really liked is that you don’t have to give an indication to the rocket, you just upload a photo indicate the object square on the map and the rocket itself is looking.
            1. +2
              12 September 2012 14: 55
              By the way, now this concept of providing the rocket itself with the identification / recognition of the target and pursuing it until complete destruction is becoming one of the main in rocketry. For example, recently there have been reports that the Chinese are developing such a seeker for their ballistic missiles, so that they can find the AUG to highlight the fattest target and hit it. Moreover, the head part of a ballistic missile can be a carrier for a supersonic anti-ship missile or several small-sized anti-ship missiles that are dropped from a ballistic missile at a certain distance to the ship and go to the target in a flock at low altitude using the tactics of the famous Granites, but also guarded by the "motherly" care of the carrier who generally falls in the water or on the ship is in no hurry. Those. The Chinese not only copied Soviet developments but also approached copy-paste creatively. A similar approach is used for air defense / missile defense systems of ships, for which the aforementioned NLOS-LS was also planned to be used. In particular, for air defense / missile defense of landing ships / docks where there is no place for placing standard vertical launch installations. It is necessary to place tanks and infantry somewhere. And of course you are right. Projects brought to this stage, as a rule, do not close completely, but are temporarily put on the shelf, And as soon as known problems are solved or the budget increases, they are back in business.
        2. 0
          12 September 2012 14: 50
          Of course, they will try to detect and "extinguish" it. But for every container "Tomahawk" you will not be enough. Only carpet bombing of the entire coastal zone. And this is both expensive and very unpleasant.
          The probability of detecting such "partisan" missiles is much lower than that of classic coastal complexes. The problem is the same with the courts. It is not always possible to determine in advance what kind of ship and under whose flag it is sailing. There were some guys, in the First World "Lusitania" they let go to the bottom as a ship carrying weapons. Although the ship was English, the Americans were very offended by the Kaiser and landed in France. We took advantage of the pretext, of course. Public opinion was prepared. To drown civilian ships is a thankless task, and if they think "drown, do not drown" it can beat ... In principle, there is more of a psychological aspect than a military one. Such a rocket would not sink an aircraft carrier alone. But UDC or escort destroyers can spoil their nerves. On this and the calculation.
          1. Darck
            -5
            12 September 2012 16: 07
            Of course, they will try to detect and "extinguish" it. But for every container "Tomahawk" you will not be enough.
            Depending on where these containers will be placed, there is usually intelligence to search for such containers.
            With the courts the same problem. It is not always possible to determine in advance what kind of vessel and under whose flag it goes.
            There were guys who were trying to fly helicopters on a ship under the wrong flag, they returned nothing. Again, this is a reconnaissance business, I don’t think that during the war some ships with tourists will fly under the flag of some kind of Handuras.
            such a seeker for their ballistic missiles, so that they can find the AUG, highlight the most fat target and hit it. Moreover, the head part of a ballistic missile can be a carrier for a supersonic anti-ship missile or several small-sized anti-ship missiles that are dropped from a ballistic missile at a certain distance to the ship and go to the target in a flock at low altitude using the tactics of the famous Granites, but also guarded by the "motherly" care of the carrier who generally falls in the water or on the ship is in no hurry. Those.
            Cool, if the same AUG does not detect and immediately sink this carrier, it is not safe to keep all the eggs in one carrier, if it is intercepted, then they will knock everything down with one anti-ballistic missile.
            1. +1
              12 September 2012 16: 47
              Of course, the carrier can also be knocked down. but mainly in the initial (ballistic) section of the trajectory. When maneuvering warheads are separated from the carrier (in this case, anti-ship missiles and not alone, but with the same false goals, then it will be a problem to shoot them down. And for such a tasty target as the AUG and several carriers it is not a pity to start up. The USSR Navy once singled out one AUG on a regiment or even several bombers, reconnaissance and other flyers. In order to guarantee to sink before .. Well, so that the Americans do not shoot down their BRs in the initial areas, they begin to press the American fleet with its steep Aegises away from their borders and will pushing even further as soon as their own AUGs take the wing. ”It’s not for nothing that the Americans are now cheating Australia so that they would allow them to keep aircraft carriers and other" galoshes "in their ports.
              1. Darck
                0
                12 September 2012 17: 11
                Of course, the carrier can also be brought down. but mainly in the initial (ballistic) section of the trajectory.
                I’m talking about this, the United States has not in vain placed anti-missile missiles on destroyers, can you name this missile or link? I want to see what they plan there.
                the fleet, with its steep Aegis, begins to squeeze away from its borders
                They will stand at their shores in neutral waters, let the Chinese try to squeeze the AUG, and if there are several of them, then generally the song)
            2. +2
              12 September 2012 18: 15
              Dear Darck: If you follow your logic, we do not need military equipment at all, because it cannot be 100% invulnerable.
              1. Darck
                -5
                12 September 2012 18: 59
                If you follow your logic, we don’t need military equipment at all, because it cannot be 100% invulnerable.
                To follow my logic, first understand what we're talking about.
                1. 0
                  12 September 2012 23: 02
                  Where are we going! You are about high, and here we are all indulging in goodies.
                  1. Darck
                    0
                    13 September 2012 02: 16
                    Where are we going! You are about high, and here we are all indulging in goodies.
                    Learn to express your thoughts constructively, if you can’t and you don’t like my comments, then do not waste my time, just put a minus.
                    1. +2
                      13 September 2012 08: 55
                      Cons and without me is to whom to put. It would be better to think for what they put you, probably for constructive thinking.
                      1. Darck
                        0
                        13 September 2012 14: 04
                        Cons and without me is to whom to put. It would be better to think for what they put you, probably for constructive thinking.
                        There are always enough offended people, I have no time to think about them.
                        Or maybe it is necessary to extinguish not the containers, but the operators and their command posts ??? ... IMHO ...
                        There may be a duplicate point, so it’s better to extinguish the threat itself.
            3. Kshatriy
              0
              12 September 2012 21: 47
              Quote: Darck
              Depending on where these containers will be placed, there is usually intelligence to search for such containers.

              Or maybe it is necessary to extinguish not the containers, but the operators and their command posts ??? ... IMHO ...
            4. 0
              13 September 2012 21: 28
              Everything we argue about here is very relative. Detect-not-detect, strike-don't-strike games. There is no 100% certainty in either one or the other. It's just that in the case of the "Club" the probability of detection is much lower when compared, for example, with a corvette or a frigate. And this is important. Especially for those who are weaker than their opponent and cannot answer him in any other way.

              Everything about anti-ship ballistic missiles is rather vague. China, it seems, has created something like that, but not in a ship, but in a land version. On a meringue, medium-range missiles (in the region of 1500-2500 km). The main thing for them is not to allow foreign aircraft carriers to enter their waters. The aircraft carrier, of course, needs closer, and the naval "Tomahawks" also need at least 1500 - 1700 km. give. On the other hand, so far no one can imagine how this Chinese product can work, especially in non-nuclear equipment. I don't even raise the issue of missile defense (pun intended) ... even less unambiguously.
        3. vikruss
          +2
          13 September 2012 05: 41
          It has its own radio station ... It means it can be <activated> by an outside party. Well, if you completely pin it, then it is worth just putting this <weapon of the future> on the side or even more fun putting it upside down and it will not fly anywhere ... one and a half tones can be turned over even with primitive motodes .... .... simply speaking. Rollback of dolars into the pocket of the bourgeoisie. These so-called weapons of the future are of no use to anyone. They basically do not move anywhere further than development ... with all the show-offs about their <phenomality> laughing
      2. Bashkaus
        +1
        12 September 2012 19: 49
        oh ok image. In 88g, the American missile cruiser Vincennes first arranged an unequal battle with a small boat, numbing it from a 130mm gun when it broke received damage, continued to hammer from the same aft. And then, a passenger airliner from Iran flew over it along the international highway, with all the identifications and on a schedule. In short, they also shot down nafig, frightened by an air attack! And you say the image ...
      3. 0
        13 September 2012 03: 25
        Without Angloamerica, there were no wars, either they personally fought, or they taunted someone, pitted. They trained, armed, and pulled chestnuts from the fire with pens of others. Name at least one war wherever Angloamerica would be unprincipled? Where would you get financial or political dividends? At least one?
    2. 0
      12 September 2012 11: 11
      And if you bury it underground? or gently carry under the guise of goods ...
      1. black_eagle
        0
        12 September 2012 18: 34
        Well, it’s been worked out a hundred times, let’s recall the BZHRK and our missiles in mines, but there is a difficulty with mines and underground, it’s mobility, except to put it all over the country, and letting the enemy in is not an option
    3. 0
      12 September 2012 16: 57
      Well, as a matter of fact, any container ship immediately turns into a floating battery. Yes, and you can put on the dies, and here you have missile boats, covering the entire 200-mile zone in range
    4. +1
      12 September 2012 18: 09
      Our country is full of landfills and a couple of shabby containers in the landfill will not alert anyone. Well, just like that, there’s an option from the bulldozer. The most important thing is the element of surprise. They know that we have them, and try to guess where!
    5. Bashkaus
      +3
      12 September 2012 19: 45
      But how is it we do not need? really needed !!!
      In prominent places it is necessary to arrange inflatable models of anti-ship systems and more, for one real 5 inflatable ones, the benefit is now that they do anything inflatable, at least Topol-M, at least C300, at least an inflatable woman ((.
      And then the most interesting, Ohio comes up with 154 tomahawks and starts playing thimble, trying to hit the only real one, and missile consumption is still 5 times higher, because Destroy all the targets, even inflatable ones.
      Destroyed, well done, only the real goal there was not originally there.
      The second wave of landing ships and cruisers went, and here you go: the rusty container standing right on the seashore and converted into a dock for the unclean skiff of Uncle Vasya suddenly turns into an extremely unpleasant thing and starts to drown everyone within a radius of 300 km. And the same garbage in civilian port warehouses along the coastline of the state
      1. 0
        13 September 2012 07: 36
        And in the light of your post, the messages of world information agencies about the war 90 in Iraq come to mind - they destroy and destroy the Skuds and they will not end in any way. And Saddam is not a relative to you by chance? He also put five inflatables on one launcher. Prankster was.
    6. 0
      13 September 2012 07: 24
      And we have the taiga and the garrison with China, and the enemy will concentrate the troops in the 500 km zone from the garrison - well, you can think of it yourself later.
  5. borisst64
    +7
    12 September 2012 10: 18
    The end of the 1980s, the girl on the train: - Grandmother, why are we always passing meat wagons here in the forest (meaning refrigerators).
    - Yes, this is not meat, these are rockets in them.

    I laughed.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      +6
      12 September 2012 10: 56
      Quote: borisst64
      - Yes, this is not meat, these are rockets in them.


      Very ... smiled, +! Well, in fact ...... very competent and ... multifunctional good
      1. Auchan
        -8
        12 September 2012 15: 23
        Sergey, what is the functionality of the Club complex? Why in the army such a masquerade - the blue container somehow really stands out in the forest belt
        1. +3
          12 September 2012 18: 18
          It was specially painted for you, that you would notice, but in the series, maybe they will be rusty so that no one guesses.
        2. 0
          13 September 2012 07: 37
          Yes, Auchan, but you can paint it in purple stripes, it's about what you can paint .........
  6. NickitaDembelnulsa
    +1
    12 September 2012 11: 11
    This is a miracle of engineering !!!
  7. mga04
    +3
    12 September 2012 12: 17
    The complex is of course very interesting, but the question is - how will the target designation problem be solved? The satellite in the first video smiled, but what about something closer to reality. Well, if we are talking about working with 9M-14 missiles for targets with previously known coordinates. What about ships? They must first be detected, and with an accuracy of at least plus or minus a couple of kilometers. Own radar of civilian ships is too weak, to put powerful search engines on them means to surrender yourself with the very first turn on of the radar. Here we need a passive target reconnaissance system, or external sources of target designation, i.e., reconnaissance-strike complex, in which the reconnaissance component does not unmask the strike.
    1. Auchan
      -9
      12 September 2012 15: 26
      Quote: mga04
      but the question is - how will the task of target designation be solved?

      Normally. No way.
      Club is the usual bluff of the Russian military-industrial complex.

      How to apply this complex is still unclear. On warships, such a masquerade is useless.
      And putting the Club on civilians is pointless: what could be the use for them?
      1. 0
        14 September 2012 09: 56
        Actually, the article gives a very detailed answer on target designation: All Caliber family missiles are equipped with an inertial guidance system, and the 3M-54E and 3M-14E planned for testing have a radar in addition to it. Such a system allows the missile to relatively easily detect and attack the target: it enters the intended area of ​​the last missile using inertial navigation, and then the radar seeker is turned on, which detects the required object. It is worth noting that when navigating without the use of satellite systems, a number of special equipment is required to accurately determine the coordinates of the launcher, program rocket electronics, etc. For this purpose, the Club-K complex includes modules for combat control (MOBU) and power supply and life support (MEP). As follows from the available data, in the case of a missile system based on a 40-foot container, all modules, including a launcher with missiles, are located in a single design. At the same time, MOBU and MEF can be mounted in separate ISO containers, if necessary.
  8. sonyr
    +1
    12 September 2012 12: 48
    Super. Put the ball on our knees))))
    1. +1
      12 September 2012 17: 03
      such a container is easy to throw into the states, add vigorous BG and a local cataclysm is easily ensured, and then the Chinese go on to battle
  9. +2
    12 September 2012 13: 01
    It was not in vain that an interesting thing caused such a stir in the West ... but there was even more interesting infa about the development of complexes with the Kyrgyz Republic for cargo aircraft and even more interesting Ballistic missiles
    http://forums.airbase.ru/2011/01/t78531--ballisticheskie-rakety-vozdushnogo-zapu
    ska.html
    1. 0
      12 September 2012 17: 06
      they will allow any coastal mini-state to provide coastal defense. You look and Argentina would then be able to punish the Britons
  10. vikot
    +6
    12 September 2012 13: 38
    Do you think it's time to revive intercontinental missile launchers on trains, such as the ICBM 15P961 Molodets? Amer respected them very much ... Therefore, they insisted on their complete ban. Here, by the way, is a reference to this case: http://gled.trainshistory.ru/stati/voennye-poezda/boevoi-zheleznodorozhnyi-raket
    nyi-kompleks-mbr-15p961-molodets.html
    1. +3
      12 September 2012 14: 51
      I could not follow the link ... "Recently, the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Lieutenant General Sergei Karakaev said that the possibility of reviving combat railway missile systems (BZHRK) in the Strategic Missile Forces was being studied. They were a retaliatory weapon, but were eliminated under the terms of the START-2 Treaty in the mid-2000s According to the experts of "Argumentov.ru" the revival of these unique combat systems is no longer possible.
      “The technologies for manufacturing platforms, namely launch systems for missile systems, have been lost. Almost all enterprises that manufactured components for the platforms — the railway complexes themselves — were corporatized and then sold. Of course, new production can be launched, but this will require billions of dollars in investments. It is also unrealistic to restore the production of the RT-23 Molodets missiles, which could carry 10 warheads. They were made in Ukraine at the Pavlograd Mechanical Plant. The proposal to replace them with Yars or even Topol-M from the realm of fiction, ”a representative of the military-industrial complex familiar with the problem told Argumentam.ru.
      The same opinion is shared by the developer of Yarsov and Topoliy, the general designer of the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering Yuri Solomonov.
      “It's probably not worth reviving them. Compared to a mobile ground-based missile system, they do not have advantages in terms of survival, but in modern conditions they have very low anti-terrorist resistance (before the USSR did not even think about this). And under these conditions, this is a very expensive pleasure. Since the entire infrastructure of the BZHRK today is simply destroyed. And it is unrealistic to revive it, "Solomonov told Argumentam.ru."
    2. +2
      12 September 2012 15: 04
      It is not difficult to revive, The problem is that this can lead to such a chain reaction that before you have time to look back, there will be nothing to shoot at and there is no one. They do not like a probable enemy that the other side has something that he cannot detect with a given degree of probability and, therefore, neutralize. After all, the same modification of the Aegis and the deployment of ships with them along the maritime borders of Russia as well as the emergence of a European missile defense system are nothing more than a nervous reaction to the Topol. Since we will not be able to detect their launchers, and who, then, will not be able to shoot down their warheads in the final section of the trajectory (too nimble and cunning), then we will shoot them down at the initial section of the trajectory when all the warheads are still asleep in one bottle and the flight path of Poplar itself is simple as rake. And you can see the torch far away when you start it.
  11. biglow
    +2
    12 September 2012 15: 04
    Americans will go crazy if these complexes go on sale and spread around the world
    and the Americans should remind that all our weapons are aimed at strengthening peace, progress and friendship between peoples
    1. 0
      12 September 2012 16: 51
      If only the American shooters would creep out, and then the Russian creeps in full swing, both Ukrainian, Belarusian and many others. Money doesn’t smell, but demand is still observed. And what is funny is both spreading in the name of peace, the progress of friendship between nations. Well, peace, of course, ... eternal
  12. +1
    12 September 2012 16: 53
    "For example, the argument is given ............................................ ............................ or on the legal side of the installation of Club-K complexes on merchant ships. "

    So the missile defense system to create anti-Russia, it is legally legal. And Russia, creating the Club system, is acting legally illegal? As the saying goes: In a stranger’s eye they see a speck, but they don’t notice a log in his eye.
  13. +5
    12 September 2012 17: 07
    This complex is interesting primarily as a backup. Containers stand for themselves somewhere at storage bases, and in the event of a conflict (war) they are installed on mobilized civil trucks and ships, and forward. "Not a bad increase in pension" - as Lenya Golubkov used to say. Or am I wrong?
    PS And the blue color is true. It will be necessary to paint green or orange.
    1. Bashkaus
      0
      12 September 2012 20: 11
      Yes, even in a star-striped))) the main thing that would have shied on the head
  14. +1
    12 September 2012 17: 42
    I would still first of all pay attention to the performance characteristics of the rocket itself. And hiding missiles in sea or other containers is a simple matter, although it requires equipping the container with all kinds of electromechanics, communications and other gizmos. By the way, somewhere in the 60s, there was an idea to place naval ballistic missiles on civilian ships, but then they abandoned it, because the Americans threatened to make a similar move. There is still a difference when they hit everything where missiles can be hidden, i.e. over everything in a row, or still according to what is served to recognition as a combat system. In the second variant, the chances of the civilian population to survive are still greater. If you remember that the total bombing of English cities by the Germans began precisely after the British began to bomb not only military and industrial facilities in Germany, but also peaceful quarters, i.e. declared all-out war on Germany. Those. even Hitler, for the time being, tried to abide by the rules of the game and bomb his opponent selectively. Well, when one of the parties broke the rule, then everything started. Moreover, the result was exactly the opposite of what was expected. Instead of confusion and panic, such total bombing only raised the resilience of those who were bombed. Why am I? And to the fact that every sage is quite simple and if you hope to outwit the enemy in such a primitive way as disguising a missile system as a civilian container or carriage, do not be surprised at his "inadequate" reaction, when, instead of pinpoint strikes on military and industrial facilities, carpet bombing of everyone and everything begins ... Here is a variant of the 2nd Lebanon war, when Hezbola shot and immediately hid behind the backs of women and children, and Israel tried not to hit these women and children, it is unlikely to dance.
    1. +1
      12 September 2012 18: 31
      gregor, are you threatening us? Like if Russia is good, then it will only be bombed pointwise, like Yugoslavia. Well, if he gets upset, then excuse me will it be like in Vietnam, and napalm, and carpet bombing? "Adopted an anti-ship missile? Get back to carpet bombing of peaceful cities." Terribly adequate answer.
      In general, when I hear the phrase rules of the game and the Anglo-Saxons, the first thing that comes to mind is the PQ-17 caravan and Hiroshima. And so much more. From the extermination of the Indians to Libya and Syria. All according to the rules of honor.
      1. 0
        12 September 2012 18: 49
        Where did you find a threat in my words and what do I have to do with the Anglo-Saxons? I am just saying that every war can be waged, albeit by very conditional but still rules, and it can be waged without any rules. And the chances of civilians to survive in the second case are much less than in the first. And he brought the case when it was the Anglo-Saxons who first violated these rules, although they have long claimed that they were violated by Hitler. In the war against the USSR, Hitler also violated certain rules, such as those written like international conventions that were never written, as a result of which he rebelled against himself even those who at first met him as a liberator or at least no worse evil than the Soviets. And there were many. .Well, having restored, he received a total war, first in the occupied territory and then at home. Compare with 16 m the year where the same Germans behaved in a completely different way on the territories given by them in the Brest Peace and therefore they were not particularly touched by them either. Those. I’m not at all a pacifist, I don’t recommend crossing a certain invisible red line. But that's my personal opinion. I hope for my opinion, I have a certain right. Or am I obliged to sing only as the whole choir sings?
        1. 0
          12 September 2012 20: 18
          Sorry if offended. Unfortunately, the days of the musketeers are long gone. There are no rules in recent wars. There is a right of strong, and fear of retaliation. It was because of the latter that Hitler didn’t use massive chemical weapons. And if we didn’t have our own Mustard, be sure that we breathed in if we had them. Well, God bless that. Article about Clubs. I dare to make one more remark. Club-K is a good example of a modular weapon. By placing different types of missiles with control equipment (ship-to-ship, ship-to-land, ship-to-air) in standard containers, it’s easier to create multi-functional ships with a variable configuration of weapons. And the process of reloading is simplified. The container was removed, the container set. (That which is not on deck, but in special cells, I think is understandable.) Directly at sea from a supply vessel. This is, so to speak, in a fantasy order. But the essence, I think, is clear.
          1. 0
            12 September 2012 23: 21

            You are right, war is a fight for survival. It’s not up to the rules
          2. 0
            13 September 2012 07: 23
            What does my grudge have to do with it? The point is that all these small tricks with pseudo-masking only lower the threshold of global war, and both sides have gone through this more than once. And each time they spent a lot of effort (and money) to return this threshold to a more or less reasonable level. Those. neither for a retaliatory nor for a preemptive strike on strategic enemy targets such containers are useless, because the retaliation will inevitably take place, and they will hit not the containers, but the areas. Here and do not go to a fortuneteller. So for the sake of gardening.
            For the use of Club-type missiles in local conflicts, they, containers, are also superfluous, only they increase the cost. There is more need for mobility, compactness and versatility of the PU. He shot and washed away, and if he did not have time to escape, then the khan is for you with a probability of 99.99999%. They will bury them right with the container, if there is anything left to bury .. I mean, but besides, the money should really be spent on high technologies, unification of weapons systems, reduction of their nomenclature, etc. and not engage in pseudo-inventions. Moreover, no increase in the cost efficiency parameter occurs from simple "stuffing" missiles into standard containers. Baby is a game
            1. 0
              13 September 2012 08: 10
              There is logic in what you say ... BUT in the world the container turnover is colossal and it is simply not realistic to track everything, a container can be anywhere and such a possibility must be taken into account, it is unlikely to drown everything in a row and slap in areas due to the possible presence of such a complex .... and considering the fact that the complex uses "missiles of the" Caliber "line" this is a headache ...
              1. +2
                13 September 2012 08: 52
                I disagree. There are already and for a long time container tracking systems. And behind heavy trucks too. Those. a person sitting, say, in Paris can see on his computer where his cargo is located, sent by container to Tokyo or Moscow. The coordinate update rate is provided quite acceptable (somewhere in the range of two seconds), which is more than enough for such distances. The technologies used for such tracking range from GPS to radio frequency and optical identifiers. And all this will not be, but already is. And every year this "is" increases by dozens of new developments. Those. it will not be difficult to allocate, if necessary, a certain percentage of "unaccompanied" containers from the total number of "accompanied" and then pay closer attention to the "wild" containers. At least from a technical point of view. What will happen next with a "wild" container that has fallen under suspicion is clear. True, you can put next to it a couple of three more containers with air defense and missile defense systems, as well as 5 or 10 cars for personnel and other things. Those. the logic of development will inevitably lead to the transformation of one container into a sickly military unit on wheels or without))))). Those. I urge you to look at things soberly and not indulge in unnecessary illusions that are harmful.
                1. 0
                  13 September 2012 10: 22
                  You are all too initializing ... let's agree that tracking a container is not easy ... I can offer at least a couple of ways to make tracking very difficult ...
  15. karimbaev
    0
    12 September 2012 18: 15
    sell to us, yours will not be accepted anyway, this is enough for us
  16. 0
    12 September 2012 21: 47
    in this thread a little rummage. there is no need for such a disguise for these products. if to disguise, then something more serious. I do not know the diameter of these products. I'm talking about diameter. tomahawk-thing is old and features for modern-day feces, but it can be launched not only from launchers, but also through a torpedo tube. if the size of the club allows, then it would be necessary to do it taking into account the launch through the torpedo - the efficiency will increase decently
  17. wow
    0
    12 September 2012 21: 53
    Kill me, I don’t understand why this sweet girl is reporting all this in some "apologetic" tone. It is necessary to lie on the opinion of the "democratizers" and their "faithful" followers in our family.
  18. 0
    13 September 2012 12: 46
    This complex is the death of the NATO fleet !!!!!!

    A rocket is very difficult to counter! Especially by NATO methods, flies at a very low altitude, above the waves and constantly maneuvers !!!!!

    Plus, the rocket is non-versatile, it can be launched not only from a "container"
    1. 0
      13 September 2012 16: 03
      Difficult but possible. The primary detection, recognition and tracking of such targets can be quite successfully carried out by modern aviation or ship early warning systems on which, in addition to radar, there are other sensors (for example passive infrared), and then the target tracking is transmitted to the multi-sensor homing missile of a surface-to-air SAM or air-to-surface missile aviation interception complex (Ф18, Ф35, etc.).
      Those. the fight against low-flying anti-ship missiles is carried out according to the "falconry" method (from top to bottom), in which the Club-type anti-ship missiles are observed in the most advantageous angle for detection and tracking, and the anti-ship missile torch is well distinguished against the background of the water surface due to the temperature contrast. By the way, with such a falconry, the anti-ship missile maneuver is of little help, as does the speed. It's really hard to take such an anti-ship missile on the forehead. But right there. Not on the forehead, but on the forehead. There would be a result
  19. nik4950
    0
    13 September 2012 14: 19
    I liked the old containers more ...
  20. nik4950
    +1
    13 September 2012 14: 49
    Since 1991, by agreement with the USA, the BZHRK have been on combat duty at the base without leaving the country's railway network. According to the START-2 treaty (1993), Russia was to remove from service (and destroy) all RT-23UTTX missiles by 2003. At the time of decommissioning, Russia had 3 divisions, 4 regiments with three launchers in each, a total of 12 trains with 36 launchers. For the disposal of "rocket trains" at the Bryansk repair plant of the Strategic Missile Forces, a special "cutting" line was mounted. During 2003-2007, all trains and launchers were disposed of, except for one that was demilitarized and installed as an exhibit in the railway equipment museum at the Warsaw Station in St. Petersburg. It is a pity that we lost such a powerful and unique weapon, worthy of analogues to this day so far does not exist in the world, and the necessary infrastructure for its maintenance. Currently, the base is sold in private hands for 45 million rubles (the price of one elite apartment in Moscow), the purpose of the sale is to cut it. http://www.pomnivoinu.ru/home/reports/458/
    1. 0
      14 September 2012 02: 16
      I would shoot. He shot those who left us without this complex. There was an opinion that it was already impossible to create anything like this, probably people voicing the same opinion were not right. Once done, you can always repeat, establish cooperation and the production process, you can and I think it is necessary. Club - K may be a kind of reincarnation of the BZHRK, of course not with those characteristics, which we would like, but nonetheless. Of course, in terms of survivability, the BZHRK was a unique structure. Sorry sorry sorry
  21. +1
    13 September 2012 16: 04
    But if you place in containers c300, 400, then there will be a topic. The usual position of the c300 division can be seen even from google maps, but pushed containers on old kamaz trucks and that's it! you will find hell!
  22. 0
    13 September 2012 20: 51
    You can put rockets in garbage containers and it will also be good!
  23. 0
    15 September 2012 00: 10
    Is the topic interesting and in demand, depending on the ratio of price and needs? Although very highly specialized. It is incorrect to compare with "Well done"! In fact, a very useful thing during the mobilization period! Range 300 km. will greatly limit the possibilities!

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"