Military Review

Anti-missile project for intercepting hypersonic weapons Glide Phase Interceptor (USA)

58

Launch of the SM-3 Block IIA anti-missile from the Mk 41 installation


The US Missile Defense Agency launches development of a new defense project. In the coming years, it is planned to create a promising missile defense system capable of intercepting hypersonic warheads. The research stage of the project has already been launched, during which they will work out and select the optimal concept for further implementation.

Contracts and costs


A new competition for the development of a promising missile defense system started on November 19. On this day, the ABM Agency issued orders for the study of preliminary projects to three participants. The leading Pentagon contractors are involved in the program - Raytheon Missiles and Defense, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman Systems.

The theme of the competition is designated as the Glide Phase Interceptor. Companies-competitors will have to work out their options for such weapons and submit ready-made concepts by the end of September 2022. Then the customer will compare their proposals and choose the most successful one, which will be developed and then brought, at least, to firing tests.

For the first competitive phase of the project, it is planned to spend approx. 60 million dollars. Thus, the companies "Rateon" and "Lockheed-Martin" will receive almost 21 million dollars for the work. The project from Northrop-Grumman is estimated at less than 19 million dollars. Together with the contracts, the companies were given 8 million dollars each to start work.


Test firing SM-3

The ABM Agency reports that the conclusion of several contracts for the development of future concepts will provide known advantages and reduce possible risks. Through this approach, it is planned to attract the experience and technologies of leading weapons developers, and they will compete with each other. All this, as expected, will allow, in the shortest possible time, to find the optimal concept of the complex to combat a fundamentally new threat.

Interception on planning


The exact tactical and technical requirements for the future air defense-missile defense system have not yet been announced, but the customer revealed some general ideas and wishes. So, the promising GPI complex will be deployed on warships and will be included in the future "regional hypersonic missile defense program."

At the request of the ABM Agency, the new interceptor missile should be compatible with standard Mk 41 VLS launchers. Destroyers of the Arleigh Burke type, involved in the missile defense system, are considered as future carriers. The rocket hardware will be compatible with the Aegis information and control system of the current version of Baseline 9.

With the help of standard electronics, the carrier ship will be able, independently or by external target designation, to launch an anti-missile, after which it will reach the target and hit it. The name of the new project shows that the targets of the GPI rocket will be existing and future gliding hypersonic units, designated abroad as boost-glide. The interception will take place after the separation of the warhead from the launch vehicle, at the planning stage.


SM-6 missile leaving VLS launcher

Technical aspects


The development of promising concepts has just begun, and we should not expect the publication of any technical details in the near future. Nevertheless, the published data allow us to determine some of the features of the future GPI rocket.

Thus, the customer requires full compatibility with the Mk 41 launchers. This means that the rocket, regardless of its design, will be delivered in a cylindrical transport and launch container up to 7,2 m long and no more than 710 mm in diameter. The maximum mass of the TPK with a rocket is 4090 kg.

Modern and expected boost-glide warheads developed by the USA and other countries have a speed of at least 5-6 M, and the bulk of the flight takes place at altitudes of at least 20-22 km. This allows us to imagine what performance characteristics a rocket should have in order to intercept them. Perhaps the GPI itself will be hypersonic, which will shorten the response and interception times. To do this, you will have to use a scheme with several stages equipped with solid propellant engines.

A missile of such a scheme will carry a separate combat stage, which will ensure targeting and destruction. Search and tracking of a hypersonic target can be provided in different ways. Thermal homing heads have great prospects in this context. They are capable of effectively and reliably detecting and capturing hypersonic targets by their plasma appearance and a hot gas trail.


The destroyer USS Delbert D. Black (DDG-119) is one of the last ships of the Arleigh Burke class.

In recent decades, the main US interceptor missile projects involve the use of the so-called. kinetic interception - the target is struck by a direct hit from the combat stage. Similar technologies and developments can be used in a future GPI project. At the same time, the use of a "traditional" high-explosive fragmentation warhead cannot be ruled out, the striking elements of which are also capable of knocking out a hypersonic target and / or launching the process of its destruction by an oncoming stream.

The carriers of the GPI interceptor missiles will be the Arleigh Burke ships with the Aegis BIUS and the Mk 41 VLS launchers. It can be assumed that in the distant future, such weapons will be placed on the Aegis Ashore land complexes, which have the necessary equipment. However, they do not talk about such opportunities: either because of the lack of such plans, or because of the unwillingness to disclose them ahead of time.

Expected effects


Until September next year, the three companies will be working on their versions of the GPI concept. Then the ABM Agency will choose the most successful one and give its authors a contract for further development. For several years after that, design work, production of prototypes and the start of flight tests should be expected. How soon it will be possible to complete them and bring the interceptor missile to operation is unknown. Perhaps this will only happen at the end of the decade or later.

The reasons for launching such a project are obvious. Leading countries are already adopting hypersonic systems, and such weapons will soon change the balance of power in different contexts. Accordingly, it is necessary to develop means of protection against it. The issue of defense is especially urgent for the United States, which is still lagging behind in the development of hypersonic strike systems.


Land-based missile defense system Aegis Ashore

The future GPI missile will have to be included in the ammunition load of the Arleigh Burke destroyers and will complement other types of interceptors. As a result, the naval missile defense component will have at its disposal several types of interceptor missiles with different characteristics and missions. A shipborne missile defense system in this form will retain its advantages in the form of high mobility and the possibility of rapid deployment in the required areas. It will also be possible to expand the range of targets to be hit and introduce the most dangerous weapons into it. Finally, the overall flexibility of combat use in different conditions and situations will increase.

Weapons of the future


Thus, the United States continues to develop its missile defense and is now going to give it new capabilities that meet the challenges of the time. Potential adversaries have made significant progress in the field of hypersonic weapons and are already putting the first samples of this kind on duty - and the Pentagon has to take appropriate measures.

The next few months are allotted for preliminary study of the new Glide Phase Interceptor project on a competitive basis. Then development work will continue for several years. Whether it will be possible to complete the desired project and obtain all the required characteristics and capabilities is a big question. The tasks set are particularly complex, and so far do not give rise to excessive optimism.
Author:
Photos used:
US Department of Defense, US Naval Institute
58 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. gregor6549
    gregor6549 29 November 2021 06: 34
    +6
    I do not see any particular problems in creating a modified air defense system based on the existing Aegis air defense system, capable of intercepting medium-altitude and high-altitude hypersonic air targets.
    The technical means of detecting and tracking air targets currently used in the Aegis air defense system (radar, optoelectronic systems, etc.) are quite suitable for a certain (but not cardinal) revision of the software and for solving similar problems for hypersonic targets ...
    (I must note that the task of detecting and sustaining tracking of supersonic and subsonic low-flying maneuvering air targets is, for a number of reasons, a more difficult task, but this is not about them now)
    It will be somewhat more difficult to develop a missile defense system with the required speed and maneuverability for given weight and size restrictions and requirements for compatibility with existing launchers and CIUS ships, but these tasks are quite solvable in the near future and in the presence of, of course, the necessary funding.
    And the United States will not have any particular problems with financing this program. And their military, and the media, and ours, too, have done and are doing everything to frighten the "American peace-loving public" with a terrible Russian and Chinese hypersonic threat. A well-frightened man in the street will not object to the required spending. The method is proven and works well, and not only in the United States.
    1. Civil
      Civil 29 November 2021 07: 18
      -6
      All this is fiction, this is how it will be developed and put into service - then we'll see. Maybe by that time one enemy is completely degrading, and the other will be pumped up with economic power.
      1. svoroponov
        svoroponov 15 February 2022 21: 55
        0
        Both the rocket and the head go in plasma, the head maneuvers along a spiral trajectory. You will not intercept it, the sensors of the interceptor from under the plasma will not work, and when controlled from the interceptor due to the signal delay at such speeds, hit accuracy cannot be achieved. Only barrage detonations along the course, but even then, taking into account the strength of warheads, defeat is problematic.
    2. Zhevlonenko
      Zhevlonenko 29 November 2021 07: 38
      +4
      They generally have no problems with funding, as well as sense, taking into account that there is no air defense system with such a name, there is a BIUS, and this is not the same thing.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 29 November 2021 13: 05
        +3
        You are right and I know. But the statesmen themselves call their complex that way. And the name is not the point. And the bottom line is that their radar stations with electronic scanning of the antenna beam provide an acceptable rate of coordinates update even for hypersonic targets, which allows, in addition to the high probability of detecting such targets, to effectively track them. And while ensuring a high probability of target detection and the possibility of their stable, without disruptions, accompaniment, the interception of these targets does not pose a particular problem in technical terms. Therefore, the developers of the Russian S400 and S500 air defense systems so confidently declare that these air defense systems are capable of intercepting hypersonic targets, and the procedures for detecting and tracking such targets in both US and Russian air defense systems are very similar. There are, of course, differences in the element base and "freshness" of these air defense systems, but the differences are not fundamental.
    3. KCA
      KCA 29 November 2021 07: 48
      -3
      What speed should the interceptor have and what resistance to overloads in order to manage to maneuver behind the glider, which at irregular intervals will change direction or height by 1 degree for 1 second? After one second of a maneuver at a speed of 6M, the glider will be at least 36 meters from the position calculated a second ago, knock it down with a kinetic blow? At such a distance and speeds, even the HE charge will not help, the fragments will not catch up with the flew away target
      1. vovochka081
        vovochka081 30 November 2021 19: 47
        0
        "After one second of maneuver at 6M speed, the glider will be at least 36 meters away." In one second at this speed, it will cover 1660 meters.
    4. SkyMaXX
      SkyMaXX 29 November 2021 08: 33
      -5
      I think they will make such a system for a long time. Still, it is not easy, it requires fast electronic "brains" and anti-missile bodies that can withstand heavy loads. The most that they can do now is interceptor missiles, capable of intercepting missiles at Mach 5-7 with a higher probability. I doubt very much that over 10 Machs will be able to intercept missiles.
    5. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 29 November 2021 09: 55
      0
      As far as I understand, the interception scheme is simple .. gp cannot maneuver intensively at such speeds. The problem is that the response time to Detect-Calculate-Start-Defeat ....... is minimal. And when noticing the launch of the GP itself, there is still some kind of handicap, but, due to the maneuverability of the GP of the rocket, it is ephemeral. And the ZR has no speed advantage.
    6. lucul
      lucul 29 November 2021 10: 51
      -6
      "I do not see any particular problems in the creation of a modified air defense system based on the existing Aegis air defense system, capable of intercepting medium-altitude and high-altitude hypersonic air targets."

      And I see, and I see a bunch of problems.
      As practice shows, for a successful interception, an anti-missile must have a reserve of characteristics 2+ times higher than the characteristics of the intercepted object. That is, the anti-missile must have at least the ability to use the oncoming air for fuel combustion at speeds of 5M +, that is, it must have a hypersonic engine. This means that the missile will move in a plasma cocoon - and how did they solve the plasma cocoon problem? If nothing is visible through it? How will the missile be guided?
      In the air defense, a long time ago, they tried to shoot down supersonic aircraft / missiles with subsonic anti-aircraft missiles - it turned out not at all very well)))
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 29 November 2021 23: 33
        +4
        "will move in a plasma cocoon - and how did they solve the problem of a plasma cocoon? If nothing is visible through it? How will they aim at the rocket?" ///
        ---
        And how did Russia solve the problem of the plasma cocoon, if nothing through it?
        can not see? smile
        How does a glider in a plasma cocoon aim at a target?
        1. lucul
          lucul 30 November 2021 10: 43
          -2
          "And how did Russia solve the problem of the plasma cocoon, if nothing through it
          can not see? smile
          How does a glider in a plasma cocoon aim at a target? "

          But this is secret, and you will not find information about it in the public domain.
          But ours solved this problem, but the Americans have not yet encountered it.
      2. Momento
        Momento 1 January 2022 02: 21
        -1
        it is obvious that the anti-missile can be guided using external target designation. you just need a very small calculation error - this is usually achieved by increasing the data (that is, the number of measurements).
  2. Operator
    Operator 29 November 2021 08: 43
    -6
    Complete technodes @ beels - a hypersonic anti-missile in the atmosphere of the earth with a thermal seeker (this is during plasma formation) akin to a gray mare bully
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 29 November 2021 21: 37
      +1
      But how many minuses they have stuck to everyone ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Max PV
    Max PV 29 November 2021 09: 56
    +5
    Thermal homing heads have great prospects in this context.

    At least I doubt it. The problem is that hypersonic warheads go to the target in the stratosphere, which means that the combat stage of the interceptor will have to move at a high, obviously hypersonic speed, in sufficiently dense air, which will lead to its ionization and heating, as well as heating the surface of the rocket and the radome of the seeker. which practically excludes the passage of infrared radiation from the target to the seeker.
    It also raises doubts about the possibility of solving the problem of using the IC seeker by working on a collision course, since the target is going high enough (25-50 km), at a speed of 6-9M, and an anti-missile going at 3-4M (on which the use of the IR seeker is still possible) , you will have to start, taking into account the perspective and maneuvering of the target, at least 150-200 km before the calculated point of defeat, and taking into account the exit to the countercourse, 200-300 km. And this will lead to the fact that the area of ​​possible defeat will be much smaller than the area of ​​possible location of the target, up to its going beyond the range of the anti-missiles in terms of angle, and, consequently, to a low probability of hitting or the need to increase the number of missiles in a salvo, and possibly a salvo from several destroyers.
    1. ycuce234-san
      ycuce234-san 29 November 2021 12: 39
      +3
      "or the need to increase the number of missiles in a salvo"

      Then, we can say that a relatively simple solution was found in a very large serial production of interceptor missiles. Quite recently, by historical standards - in WWII and WWII, complex aircraft, tanks and especially cars - were produced in very large batches and only after that - in small batches, which made it very expensive. Again, there may be a return to such large series with compensation for quality by quantity and a drop in cost.
  4. prior
    prior 29 November 2021 10: 18
    0
    anti-missile to intercept hypersonic weapons is a great topic to "master the budget" with great potential to justify failure ......
  5. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 29 November 2021 11: 49
    +4
    Thermal homing heads have great prospects in this context. They are capable of effectively and reliably detecting and capturing hypersonic targets by their plasma appearance and a hot gas trail.

    If the warhead is all in plasma, then the interceptor going at the same altitude and speed will also be in the plasma, and the thermal homing heads will have a big problem.
    If the interceptor moves at a much slower speed, this is also a big problem.
  6. pytar
    pytar 29 November 2021 13: 57
    +5
    In recent decades, the main US interceptor missile projects involve the use of the so-called. kinetic interception - the target is struck by a direct hit from the combat stage ... Thermal homing heads have great prospects in this context. They are capable of effectively and reliably detecting and capturing hypersonic targets by their plasma appearance and a hot gas trail.

    Hypersonic complexes, with their advantage in speed, have large, fatal disadvantages!
    The main disadvantage, they are too visible, "shine" like a meteorite in the sky! They're easy to spot and track! Moreover, they are not maneuverable. At hypersonic speeds, the device has tremendous kinetic energy, it is not capable of any sharp turns!
    Hypersound gives little time for a response, but modern computer systems may well cope. It is debatable how expedient it is to use an anti-missile to strike a target with a direct hit! Much cheaper and more effective would be a warhead spraying a cloud of dusty mixture on the way of a hypersonic vehicle! Objects will not be able to change their trajectories, and those that crash into a denser environment will collapse, for them the impact will be like concrete! With such an application, it is possible to use cheap anti-missile missiles of the MLRS type, which create a dense curtain in the path of the hypersonic unit.
    The Americans seem to want to create a kind of universal anti-missile missile that would work against different types of threats.
    In short, there is a shield against every sword!
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 29 November 2021 21: 40
      0
      In short, there is a shield against every sword!

      Don't say gop until you've skipped over.
      Call the mask. There is no way without him. Yeah.
      I will look at you with your clouds at an altitude of 40 km ... lol
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 29 November 2021 23: 37
        +4
        Glider flies blindly in a plasma cocoon.
        And a missile defense missile is also in a plasma corona. Also blindly.
        Will the blind fall into the blind? laughing
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 29 November 2021 23: 44
          -1
          Our blind man only has to rush about sometimes.
          At an altitude of 40 km (I'm writing everything about Zircon).
          And the second blind man needs to hit the target exactly. hi
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 30 November 2021 00: 27
            +2
            "Our blind man only needs to rush about sometimes." ///
            ----
            He needs to hit the target, by the way. After all throwing in plasma.
            How to hit the target on hypersound? - a great secret ...
            But the answer is simple:
            1) braking,
            2) cooling down,
            3) aiming at low supersonic.
            4) hitting the target good
            That's all Zircon
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 30 November 2021 02: 27
              0
              This is how I love shifting the topic.
              The point is that someone wants to shoot him down.
              I claim that you will be tortured to swallow dust.
              And whether he hits the target or not - tests say that yes. hi
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 30 November 2021 12: 00
                +2
                Both sides are tortured to swallow the dust: both the attacking and the defending.
                The former will miss targets, the latter will miss gliders.
                Hypersound in the atmosphere is a problematic thing. Therefore, the flight is only in the upper layers.
                But you still need to go down at the end ...
                Or overheat.
                Or slow down and take aim.
                But here missile defense is also easier.
                No miracles
      2. pytar
        pytar 30 November 2021 09: 39
        +1
        Don't say gop until you've skipped over.

        Don't say gop until you've jumped over the "cloud" ...
        Call the mask. There is no way without him. Yeah.

        He works on this issue too ...
        I will look at you with your clouds at an altitude of 40 km ...

        40 km., The air is extremely rarefied, the apparatus rushes with a monstrous 6-8 max, and suddenly crashes into a dusty mass of particles ... Do you think it will pass easily? What kinetic, temperature and other loads on top of it will dramatically increase? Will he be able to walk about 150-200 m through such a dust cover without any problems?
      3. pytar
        pytar 10 February 2022 10: 09
        -1
        Don't say gop until you've skipped over.

        History has shown that each new weapon gives a time advantage, but in the modern world, technology allows you to quickly find the answer. And there is nothing fundamentally new in hypersound. In my personal opinion, hypersonic gladers are more dangerous than hypersonic missiles, since they can jump, changing trajectories more sharply.
        Call the mask. There is no way without him. Yeah.

        The mask is really cool! Russia also has its own Masks, the only difference is that in the West talents are encouraged, while in Russia they are suppressed. Therefore, many Russian Masks work in the West.
        I will look at you with your clouds at an altitude of 40 km ...

        Clouds of solid particles in the Stratosphere linger longer. And in this case, the desired conditional density must be maintained for only 1-2 seconds, no more. If several dusty curtains are fired one after the other, the rocket has no chance to break through.

        Explanation of the principles of a missile defense breakthrough:
        1.Speed ​​- the greater speed of the attacking missile gives less time for missile defense reactions. But modern powerful computers. systems are still fast! Due to its speed, flight altitude and radiation, a hypersonic vehicle is easily visible to radars and other means of identification along almost its entire trajectory.
        2. Stealth - cruise missiles fly at subsonic speeds, but at low altitude and have elements that reduce visibility. This reduces the detection range and, accordingly, the reaction time of missile defense.

        Essentially the same effect is obtained. And there is opposition to both systems. None of them are absolute. They have both advantages and disadvantages. Wallpaper systems have a place to be and will be in parallel in service. hi
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 10 February 2022 12: 09
          +1
          Theoretically, of course, rain in the desert can be.
          But in practice, the States are not only able to conduct tests,
          but just to persuade the rocket to unhook from the plane is not
          it turns out. And you are talking about dusty curtains for 2 seconds, 40 km. bully
          1. pytar
            pytar 10 February 2022 13: 05
            +1
            Theoretically, of course, rain in the desert can be. But in practice, the States are not only to conduct tests, but simply to persuade the rocket to unhook from the plane
            it turns out. And you are talking about dusty curtains for 2 seconds, 40 km.

            Of course, I am not a lawyer for the states, but I think it is stupid and harmful to deny their technological capabilities. bully
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 10 February 2022 13: 07
              0
              The possibilities of Russia should not be denied either. hi
              1. pytar
                pytar 10 February 2022 14: 28
                0
                The possibilities of Russia should not be denied either.

                I don't do it. hi
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 30 November 2021 01: 25
      +2
      Protection against hypersonic missiles of a relatively short range is more problematic ... At such a range, the reaction of a missile defense system with an anti-missile launch may not be enough! This is when an air "fence" made of ammunition ready for a "response" can come in handy ... even a kind of "air minefield" ...
      1. pytar
        pytar 30 November 2021 12: 55
        +1
        even a kind of "air minefield" ...

        Exactly! good

        "Stobor" of mini-ammunition floating in the air!
      2. pytar
        pytar 10 February 2022 10: 17
        0
        Protection against hypersonic missiles of a relatively short range is more problematic ... At such a range, the reaction of a missile defense system with an anti-missile launch may not be enough! This is when an air "fence" made of ammunition ready for a "response" can come in handy ... even a kind of "air minefield" ...

        I will answer you with an explanation of the principles of a missile defense breakthrough:
        1.Speed ​​- the greater speed of the attacking missile gives less time for missile defense reactions. But modern powerful computers. systems are still fast! Due to its speed, flight altitude and radiation, a hypersonic vehicle is easily visible to radars and other means of identification along almost its entire trajectory.
        2. Stealth - cruise missiles fly at subsonic speeds, but at low altitude and have elements that reduce visibility. This reduces the detection range and, accordingly, the reaction time of missile defense.

        Essentially the same effect is obtained. And there is opposition to both systems. None of them are absolute. They have both advantages and disadvantages. Wallpaper systems have a place to be and will be in parallel in service.
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 10 February 2022 11: 00
          0
          Quote: pytar
          the greater speed of the attacking missile gives less time for missile defense reactions. But modern powerful computers. systems are still fast!

          Is it worth relying too much on it? How not to "fly" like "plywood over Paris"! The reaction speed of a missile defense system depends not only on the speed of computing resources, but also on some other factors ... even on "mechanical" speed! how quickly the launcher (PU) will turn in the right direction during an inclined launch or go into the launch readiness of the anti-missile after the powder "ejector" is fired and the pulse mini-rocket engines of the anti-missile turn to the starting position during a vertical launch! difficulty in solving the mentioned problem! In addition, there is no opportunity (time) for a second "shot" in case of a miss! One of the ways to solve the problem, I see in the development of the concept of loitering ammunition or loitering ammunition carriers (platforms) ...
          1. pytar
            pytar 10 February 2022 13: 00
            0
            Is it worth relying on too much?

            It's not worth it. Everything has some level of possibility. yes

            The response speed of a missile defense system depends not only on the speed of computing resources, but also on some other factors ... even on the "mechanical" speed! (That is, on how quickly the launcher (PU) will turn in the right direction when inclined launch or go into the launch readiness of the anti-missile ...!

            Here you are right! good The overall speed of the reaction is important! It is formed from the sum of the speed of action of individual components by the system. Western electronics undoubtedly outperforms significantly Russian. On the other hand, according to Ross. vertical launch sources of systems such as S-300,400,500 has an advantage over the American Patriot system, since it does not need to turn in the direction of the target. In fact, if the target initially approaches from the direction of the launcher, the Patriot has an advantage / other factors being equal /, since the anti-missile flies along a shorter trajectory!

            The advantage of Patriot is controversial, because the coverage angle is so limited! As you can see, newer Western systems such as Aegiss and others of that class are already starting vertically, while they have powerful computing systems and radar. hi
            1. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 10 February 2022 14: 03
              0
              It's nice to have both! As an example ...: 1.S-300 and Buk; 2. "Shell" and "TOR" ...
              1. pytar
                pytar 10 February 2022 14: 30
                0
                It's nice to have both! As an example ...: 1.S-300 and Buk; 2. "Shell" and "TOR" ..

                Obviously, we need a comprehensive multivariate approach to solving the problem. Separation, separation of functions, combination of different methods! hi
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 10 February 2022 21: 02
                  +1
                  Duc, and I'm talking about it! yes
    3. Timon2155
      Timon2155 10 February 2022 00: 33
      0
      How simple it was - sprayed gas and shot down a GP rocket! Apply for a patent, otherwise the Americans are about to steal your invention)))
      1. pytar
        pytar 10 February 2022 10: 19
        +1
        Apply for a patent, otherwise the Americans are about to steal your invention)))

        I will arrange! laughing For the Americans for money selling, you as a gift! I don't take my money! yes
  7. 501Legion
    501Legion 29 November 2021 15: 36
    -3
    they won't succeed
  8. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 29 November 2021 17: 03
    +2
    Much cheaper and more effective would be a warhead spraying a cloud of dusty mixture on the way of a hypersonic vehicle!

    What will this drink be? What are the particle sizes to simulate concrete.
    If it’s possible, it’s even easier to make a sawed missile defense against ICBMs.
    1. pytar
      pytar 30 November 2021 00: 08
      0
      What kind of dust will it be? What are the particle sizes to simulate concrete.

      Want all the military secrets? Calculations? bully We are talking about a cheap and quite working solution. It is several times cheaper than an anti-missile missile operating on the principle of direct hit. In that case, hypersound turns into a disadvantage.
      If it’s possible, it’s even easier to make a sawed missile defense against ICBMs.

      One of the components of the former Reagan missile defense system represented something similar, but used microbeads. The ICBM flies along a ballistic trajectory and goes far beyond the atmosphere.
      For reasons that I do not want to apply to, a finely dispersed substance is more suitable for the stratosphere. Shooting with dust "hail" in the area of ​​the trajectory of the GZA, create an insurmountable obstacle for him.
  9. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 30 November 2021 12: 28
    -1
    Want all the military secrets? Calculations?

    I only want knowledge of physics in the framework of secondary school.
    bully We are talking about a cheap and quite working solution. It is several times cheaper than an anti-missile missile operating on the principle of direct hit. In that case, hypersound turns into a disadvantage.

    1. "Drunk" must be bigger or rather turn into a cloud of fragments, balls, cubes, rods, and so on - in other words, a well-known HE warhead. By the way, she also does not work for a direct hit, but for a miss.
    2. "Pyilinka" can hit more or less densely and harder. Snow and rain cannot stop the warhead, something denser and heavier is needed, and this means a large whole. For example, if you need to create a cloud in the form of a disk with a diameter of 1 km from 5 mm steel balls at a distance of 10 cm, you can estimate the entire need for the balls.
    3. The anti-missile must be delivered to the 20-40 km height on the way of the warhead, but unfortunately they must have a small final speed, otherwise they burn out quickly. The low speed of the balls means low speed of the interceptor missiles. Finally, if you managed to create an ideal disk from balls, it will unfortunately move - it cannot be stopped in place while waiting for the warhead.
    In other words, they went in a circle and returned to the well-known anti-missile missiles with the PF part and all their unresolved problems that led to direct hit missiles.
    1. pytar
      pytar 30 November 2021 13: 59
      +1
      I only want knowledge of physics in the framework of secondary school.

      Without them, nowhere. bully

      1. "Drunk" must be bigger or rather turn into a cloud of fragments, balls, cubes, rods, and so on - in other words, a well-known HE warhead. By the way, she also does not work for a direct hit, but for a miss.

      Similar to OF, but not quite. The fragments fly away quickly, their density is low. It is not by chance that I use the words "dusty cloud". Small particles quickly lose their acceleration and take more time to be determined in general. And how to form the proper density of the "cloud" is a question of various technical solutions. There can be balls - a mixture of explosive and particles, or something else.

      2. "Pyilinka" can hit more or less densely and harder. Snow and rain cannot stop the warhead, something denser and heavier is needed, and this means a large whole. For example, if you need to create a cloud in the form of a disk with a diameter of 1 km from 5 mm steel balls at a distance of 10 cm, you can estimate the entire need for the balls.

      Even snow or rain can damage an object moving with a few swings. Did you jump into the pool with great heights? The point is to create a cloud of higher density of matter. The hypersonic device is designed for movement of Mach 6-8 in an environment of lower density.

      3. The anti-missile must be delivered to the 20-40 km height on the way of the warhead, but unfortunately they must have a small final speed, otherwise they burn out quickly. The low speed of the balls means low speed of the interceptor missiles. Finally, if you managed to create an ideal disk from balls, it will unfortunately move - it cannot be stopped in place while waiting for the warhead.

      The question is in the calculations! Since the gypsy apparatus is very noticeable, you can quickly calculate its track and fill it with dust clouds. It is not necessary for the anti-missile missile to be super-fast, it needs to travel less distance and end up approximately at the "meeting point". There is no need for dust particles to have kinetic energy, since the enormous kinetic energy of the hyper itself, "works" for the ego of destruction.
      A volley of multiple anti-missiles, create an insurmountable wall! On the basis of a conventional MLRS, one can make such a system capable of spraying a cloud of several tons in a minute!
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 30 November 2021 14: 52
        +2
        The meaning of your proposals is clear to me and I treat them positively ...
  10. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 30 November 2021 12: 40
    -1
    For reasons that I do not want to apply to, a finely dispersed substance is more suitable for the stratosphere. Shooting with dust "hail" in the area of ​​the trajectory of the GZA, create an insurmountable obstacle for him.

    A question of reduced complexity. Why did no one grab onto these finely dispersed substances and create such missile defense systems? I can point to several obvious reasons.
    1. pytar
      pytar 30 November 2021 13: 00
      +1
      A question of reduced complexity. Why did no one grab onto these finely dispersed substances and create such missile defense systems?

      How do you know that no one is developing anything like that?
      The question idea makes sense only when the object is hit, it flies in several swings in the upper atmosphere. There was no hypersonic weapon before, there was no need to look for an answer.
      In general, there are various possibilities, there may be specks of dust with certain characteristics, there may be mini-ammunition that creates a dense shrapnel coating, etc. The meaning is illustrated by the following example:
      Due to the high speed of the arrow, it is problematic to knock it down with another arrow. Better to throw away some partitions in her path, even straw is enough! Japanese samurai riders put on their backs, which looks like an air bag. And this balloon turned out to be sufficient so that the arrow shot into the back of the rider did not reach his body. Here on VO there is a post on the question.
  11. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 30 November 2021 13: 23
    -1
    The question idea makes sense only when the object is hit, it flies in several swings in the upper atmosphere. There was no hypersonic weapon before, there was no need to look for an answer.

    There is a lot more relief from this idea in the lower layers of the atmosphere. At least in World War II, the Germans were fed to create air defenses against heavy bombers based on clouds of coal drink. They struck aerostats and other obstacles against aircraft, which is also close as an idea. Developed and protection systems for launching ICBM silos, including in the USSR.
    In space, it is also somewhat easier to use this idea against satellites.
    The most difficult and ineffective use is precisely in the upper layers of the atmosphere and against maneuvering hypersonic weapons.
    Japanese samurai riders put on their backs, which looks like an air bag.

    This is a return to passive defense - armor, shield, bunker. Specifically, the samurai had a chance that the English archers of the 14th century did not shoot at them. And against hypersonic weapons, the best passive defense is underground structures.
    1. pytar
      pytar 30 November 2021 14: 32
      0
      There is a lot more relief from this idea in the lower layers of the atmosphere.

      Colleague, the opposite is true! The idea is just right for the upper atmosphere layers! You did not understand its essence! Only in the upper layers does the apparatus move to hypersound and gain kinetic energy, sufficient for its self-destruction, if it encounters a denser medium at that moment! The idea is to use the kinetic energy of the device for its destruction! Not so that they chase after him and hit him with expensive high-precision ammunition, but that he himself "hit" and burned out from overloads! In space, where satellites fly even faster, a meeting with even a microparticle can be fatal! Can you imagine meeting a satellite with a conditionally static cloud of small particles? Nothing will be left of him!
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 30 November 2021 14: 48
      +2
      Quote: Kostadinov
      the Germans were fed to create air defense against heavy bombers based on clouds of coal drink. They hit aerostat and other obstacles against aircraft, which is also close as an idea

      Well, firstly, the Germans tried to use not "microminiature shrapnel" ... "mass", but a kind of volume-detonating ammunition! Secondly, it is not for nothing that it is said that history develops in a "spiral" ... "turns"! This is to the topic of "balloon (parachute) obstacles ... that did not work (did not work out well) in the forties of the last century, it can happen in the 21st century at a new technological level! By the way, similar projects exist now!"
      It should be added that not so long ago the possibility of "reanimating" the "Moselle" mine protection system at a new technical level was considered ...
  12. Fisherman
    Fisherman 2 December 2021 12: 36
    -2
    Cutting ... another ... that's when the existing missile defense system is brought to an efficiency of at least 25-30% (and not in ideal weather conditions, finding ships, information about the trajectory, etc., what they indulge in "tests"), then you can bother about the prospects against hypersound.
  13. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 3 December 2021 13: 59
    0
    Colleague, the opposite is true! The idea is just right for the upper atmosphere layers! You did not understand its essence! Only in the upper layers does the apparatus move to hypersound and gain kinetic energy, sufficient for its self-destruction, if it encounters a denser medium at that moment!

    I agree that the opposite is true. The point is not in the kinetic energy of the attacking device. It does not lose its great kinetic energy almost to the point of its charge.
    The bottom line is that the formation and preservation of clouds of all sorts of dense particles in a very rarefied atmosphere (20 km and above) is incomparably more difficult than in the lower layers where the atmosphere is much denser or in space above the atmosphere (if particles are brought into orbit - the speed is 8 km / s) ... Therefore, the idea is just right for the lower layers of the atmosphere or for space devices.
  14. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 3 December 2021 16: 51
    0
    This is to the topic of "balloon (parachute) obstacles ... that did not work (did not work out well) in the forties of the last century, it can happen in the 21st century at a new technological level! By the way, similar projects exist now!"

    Who said that aerostat barriers turned out badly in World War II and who claims that in the 21st century nothing can be done better? Here is just a reminder that the idea is not new and that any long-lived "clouds", "curtains" and "barriers" are much easier to make in the lower layers of the atmosphere, and even easier to land.
  15. Crabong
    Crabong 8 January 2022 19: 07
    0
    Clear Kasimbay.
  16. Andrew 18.11
    Andrew 18.11 6 February 2022 22: 48
    0
    Yeah, as usual, it all starts with a big advertising campaign. Americans are corrupted by Hollywood. There is no subject of advertising yet, but everyone already believes that there is, discussing it, showing some photos. Let's see how it ends. And when. Do they have the right technology? And they know how to cut the budget no worse than us.