Rocket "Zircon" and its carriers on the eve of adoption

100

This year, the Russian defense industry has completed work on a promising hypersonic missile system for surface ships Zirkon. Now the necessary procedures and measures are being carried out, as a result of which the complex will be officially adopted by the naval fleet. After that, the deployment processes of such weapons in order to protect maritime borders.

From unnamed sources


The start of flight design tests of the new 3M22 Zircon anti-ship missile became known in 2016 thanks to unnamed sources in the Russian press. Official reports on test launches appeared later, only in 2020. In 2021, work continued and moved to the stage of state tests. In addition, the first contract for the supply of missiles to the fleet was signed at the Army-2021 forum.



In mid-January of this year, domestic media reported that, according to the results of state tests, the Zircon complex for surface ships was recommended for adoption. At the same time, the final rocket launch as part of state tests took place only in May.

On July 18, the TASS agency revealed new information about the future adoption of the Zircon into service. From an unnamed source close to the Department of Defense, it learned that the missile would be received within the next five months, i.e. until the end of the year. The development organization, NPO Mashinostroeniya from the KTRV, is already mass-producing missiles.


Rocket exit from the launcher

On July 28, TASS clarified this information. This time, an anonymous source said that all the necessary documents had already been prepared. Thanks to this, the Zircon product can be officially adopted as early as September.

According to official data


New information about the Zircon was announced on July 31 during the Main Naval Parade in St. Petersburg. President Vladimir Putin personally revealed it. In his celebratory address to the sailors, he mentioned that deliveries of new hypersonic missile systems to the fleet will begin in the coming months.

According to the president, the frigate Admiral Gorshkov will become the first combat carrier of the Zircons. In accordance with the interests of national security, an area will be selected in which the frigate will have to carry out combat duty with new weapons. Where exactly he will solve problems, the head of state did not specify.

rocket underwater


Anti-ship missiles "Zircon" is intended for both surface ships and submarines. Work on the underwater modification of the missile system is ongoing and is already at the stage of flight tests. The first launches of new products took place at the beginning of October 2021. The Severodvinsk multi-purpose nuclear submarine, pr. 885 Yasen, fired Zircons from the surface and underwater position with an interval of several hours. Both missiles successfully hit training targets.

Shortly after these launches, an approximate schedule for further work became known. The press reported that in the next two years or more, the necessary activities would be carried out without new launches. Flight tests will be resumed only in 2024. It is planned to use the Perm nuclear submarine of the updated project 885M as a new experimental missile carrier. Depending on the progress in its construction, some schedule adjustments are possible.


In 2024-25 the Zircon underwater complex will undergo state tests, as a result of which it will be put into service. More precise plans remain unknown. Probably, they will be named in the future, at the stage of state tests or preparation for them.

Weapon carriers


The frigate Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov, the lead ship of Project 22350, became the platform for testing the Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missile. Full service in this role will begin in the coming months, possibly as early as early autumn.

It is obvious that other frigates of Project 22350 will also receive 3M22 missiles, as well as related instruments and software. At the moment, the Navy has only two such ships in its combat strength - the Admiral Gorshkov and the Admiral of the Fleet Kasatonov. Another six units are in various stages of construction, with the next two to be laid down this year.

The construction of such a series of frigates will continue until 2027-28. According to its results, the Northern, Pacific and Black Sea Fleets will have 10 ships capable of carrying hypersonic anti-ship missiles. In addition, an expansion of the 22350 project frigate series is expected in the near future. An improved project 22350M is also being developed. The implementation of these plans will further increase the missile potential of the Navy.

The first four frigates of Project 22350 receive the 3S14 universal firing system with 16 cells for various types of missiles. The following ships will receive twice as much ammunition. In the promising project 22350M, the number of cells will be increased to 64.


Rocket launch from the Severodvinsk on the surface, October 2021

It should be noted that in theory, not only frigates of project 22350 (M) can carry a new type of missile. The 3S14 firing system is used in a number of other projects, and each of its carriers will also receive the fundamental possibility of using Zircon. These can be modernized cruisers of project 1144, frigates of project 11356 or even small missile ships of project 21631 and 22800. What types of ships will receive hypersonic weapons will become known later.

Submarine Service


The first launches of the underwater modification of the 3M22 anti-ship missiles took place from the Severodvinsk combat submarine. According to news last fall, the next stage of testing will be carried out using the Perm submarine. The same ship, allegedly, in 2025 will become the first carrier of the Zircon in the combat composition of the Navy.

The nuclear submarine "Perm" should not remain the only underwater carrier of the new missile system. Accordingly, after 2025, all other ships of project 885 (M) will receive their Zircons. Three of these pennants are already in service with the Navy, and a fourth is expected to be handed over at the end of the year. Another five ships, including the Perm, are at various stages of construction.

Shooting anti-ship missiles 3M22 from the side of the "Ash" is carried out using a vertical launcher in the central part of the hull. It has 32 cells for missiles of various types. Whether it is possible to launch the Zircon through a standard 533-mm torpedo tube is unknown.

If a new missile system for submarines requires a special launcher, then only nuclear submarines pr. 885 (M) will remain its carriers in the foreseeable future. Possible compatibility with torpedo tubes, in turn, will expand the range of potential carriers.

Fleet-wide


In the coming months, at least two ships will receive the new Zircon hypersonic missile - combat frigates of Project 22350. Then the fleet will receive new ships of this type and will be able to expand their combat capabilities with hypersonic anti-ship missiles. From 2025, a similar re-equipment of submarine forces will begin. By that time, there will already be several "Ash" in the ranks, which will probably speed up the process of deploying missiles.


As a result, by the end of the current decade, the surface and submarine forces of the Russian Navy will have at least 18-19 ships and submarines with Zircons on board. Pennants with such weapons will be in the Northern, Pacific and Black Sea fleets. At the same time, there is a fundamental possibility of increasing the total number of such ships and the appearance of new anti-ship missiles on the ships of two other formations of the Navy.

Depending on current needs and tasks, carrier ships will be able to take on board one or another number of 3M22 products. At the same time, their ammunition will also include other weapons, such as Caliber or Onyx missiles. This will provide high flexibility in solving combat missions. One ship or submarine will be able to attack ground or surface targets, and for the latter it will be possible to choose the most effective means of destruction.

Waiting for the missiles


Thus, one of the main projects aimed at the development of the Russian navy is being successfully completed right now. In just a few months or even weeks, the full-fledged operation of the latest Zircon hypersonic missile system for surface ships will begin. In another three years, submarines will also receive such weapons.

Over the next years, the number of carriers of the new anti-ship missiles in service will constantly grow. All current plans will be completed by the end of the decade - and the fleet will have approx. 20 pennants with dozens of such missiles. This will give our Navy special combat and operational capabilities, and the expected benefits fully justify the necessary expectation.
100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    3 August 2022 16: 05
    Good "toy", we are waiting ...
    1. -5
      3 August 2022 17: 08
      Unless the striped ones push through their inclusion in some kind of restriction agreement. And they really want it
      1. +7
        3 August 2022 17: 52
        Now the contracts are a thing of the past.
        1. +2
          3 August 2022 22: 26
          The other day, the PLA of the People's Republic of China announced the launch of its DF 17 gipper over Taiwan, it will fly in its airspace. Everyone is charging smartphones in Toybei. The hyper will fly to the public for the second time.
  2. +7
    3 August 2022 16: 23
    each of its carriers will also receive the fundamental possibility of using Zircon
    What is a fundamental opportunity? belay
    1. +1
      3 August 2022 17: 25
      What's not clear?
      The decision on which projects will be put has not been made yet.
      1. +5
        3 August 2022 17: 39
        Got it already. Only not fundamental, but potential. hi
        1. +1
          4 August 2022 13: 57
          Well, yes, a potential one would probably be more correct ....
          Well, you just want to calibrate articles to the word, this is from the last century laughing
      2. +2
        3 August 2022 23: 57
        UKKS - standard. Where what kind of ammunition is loaded - that one will stand. To set calibers, onyxes or zircon - they will decide on the task at hand. What for RTOs, what for frigates or corvettes.
        1. +2
          4 August 2022 01: 41
          In theory, yes. In practice, there is also an OMS, a BIUS, then how and on what to direct .... God forbid, if all this is there and if the brains are easily rewritten, which I personally, knowing our abilities in electronics, I doubt
  3. -4
    3 August 2022 16: 52
    usually on the Army forum, they announced the laying of new ships - and there is silence at Army-2022
    now all bookmarks will be only on a single day of bookmarking ships, like July 16
    1. +1
      4 August 2022 04: 41
      All slipways are already occupied by ships under construction. It’s just that it’s not yet possible to hand over ships. Frigates 22350.1, ordered a year+ ago, cannot be laid down, because the hulls are not lowered from the stocks. For engines - NO.
      Therefore, there are no bookmarks in the new boathouse in St. Petersburg.
      Six ships of the same type on stocks without power plants, that's a lot.
      I had hope for Nikolaev and his "Zarya-Mashproekt", but it's already not destiny.
      "Karakurts" are also waiting with empty engine cases.
      And the corvettes receive their power plants ... very slowly.
      Driving Curse?
      Yes .
  4. 0
    3 August 2022 16: 54
    The West will not calm down until we truly kill one of them.
  5. -1
    3 August 2022 16: 54
    Small Dagger for TA.
  6. -6
    3 August 2022 17: 02
    Zircon can drown the "property of mankind" - amsky 10 av to 100000 vi.
    It must be banned.
    Heritage "UNESCO IN DANGER".
    The world will lose such promising museums.
    Only reparations by aircraft carriers
  7. +13
    3 August 2022 17: 47
    Zircon is great. In the 80s of the last century, the Soviet Navy was armed with anti-ship missiles Bazalt and Granite, which were practically impossible to intercept with the weapons at the disposal of the US Navy. In the high-altitude section, from the moment the anti-ship missiles were discovered and until the moment it went to low altitude, the possibility of interception existed more theoretically than practically, but at low altitude ... The standards for low-altitude practically did not work, Spy saw low-altitude targets poorly, Seasparrow was ineffective, and 20 -mm volcano-phalanx were our rockets like pellets to an elephant. That is, the phalanx could hit the rocket, but at a distance at which, by inertia and without control, it would still fly to the target.
    In general, from the beginning of the 80s to the beginning of the 2000s, when the very effective ESSM was put into service, the US Navy did not have firepower against Kostya Saprykin. And all hope was for decoys, electronic warfare and the destruction of carriers before reaching the launch lines.
    But in the early 2000s, the Americans learned how to intercept supersonic low-flying aircraft, and our advantage in this matter came to an end. And the Zircon returns it - although it flies at high altitude, the flight time leaves almost no chance of intercepting even a single missile, and even a salvo of such missiles ... "What a pain! What a pain! Argentina-Jamaica - five-zero !" laughing
    1. -7
      4 August 2022 01: 39
      Alas, I'm afraid there are no fundamental differences, so after flashing the brains of Aegis, interception of such missiles is also possible.
      Then everything is decided by the mass nature of the volley and laying in the minimum time interval of the entire crowd of missiles when approaching ....
      And with carriers so far .... not a lot.
      1. +1
        4 August 2022 22: 55
        Quote: Devil13
        Alas, I'm afraid there are no fundamental differences, so after flashing the brains of Aegis, interception of such missiles is also possible.

        At what height?
        1. 0
          9 August 2022 14: 49
          Company's secret. But let me remind you that the Sm-family covers almost all heights up to the satellites, and soon everything will be blocked. And unlike us, they train, incl. and on mosquito models.
          1. +1
            9 August 2022 17: 53
            I didn't just ask you my question. bully

            Quote: Devil13
            The sm-family covers almost all altitudes up to satellites

            This is not true. After 30+ km there are nuances. Yes
            1. 0
              12 August 2022 18: 17
              There is a "window", of course, but you need to understand that when approaching the target, you still have to go through this height, and there will be a zone where they will still shoot a little, not at the "funnel" of the dead zone of the radar, but dive ....
              Although it would be an interesting decision, it would take the amers about five years to cover it up.
              1. 0
                12 August 2022 18: 30
                Zircon is just diving. Seconds.
                Do you think they can catch it? bully
                1. 0
                  17 August 2022 02: 42
                  If it lights up at 100 km - yes, they will have time.
                  Let me remind you that he somehow needs to capture the target without violating the laws of physics.
                  You can have time, especially considering that Aegis works for them.
                  1. 0
                    17 August 2022 13: 29
                    Quote: Devil13
                    If it lights up at 100 km

                    Why would he light up? It's in plasma. wink
                    1. 0
                      19 August 2022 20: 39
                      Of course)
                    2. -2
                      9 September 2022 22: 42
                      Plasma means that he sees nothing, and everyone sees him, at all frequencies.
          2. 0
            9 September 2022 22: 45
            The question is that an object maneuvering in hypersound is not physically interceptable. The anti-missile needs to fly with a lead, but at high target speeds, any change in course will force the anti-missile to radically change direction. Energetically impossible to hit.
    2. +3
      4 August 2022 04: 49
      Yes, the rocket was a success. Both range and speed. There are two questions left that can spoil this joy - carriers (their presence / quality / quantity) and target designation. A sufficiently developed satellite constellation is needed and something to be done with our military shipbuilding.
      1. +5
        4 August 2022 08: 54
        Quote: bayard
        There are two questions left that can spoil this joy - carriers (their presence / quality / quantity) and target designation.

        This is without any doubt. But still, the appearance of such a missile in our country falls into the category of a Great Victory for me: nevertheless, this is one of the necessary prerequisites for the revival of a strong fleet. Not the only one, not self-sufficient, but still.
        1. 0
          4 August 2022 16: 57
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          the appearance of such a missile in our country for me falls into the category of a Great Victory: nevertheless, this is one of the necessary prerequisites for the revival of a strong fleet.

          Moreover, this is a very good reason to build such a fleet. And a good incentive to launch the Borey-K SSGN into the series, which can carry 80 such Zircons. (not counting some other amount of KR from the TA of the "Caliber" family). The cost of the serial "Borea-A" today is about 450 million dollars. (the ruble is staggering, so it’s better in them), and this is the cost ... of a corvette 20385. So to get a submarine cruiser with an arsenal of the Kyrgyz Republic equal to the arsenal of the cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov", but at the price of a corvette, and even an underwater one, it's very ... very tempting.
          But at the moment I am expecting sea trials ... successful sea trials of the Admiral Golovko frigate. When and if this finally happens, it will be possible to run the "mad printer" at all suitable shipyards building both 22350.1 and 22350M. For if you get a gearbox for a diesel-gas turbine power plant, then it will definitely not be more difficult to marry two turbines on one gearbox.
          feel And if I could still get hold of medium-speed diesel engines with a capacity of 8000 l / s, from the same China ... in the light of the circumstances newly discovered in Taiwan, then I won’t see any problems for the normal construction of the fleet at all.
          hi
          1. 0
            4 August 2022 22: 57
            Quote: bayard
            "Borey-K", which can carry 80 such "Zircons".

            Can you estimate the price of the issue?
            There will not be so many Zircons for 1 nuclear submarine.
            1. +2
              4 August 2022 23: 33
              Quote: Alex777
              Can you estimate the price of the issue?

              Borey-K itself will cost about the same as Borey-A. Well, maybe the first SSGNs are 5-10% more expensive. But I won’t tell you the price of Zircon. Definitely an expensive toy, but with a good serialization it will become cheaper.
              And you need a lot of them - both for the Navy, and for the DBK, and for ground-based missile systems (perhaps the Supreme Command spoke about this).
              Quote: Alex777
              There will not be so many Zircons for 1 nuclear submarine.

              This goes without saying, but the composition of weapons / ammo for such SSGNs will depend on the specific tasks. But if you take into account that "Caliber" (without the letter "M"), "Borey-K" will include 112 pieces. , then the strike potential of such an SSGN looks even more attractive.
              After all, more than 10 missiles for the Iskanders were riveted?
              So why not rivet "Zircons" a thousand or two?
              And it will not be enough, then add more?
              The missile is good, its effectiveness is a multiple of any other anti-ship missiles or CRBDs, it can carry nuclear warheads, it can be based both on ships (surface / underwater), DBK, GRK.
              Quote: Alex777
              for 1 nuclear submarine, will not.

              And if the task is to reach the line of attack and destroy the consolidated AUG of 2-4 ABs and the escort ships due to them with one non-nuclear strike? Based on the calculation - two Zircons (for reinsurance and guarantees) per cruiser / destroyer, and 4 per AB?
              In this case, it may just be the full BC "Zircons" that will come in handy.
              And in standard equipment in the BC, 20 "Zircons" are enough, the rest are "Caliber" and "Caliber-M".
              1. +1
                5 August 2022 12: 12
                Quote: bayard
                And if the task is to reach the line of attack and destroy the consolidated AUG of 2-4 ABs and the escort ships due to them with one non-nuclear strike?

                The destruction of 2-4 AUGs is, without options, TMV with strategic nuclear weapons.
                Therefore, the probability of the task of a non-nuclear strike, PMSM, tends to zero. hi
                1. +2
                  5 August 2022 14: 32
                  Quote: Alex777
                  The destruction of 2-4 AUGs is, without options, TMV with strategic nuclear weapons.

                  So I'm hypothetical.
                  In the modern Russian Federation, it was believed that having strategic nuclear forces, a large land war with non-nuclear means was excluded for us. They say NATO will only be nuclear, and the rest will not dare.
                  As "under Nicholas-2" (he also believed that there would be no war and the Japanese would not dare). And it won as it happened - we are at war.
                  Although the war is not called war.
                  Yes, and AUGs are different. Japan has a huge and very modern fleet. There are aircraft carriers and territorial claims against us. They are not in NATO and not a nuclear power.
                  And if he dares?
                  How in 1904?
                  While we are bogged down in the European mess?
                  And how can we do without "Borya-K"? bully
                  P-time - and there is no that Japanese fleet. Yes
                  Without nuclear weapons. Yes
                  With one blow. Yes
                  And the conflict is over. Yes
                  And you don’t have to start up with NATO - after all, everything is already over ... feel
                  Submarine cruisers at the cost of a corvette and the striking power of the modernized Nakhimov - this can become such an argument ... And quickly, using existing technologies, without crap with gas turbines and travel gears. This is a very good tool for fast and high-quality strengthening of the Fleet.
                  1. +1
                    5 August 2022 15: 03
                    Quote: bayard
                    Submarine cruisers at the cost of a corvette and the strike power of the modernized Nakhimov - this can be such an argument ...

                    The deployment of the submarine should be covered by surface ships and aircraft. Then there will be a sense. hi
                    1. +1
                      5 August 2022 20: 30
                      Quote: Alex777
                      The deployment of the submarine should be covered by surface ships and aircraft.

                      By itself . At the Pacific Fleet, even a pair of corvettes and a BOD / frigate may be enough to form such a KUG. And of course aviation.
                      And the surface fleet needs to be built all the way ... they just upset me with the lack of news about the successful sea trials of the Golovko. Six frigates on stocks and in completion without engines (operational), this is already the edge. The new boathouse in St. Petersburg is empty, the shipyards are idle or are engaged in sad nonsense with corvettes and RTOs, for which power plants also go 1-1,5 per year ...
                      For such successes and achievements, under the Father of Nations, they put up against the wall. With confiscation and defeat in the rights of relatives ... And how it turns out it was fair.

                      In the light of the events in Formosa, the Chinese announced the deepening of cooperation with the Russian Federation. what It can be seen that something began to reach, as to the Vigilant Falcon from a joke. It would be nice, under such an impulse, to urgently resolve the issue of the purchase and production in the Russian Federation for a full cycle of medium-speed marine engines, those that are on their frigates. With the transfer of the complete technical process and the supply of all equipment. And put a thick bolt on a French license. You can do this illegally, non-publicly, without permission, as the Chinese love.
                      1. +1
                        5 August 2022 22: 05
                        Quote: bayard
                        Six frigates on stocks and in completion without engines (operational), this is already the edge.

                        I don't understand why not invest in the expansion of Rybinsk. At least now. After the adoption of the new Naval Doctrine.
                        It no longer makes sense for us to look back at the Anglo-Saxons and "cast a shadow on the wattle fence".

                        Quote: bayard
                        In light of the events in Formosa, the Chinese announced deepening cooperation with the Russian Federation.

                        These Trojans expand today, shrink tomorrow. You can't count on them for anything serious. At least not yet proven otherwise. hi
                      2. +1
                        6 August 2022 02: 43
                        Quote: Alex777
                        I don't understand why not invest in the expansion of Rybinsk. At least now. After the adoption of the new Naval Doctrine.

                        They seem to have invested a lot there, and everything seems to work out with the turbines. And they invested a lot in Zvezda-Reductor - they bought a sufficient number of gear-cutting machines to provide for the entire military and civilian shipbuilding programs, BUT. The production of a travel gearbox is not only foundry, metalworking, but also (attention!) thermal (hardening) processing of manufactured shafts and gears ... But the latter does not seem to work with us. Therefore, most likely, the first power plant for "Golovko" was ditched, and the one that is installed in the hull now ... AVAILABLE (!!!) still does not allow the frigate to be put on the running gear.
                        The gearbox is often a much more complex thing than the actual engine. And that is why in February-March I was so looking forward to the liberation from the Nazis of the Russian city of Nikolaev - the city of Russian shipbuilders. For there is a pearl (without any exaggeration) of the world's marine engine building.
                        But instead of taking this particular city in the first dash, for which literally one more fresh division was not enough to master it ..... We had a chance, with a little more effort, to solve the problem of our own military shipbuilding once and for all. But this did not happen.
                        No import substitution has happened for the 8 years allotted to us by history on our own territory and capacities ... Now I'm afraid that time has been lost. There are no more competent engineers or technologists left. But they didn’t prepare new ones ... and didn’t even give birth.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        After the adoption of the new Naval Doctrine.
                        It no longer makes sense for us to look back at the Anglo-Saxons and "cast a shadow on the wattle fence".

                        It makes no sense, but the authorities are still the same - a pure and uncomplicated Anglo-Saxon lobby. Look at what's happening in the financial sector.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        These Trojans expand today, shrink tomorrow. You can't count on them for anything serious. At least not yet proven otherwise.

                        With the Chinese, you need to behave in accordance with their habits. Have they announced deepening, rallying, etc.? Contracts for the supply of what we critically need right now right under our noses. MOST FAVORITE MODE with the obligation not to adhere to any sanctions imposed by a third party against any of the parties to a bilateral agreement (MFN agreement).
                        Did you announce your intention?
                        Need support?
                        Signing an agreement on the RNB!
                        They'll start fiddling... request ... it means they're lying.
                      3. 0
                        6 August 2022 10: 09
                        Quote: bayard
                        And that is why in February-March I was so looking forward to the liberation from the Nazis of the Russian city of Nikolaev - the city of Russian shipbuilders. For there is a pearl (without any exaggeration) of the world's marine engine building.
                        But instead of taking this particular city in the first dash, for which literally one more fresh division was not enough to master it ..... We had a chance, with a little more effort, to solve the problem of our own military shipbuilding once and for all. But this did not happen.

                        1. Snatch is good. And then, when you took it, you also need to protect it.
                        2. You yourself have enough examples of how the Armed Forces of Ukraine destroyed cities that have long been taken and their enterprises.
                        3. Nikolaev will be ours anyway. But I don't expect quick results.
                        Question: Does heat treatment only exist in gearboxes? I don't think.
                        There are a lot of examples when science in Russia is given a task, and it solves it. Something is wrong with this story...

                        Quote: bayard
                        With the Chinese, you need to behave in accordance with their habits.

                        Today I received an interesting message:
                        It is reported that China is creating an infrastructure of Chinese companies (trading, banking, insurance, etc.) that will work exclusively with sanctioned foreign companies, primarily from Russia
                      4. 0
                        6 August 2022 14: 38
                        Quote: Alex777
                        1. Snatch is good. And then, when you took it, you also need to protect it.

                        If it were possible to capture / block on the move, in the early days on the factor of surprise, then they would have defended. The whole question is in a sufficient outfit of forces. And we did not have enough strength in almost all areas. And here the question is for the leadership and planners - an operation of this magnitude is being prepared ahead of time, choosing priorities and preparing troops.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        2. You yourself have enough examples of how the Armed Forces of Ukraine destroyed cities that have long been taken and their enterprises.

                        Well, Kherson was covered up. They would take Nikolaev, the main air defense systems would be there, and Kherson in the rear.
                        If there were at least 2 times more forces than they equipped (about 150 thousand together with the LDNR corps), the Armed Forces of Ukraine would fall down. And everything that the drivers did with their hands was a game of giveaway for the sake of a protracted conflict.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        3. Nikolaev will be ours anyway. But I don't expect quick results.

                        Now I don't expect anything fast.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        Question: Does heat treatment only exist in gearboxes? I don't think.

                        But it is in gearboxes that it is critically important.
                        Quote: Alex777
                        There are a lot of examples when science in Russia is given a task, and it solves it. Something is wrong with this story...

                        The problem here is that even under the USSR, hardening furnaces were usually purchased abroad. And the equipment of this (corresponding) level is produced, as it were, by more than one or two enterprises in the world. The USSR mined for "Zarya-Mashproekt" in leftist ways (there were also sanctions) through chains of front companies. It was about the same with vacation stoves (I am more familiar with them). But it was under the Soviet Union, with our Science and Industry, unlike the current one. And I heard about the problems with hardening on the "Star-Reducer". The problem is both with the presence of furnaces, so (several pieces were found, but a multiple / order of magnitude more is needed), and with the technical process itself. In a gas turbine gearbox, the load on gears and shafts is much higher than in a steam turbine or a diesel engine. And sizes. Only a few factories around the world are capable of producing this. The Chinese could not adopt the entire technical process, and therefore (including) they switched to electric transmission (electric propulsion).
                        Quote: Alex777
                        It is reported that China is creating an infrastructure of Chinese companies (trading, banking, insurance, etc.) that will work exclusively with sanctioned foreign companies, primarily from Russia

                        ... Infrastructure for working with "lepers"?
                        They are trying to get their main companies out of retaliatory sanctions. Let's see what comes out of this.
                  2. 0
                    12 August 2022 18: 19
                    I'm very interested, where did you find the cost of 955A at 20 billion rubles?
                    With the cost of an ash tree of 60 billion, if my memory serves me right
                    1. +1
                      12 August 2022 21: 00
                      Quote: Devil13
                      I'm very interested, where did you find the cost of 955A at 20 billion rubles?

                      I have never given the cost of "Borea" in rubles. The cost of the head "Borea" (without the letter "A") amounted to 550 million dollars. This is the price I relied on. More recently, with a link to the public procurement website, they gave me the cost of current purchases of Borea-A - about 450 million dollars. (438 million, if memory has not changed). Here are my numbers and conclusions.
                      And "Ash" .... there are some interests of very "correct" people with a check to which even the Investigative Committee and the Prosecutor's Office cannot approach. According to the description of those involved there, a military operation must be carried out for such a comprehensive financial audit. So the price is what it is - 1 billion dollars +.
                      "Ash" really has a more developed HAK with side canvases, with all-round visibility and hydroacoustic lighting (taking into account the release of BUGAS). But the rest of the arithmetic speaks for itself - "Borey-A" is 2,5 times cheaper than "Ash-M", and This not normal .
                      "Borey-K" can be equipped with side panels of the HAK like the "Ash-M", and let it cost not 450 million, but 550 million dollars. , it will still be 2 times cheaper than "Ash" and 2,5 times more powerful in a salvo of percussion missiles than "Ash-M" (40 "Caliber" from "Ash" against 112 "Caliber" from "Borea- K", not to mention the fact that Yasen has 30 torpedo ammo units, and Borey has 40 units, and another 12 - 20 KR can be launched from the TA - PLUR "Answer", anti-ship missile "Caliber" with supersonic step, KRBD "Caliber").
                      Read on and draw your own conclusions.
                      Why "Borey" has fallen in price so much?
                      Serialization. request
                      Why do I quote and consider the cost of our submarines in US dollars?
                      Due to the instability of the domestic currency. As a result, the price tag in rubles is constantly growing, or fluctuating with a poorly predictable value at the moment.
                      And in dollars, the price tag remains approximately unchanged.
                      ... By the way, the decrease in the cost of "Borea-A" in dollars could be caused not only by serial production, but also by the strengthening of the ruble this year.
                      Like this.
                      1. 0
                        17 August 2022 02: 48
                        I assume that the information on the cost is still not true.
                        Borey-A have a side canvas.
                        Nevertheless, I consider the appearance of such underwater barges unlikely, although it is a pity.
                        With the alteration of bius, shpu, and everything else, it will come out no less than the cost of ash.
                        Well, ash also comes in a series with no less number.
                      2. +2
                        3 September 2022 04: 28
                        Quote: Devil13
                        I assume that the information on the cost is still not true.

                        I was given information from the public procurement website, these are official figures. The first "Boreas" (without "A") cost as much as the frigate "Gorshkov". The latter with the letter "A" stand like a corvette 20385.
                        Quote: Devil13
                        Borey-A have a side canvas.

                        This pleases and such an option for SSGN will be very useful.
                        Quote: Devil13
                        Nevertheless, I consider the appearance of such underwater barges unlikely, although it is a pity.

                        There were intentions to lay down a series of such (at least 4 - 6 pieces) since 2015. But there were delays with the deliveries of Boreev-A, Yaseney-M, and then they decided to extend the Boreev-A series to 10, and then up to 12 pcs. (against the original 8 pcs.). But recently there was information that the idea of ​​the Boreev-K series is still relevant and is in the plans.
                        Quote: Devil13
                        With the alteration of bius, shpu, and everything else, it will come out no less than the cost of ash.

                        With alteration of only the CIUS and "drum" tabs in the silos (launching cups)?
                        For the head price, it can and will be up to 150% of Borea-A, but even this will give a price tag of a maximum of 700 million dollars. And for the entire series, the rise in price will be 15-20 percent for each SSGN, no more. Which is definitely very good. Do not forget that in everything else, except for the CICS and inserts in the launch cups, it will be the same Borey-A. Which is serial and has been produced for many years, in a large series, with well-established cooperation and technical process. The main thing is to start laying the "Boreev-K" immediately after the construction sites are vacated from the last "Boreev-A" being launched.
                        Quote: Devil13
                        Well, ash also comes in a series with no less number.

                        "Ash-M" falls into the category of "particularly agreed price tag" and is unlikely to become cheaper. And if it gets cheaper, then up to a price of 1 billion dollars. instead of $1 billion+.
                        Quote: Devil13
                        Well, ash also comes in a series with no less number.

                        Actually, smaller. At least (and so be it) for the present period. Talk of building "more than planned 7 units." were and I think that in addition to the previous plans they will be laid 2-3 more pieces. - the stocks should not stand idle until the project and cooperation for the MAPL of the new project is ready.
                2. 0
                  7 September 2022 00: 57
                  What kind of group of as many as 4 aircraft carriers ??
    3. The comment was deleted.
  8. -2
    3 August 2022 18: 09
    All the same, I would like our nuclear submarines to become carriers of zircons in the first place. After all, they have more opportunities than surface ships to imperceptibly approach 1000 km to enemy aircraft carrier groups. Why is it impossible, as a caliber, to launch zircon through torpedo tubes? This would allow them to equip the existing nuclear submarines 949 and other projects. If the zircon was successfully launched from the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine, pr. Why the decision of this most important strategic issue is impermissibly postponed until 885.
    1. -1
      3 August 2022 18: 29
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      All the same, I would like our nuclear submarines to become carriers of zircons in the first place.

      I don't think this will ever happen. In the sense that it does not happen that a missile is designed for both submarines and NK, but nuclear submarines received a missile faster than surface ships.
      Simply put, development always goes from simple to complex, and testing a rocket on a surface ship is always easier than on an underwater one. You yourself understand, either shoot a frigate with a rocket, or a submarine from a depth.
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      After all, they have more opportunities than surface ships to imperceptibly approach 1000 km to enemy aircraft carrier groups.

      Alas, our intelligence is not at all so hot, so the chances of defeating the AUS from 1000 km are near zero.
      But now even our single zircon frigate, going to the BS near the AUG, will pose a mortal threat.
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      Why is it impossible, as a caliber, to launch zircon through torpedo tubes?

      obviously too thick for a 533mm torpedo tube. And to narrow down - there will be less fuel, less explosives, less range ...
      1. 0
        3 August 2022 19: 42
        too thick for a 533 mm torpedo tube.

        Is the 650 mm torpedo caliber already a thing of the past?
        1. +2
          3 August 2022 20: 51
          Quote: Aviator_
          Is the 650 mm torpedo caliber already a thing of the past?

          Alas, yes.
      2. 0
        4 August 2022 01: 24
        I think the surface ships, in addition, have undoubtedly more understandable guidance and tracking of anti-ship missiles, which at this stage greatly speeds up the adoption. As for our intelligence, I completely agree with you ... But the "thick" (650 mm) torpedo tubes still serve on third-generation nuclear-powered ships in sufficient quantities. The point is most likely not in the diameter and probably not even in the BIUS, which are now being updated.
      3. 0
        4 August 2022 14: 57
        There are also 650 mm. TA. If calibers are launched from Warsaw women, and I haven’t heard anything about the development of a new TPK, so there seems to be nothing impossible.
        1. 0
          17 August 2022 02: 50
          The calibers are not made by NPO Engineering. You can compare the sizes of the caliber and onyx, there is data on the network.
      4. 0
        4 August 2022 18: 12
        Alas, our intelligence is not at all so hot, so the chances of defeating the AUS from 1000 km are near zero.
        But now even our single zircon frigate, going to the BS near the AUG, will pose a mortal threat.

        There will always be a confrontation between a shield and a sword, and if air-based hypersonic appears, or air defense capable of shooting down zircon, how then will the frigate get to the AUS?
        1. +1
          4 August 2022 21: 34
          Quote from Horfrost
          There will always be a confrontation between a shield and a sword, and if air-based hypersonic appears, or air defense capable of shooting down zircon, how then will the frigate get to the AUS?

          We are talking about military services, this is in peacetime or during a period of tension, that is, you can get close without deadly problems and control the actions of the enemy. Approximately this is what our 5OPESK was doing in the Mediterranean.
          And air defense will appear ... of course, it will. But last time it took the Americans about 20 years to make this appearance. And during the recommended 20 years we had the indicated advantage. Yes, not absolute. Yes, not forever. Yes, which in itself does not ensure victory in a naval war. But still - significant, and we had it.
          Is it bad?
          1. 0
            4 August 2022 23: 56
            Of course not, it's actually good! I am for the development of those areas of the domestic military-industrial complex in which we succeed. Then it’s not a bad idea for a frigate to overwhelm the S-500 paired with an AWACS helicopter, or an unmanned version of target designations. So that aviation from an aircraft carrier is not afraid, scare away. And direct your hypersound from a safe distance. Well, there are 20 frigates themselves.
    2. 0
      3 August 2022 19: 17
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      Why is it impossible, as a caliber, to launch zircon through torpedo tubes?

      In fact, the article says the following about this: "It is not known whether the launch of the Zircon is possible through a standard 533-mm torpedo tube." Where did you get the idea that "no"?
      1. +2
        3 August 2022 20: 56
        Quote: Hagen
        In fact, the article says the following about this: "It is not known whether the launch of the Zircon is possible through a standard 533-mm torpedo tube."

        But this is highly doubtful. It's just that the manufacture of hypersonic anti-ship missiles is a technical feat in itself, and diameter restrictions will greatly reduce the performance characteristics of the missile. And for what? A normal missile carrier will still not work out of a torpedo submarine, this is so for them, an additional function, no more, but the strike capabilities of real SSGNs and surface ships will be reduced
        1. +1
          4 August 2022 05: 35
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          It's just that the manufacture of hypersonic anti-ship missiles is a technical feat in itself, and diameter restrictions will greatly reduce the performance characteristics of the missile. And for what?

          In general, I do not argue. It can't be like that. I simply stated the fact of doubt in the article and the statement of the opponent. From which the question arose - who is right? And the fact that hypersound is a feat of our scientists and production workers, I agree with you and do not dispute it in any way. hi
          1. +1
            4 August 2022 08: 51
            Quote: Hagen
            In general, I do not argue.

            So I'm not arguing at all - I'm just expressing my thoughts. In my opinion, we are just talking, and I personally don’t have the slightest reason to consider this conversation not only as a dispute, but at least as a discussion hi
    3. +1
      4 August 2022 04: 52
      Quote: wladimirjankov
      Why is it impossible, as a caliber, to launch zircon through torpedo tubes?

      The diameter of the "Zircon" hull will not allow it to be pushed even into the large / thick TA of our submarines. Only UKKS and VPU "Ash".
    4. 0
      12 August 2022 18: 22
      Because you cannot imagine how stupid the defense industry works in some places, and what the price of a number of decisions is.
      And also, because NPO mechanical engineering is a developer of zircon, and has its own characteristics of TK.
      Within the 533mm diameter, it is unrealistic to achieve such performance characteristics.
  9. -2
    3 August 2022 19: 13
    I would like to see a test with Zircon hitting a moving target. This is for starters. And then another with a hit on a moving target, scattering corner reflectors and releasing "Nulks" in all directions.
    1. +1
      3 August 2022 20: 25
      This will never be shown! Enemy specialists in such a video can see too much)
      1. -4
        3 August 2022 20: 28
        Quote: Ponchik78
        Enemy specialists in such a video can see too much

        For example, that it was not possible to hit the target?
        1. 0
          3 August 2022 20: 37
          For example, how to reflect a rocket.
          1. -2
            3 August 2022 20: 54
            Quote: Nickelium
            For example, how to reflect a rocket.

            Congenial. And why then showed the hit of the "Dagger" in Kyiv? After all, the enemy experts saw how you can reflect the "Daggers"?
            1. +1
              4 August 2022 14: 27
              Apparently they were confident in the Dagger. Congenial or not?
              1. -2
                4 August 2022 14: 29
                Quote: Nickelium
                Apparently they were confident in the Dagger. Congenial or not?

                Of course. Now enemy specialists know how to repel it.
                1. 0
                  4 August 2022 14: 35
                  How? Congeniality?
                  1. -2
                    4 August 2022 14: 47
                    Quote: Nickelium
                    How? Congeniality?

                    I am not an enemy specialist. I do not have such talents - to see a missile hit and understand how it can be reflected.
                    1. 0
                      4 August 2022 15: 42
                      Ahah, the enemy specialist also has no talent. But the photographer or director - quite.
                      1. 0
                        4 August 2022 15: 49
                        Quote: Nickelium
                        Ahah, the enemy specialist also has no talent. But the photographer or director - quite.

                        Actresses are also gifted with talents.
                      2. 0
                        4 August 2022 17: 21
                        Especially Lucy Karamelka.
                      3. 0
                        4 August 2022 17: 46
                        Quote: Nickelium
                        Especially Lucy Karamelka.

                        The first time I've heard. But I take your word for it.
                      4. 0
                        4 August 2022 20: 03
                        Type in a request on YouTube. A real masterpiece from the great master awaits us.
    2. +5
      3 August 2022 21: 00
      Please show a similar LRASM test video. Well, or RBS-15. Maybe Harpoon? Well, at least some thread of anti-ship missiles, but with the obligatory fulfillment of the conditions you voiced
      1. -3
        3 August 2022 21: 08
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Please show a similar LRASM test video. Well, or RBS-15. Maybe Harpoon? Well, at least some thread of anti-ship missiles, but with the obligatory fulfillment of the conditions you voiced

        I asked first.
        1. +4
          3 August 2022 21: 52
          Sorry, but that's not how it works. If you question the effectiveness of Zircon on the basis of the lack of a video that meets your standards, then be consistent and declare all RCCs for which there is no such video as fake and incapacitated.
          1. +1
            3 August 2022 22: 08
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            If you question the effectiveness of Zircon on the basis of the lack of a video that meets your standards, then be consistent and declare all RCCs for which there is no such video as fake and incapacitated.

            The ability of subsonic low-flying missiles to hit real targets has long been known, tested in combat, and it is ridiculous to question it.

            Nothing is yet known about the ability of hypersonic missiles in general and Zircons in particular to do the same. Not only was the video not shown, but there were no reports that such tests were carried out.

            You can not even remember about such a piquant feature as the problems we have with target designation (especially at distances of the order of 1000 kilometers).

            In general, we have a club, yes. Whether we can beat someone with this club - the world is not sure yet.
            1. +1
              4 August 2022 08: 49
              Quote: DenVB
              The ability of subsonic low-flying missiles to hit real targets has long been known, tested in combat, and it is ridiculous to question it.

              Accordingly, we see that anti-ship missiles can be successful and effective even in the absence of videos from tests on a target in motion and using LOCs and electronic warfare. Because there is no such video on subsonic missiles, but there are facts of successful use.
              Conclusion - the presence / absence of recommended videos cannot serve as a basis for conclusions about the viability / incapacity of a weapon. You can doubt the combat effectiveness of Zircon, since you do not believe in the state test program, there are no questions here. But doubting the effectiveness of a rocket is one thing, and believing that it is ineffective is a completely different thing, and you have no reason for the latter.
              Quote: DenVB
              Not only was the video not shown, but there were no reports that such tests were carried out.

              And what, do you have data on all 12 launches of Zircon?
              Quote: DenVB
              You can not even remember about such a piquant feature as the problems we have with target designation (especially at distances of the order of 1000 kilometers).

              Why? They just need to be remembered. I keep reminding people of this all the time.
              1. -2
                4 August 2022 10: 02
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Accordingly, we see that anti-ship missiles can be successful and effective even in the absence of videos from tests on a target in motion and using LOCs and electronic warfare. Because there is no such video on subsonic missiles, but there are facts of successful use.
                Conclusion - the presence / absence of recommended videos cannot serve as a basis for conclusions about the viability / incapacity of a weapon. You can doubt the combat effectiveness of Zircon, since you do not believe in the state test program, there are no questions here. But doubting the effectiveness of a rocket is one thing, and believing that it is ineffective is a completely different thing, and you have no reason for the latter.

                There are a lot of words, the meaning of which, apparently, is only to try to hurt the opponent, when in fact there is nothing to say.

                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And what, do you have data on all 12 launches of Zircon?

                No. But there were no reports of such tests. Now, if there were messages, then one could believe them or not believe them. But there were no messages.

                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Why? They just need to be remembered. I keep reminding people of this all the time.

                Well, then, what's the point of having a club and showing it off to friends and enemies, if both of them know perfectly well that you don't see where to hit it?
                1. +2
                  4 August 2022 10: 24
                  Quote: DenVB
                  There are a lot of words, the meaning of which, apparently, is only to try to hurt the opponent, when in fact there is nothing to say.

                  A classic of the genre - there is nothing to argue, and Yaroslavna begins crying "a lot of words, there is nothing to object" to you Russians in white and with examples they explained that the lack of video and information about the tests of anti-ship missiles in your format is not evidence of the inferiority of anti-ship missiles. Are there any substantive objections?
                  Quote: DenVB
                  Well, then, what's the point of having a club and showing it off to friends and enemies, if both of them know perfectly well that you don't see where to hit it?

                  period of tension. The AUG is deploying ... well, let's say, off the coast of Syria. Or somewhere else, it doesn't matter. Our frigate is coming. One. Of the new ones, which are with 24 missiles in the UVP.
                  So, if there are calibers, or onyxes, this is dangerous ... moderately. If it is necessary to act, the probability that our frigate will be able to be neutralized without much damage to the AUG is very high, the risk is justified.
                  But if there are zircons, then this is a death sentence for AB if he tries to do something.
                  In war - the very fact of the presence of zircons requires a very serious limitation of the actions of enemy forces. Because the AUS, with the highest probability, will survive a limited missile attack by the forces of the same nuclear submarine, but not with zircons.
                  1. -2
                    4 August 2022 10: 37
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    A classic of the genre - there is nothing to argue, and Yaroslavna begins crying "a lot of words, there is nothing to object" to you Russians in white and with examples they explained that the lack of video and information about the tests of anti-ship missiles in your format is not evidence of the inferiority of anti-ship missiles. Are there any substantive objections?

                    The objections are that it is necessary to prove effectiveness, not inferiority. This cannot be understood by any reasonable person.

                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    But if there are zircons, then this is a death sentence for AB if he tries to do something.

                    So from what distance is your frigate going to launch Zircons?

                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    In war - the very fact of the presence of zircons requires a very serious limitation of the actions of enemy forces.

                    If the enemy is sure that the Zircons can hit somewhere.

                    By the way, the Chinese have had a semblance of our Zircons for a long time. DF-21. American AUGs come within the range of these missiles. They don't limit them too much.
                    1. +2
                      4 August 2022 13: 37
                      Quote: DenVB
                      The objections are that it is necessary to prove effectiveness, not inferiority.

                      In our case, there are official statements that Zircon confirms its performance characteristics and that all 12 launches are successful. Therefore, if you want to talk about the inferiority of zircons, you must prove it.
                      Quote: DenVB
                      So from what distance is your frigate going to launch Zircons?

                      Usually they go to the BS at a distance close to the line of sight.
                      Quote: DenVB
                      If the enemy is sure that the Zircons can hit somewhere.

                      Isn't he sure? Provide a source of information, please.
                      Quote: DenVB
                      By the way, the Chinese have had a semblance of our Zircons for a long time. DF-21.

                      fool You, before judging missile cases, at least learn to distinguish between cruise and ballistic missiles
                      Quote: DenVB
                      American AUGs come within the range of these missiles.

                      In peacetime. Just like the AUGs entered the range of Basalts and Granites in peacetime. But if they even went to the same peaceful, but with the goals of conducting maneuvers, they masked the movement of the AUG
                      Quote: DenVB
                      They don't limit them too much.

                      In peacetime :)))))))
                      1. -1
                        4 August 2022 14: 39
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        In our case, there are official statements that Zircon confirms its performance characteristics and that all 12 launches are successful.

                        Successful launches are very good. Successful hits on a target that successfully imitates a real one would be even better.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Therefore, if you want to talk about the inferiority of zircons, you must prove it.

                        So far, only you are talking about inferiority. I don't know how you will prove anything. However, remembering the story with the tugboat, I believe that you are capable of proving the impossibility of the obvious very stubbornly. wink

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Isn't he sure? Provide a source of information, please.

                        This is the general tone of reasoning about hypersonic missiles - the problem of guidance.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        You, before judging missile cases, at least learn to distinguish between cruise and ballistic missiles

                        But the essence of the problem is the same - to hit the target at hypersonic speed. If the DF-21 attacks in a near vertical dive (most likely), then the Zircon should attack in a shallow dive (most likely).

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Usually they go to the BS at a distance close to the line of sight.

                        Shoot Zircon point-blank? An interesting option.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        In peacetime.

                        Well, here almost a war was expected just yesterday.
                    2. +1
                      17 August 2022 03: 01
                      First. There were news about the launches. You can track everything on the appropriate news resources, on YouTube you can - even with a video.
                      The Russia TV channel has an interesting video even with the moments of arrival from these launches.
                      Every launch they try to shepherd the Norwegians with reconnaissance ships. So I'm sure they know it hits.
                      There are even a couple of official jokes on this topic,

                      Farther. No one in the world is doing the full test you mentioned.
                      They would have carried out - the result would not even have been under ss, but OB or even higher.
                      So calm. Do you want to know how it is in reality and be silent on the Internet? I can give you an address.

                      Speaking about "from what distance" - the shorter the distance, the more fuel, and the more mercilessly you can burn and maneuver it.
                      This time.
                      Two - the less reaction time.
                      At one time, the USSR solved the problem of aug by posting 1 for each! Project 68 bis cruiser. Dragging alongside the Aug, the cruiser could fire a couple of volleys before being destroyed. But that pair of salvos would plow the deck clean, depriving the augs of their raison d'être and making them a target.

                      And then recently the Varyag deployed a whole group with Truman, politely closing the Adriatic Strait. And immediately the Syrian issue was somehow resolved, postpone for a month ..... Well, absolutely unrelated events, and an invention of journalists)
    3. 0
      12 August 2022 18: 24
      Well, firstly, any shooting from the tests will take place under the heading. This time.
      Two is the task of the fleet, to work out the defeat of such a protected target.
      It is desirable that there would also be a couple of shells on the target and try to intercept anti-ship missiles
  10. -2
    3 August 2022 19: 42
    It would be nice to make a coastal, anti-ship and aviation version of the Zircon wink good good good
    1. 0
      3 August 2022 22: 26
      “According to the aviation version, we also have a big backlog. When the time comes, we will definitely continue this work, but for now, the country already has a hypersonic aviation missile - this is the Kinzhal missile," Svintsov said on the air of the Military Acceptance program on the Zvezda TV channel. The Deputy General Director added that Zircon was originally developed in both marine and aviation versions. "The customer decided at the first stage to intensify work on the creation of a marine version of the rocket"
    2. -1
      4 August 2022 05: 57
      They have already stated that the development of the Berg complex under Zircon is being carried out in parallel
  11. -2
    3 August 2022 20: 35
    I wonder if they will test it in Ukraine? Some dugout in Chernivtsi.
  12. 0
    4 August 2022 14: 29
    Quote: DenVB
    to kill someone - the world is not yet sure about this.

    Do you propose to slap a steamboat as evidence? smile The reconnaissance of the adversaries works well, otherwise they would not consider both the "Daggers" and the "Zircons" a threat, or do you think this is a tricky move, they say, money is knocked out for the defense industry?
    1. 0
      4 August 2022 14: 56
      Quote: Buhach
      Do you propose to slap a steamboat as evidence?

      Почему нет?

      Quote: Buhach
      The reconnaissance of the adversaries works well, otherwise they would not consider both the "Daggers" and the "Zircons" a threat, or do you think this is a tricky move, they say, money is knocked out for the defense industry?

      Firstly, Zircons and Daggers are a very big threat in any case - for stationary targets. Secondly, it is clear that over time, guidance on moving and defending targets will be worked out and improved. It would be foolish to ignore the threat entirely. But so far, the adversary's panic is not noticeable.

      Quote: Buhach
      or do you think this is a tricky move, they say, money is knocked out for the defense industry?

      But this is a must. They did this throughout the Cold War - the US intelligence community exaggerated our military capabilities, and their military-industrial complex happily mastered the money knocked out of Congress.
  13. -5
    4 August 2022 16: 07
    Another prodigy, no analogues. A guided missile that defies the laws of physics.
    At a speed of 8M, the plasma will not allow you to control the rocket, carry out self-guidance and course correction, receive GPS coordinates and transmit telemetry.
    1. -1
      5 August 2022 12: 17
      You forgot "There is no bridge!" all cartoons, and further according to the training manual ...
      1. -2
        6 August 2022 19: 52
        Putin has a base on the far side of the moon.
  14. -1
    4 August 2022 19: 06
    Bidon said it like an ordinary rocket, only you can’t defend yourself from it in any way wink
  15. 0
    4 August 2022 23: 30
    Need a version for airplanes. And then, unlike the Indians, we don’t even have an aviation version of onyx
  16. -1
    9 August 2022 12: 29
    And why is there no air-based version?
  17. 0
    10 August 2022 16: 27
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    And the Zircon returns it - although it flies at high altitude, the flying time leaves almost no chance of intercepting even a single missile, and even a salvo of such missiles ... "What a pain! What a pain! Argentina-Jamaica - five-zero !" laughing

    Andrey, what do you think, back in 2020, there was an article in naked-science about marine hyper sound.
    “In fact, we are facing a turning point in the maritime history of wars: missile-carrying ships temporarily gained noticeable advantages over aircraft carriers. Of course, this does not mean that aviation has ceased to play a leading role in the war at sea. The same MiG-31 and Tu-22 with another hypersonic missile , "Dagger".
    However, now dominance at sea will gradually move from deck-based aviation to land-based aviation. After all, an aircraft carrier cannot continue to work after three or four hits by Zircons. The land airfield can withstand the strikes of fifty cruise missiles without losing its airworthiness, as the events in Syria have shown. And there are orders of magnitude more sites on the planet suitable for military airfields than aircraft carriers: it will be difficult to fire at everything.
    As carriers of hypersonic missiles, aircraft are better than surface ships: the speed is many times higher, so it is quite possible to strike earlier than the enemy. That is, aircraft, and in the future drones, will definitely retain their dominant position at sea in the next decades.
    Those who are unlikely to keep it are large surface ships of all types.