Ammunition of increased power "Hammer": for the destruction of buildings and strongholds on the front line

113
Ammunition of increased power "Hammer": for the destruction of buildings and strongholds on the front line

The conduct of a special military operation (SVO) by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (RF Armed Forces) made us look at many things differently. As can be seen from the reports of military correspondents, often hostilities are waged for weeks on the same building, which will eventually be destroyed to such a state that it will no longer be possible to use it for civilian needs. At the same time, it is either impossible or extremely difficult to completely destroy this building in order to instantly destroy the enemy defenses in this area.

This slows down the pace of offensive operations and leads to unjustified losses on our part. Accordingly, it is necessary to find a way to significantly increase the speed and efficiency of disabling the enemy's defensive lines, equipped in buildings and structures. However, it is quite difficult to do this with existing weapons.



How can you completely destroy a massive capital structure?

Compromise solutions


With the help of multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS)? But one or more MLRS shells will not destroy a building, and more hits with unguided rockets are difficult to achieve, in addition, some shells that deviate from the target can pose a threat to friendly troops.

Artillery? But its capabilities when firing conventional shells are also limited - it is necessary to aim, and then for some time to conduct concentrated fire on one building. Under existing conditions, one can easily become a target for counter-battery weapons oneself.

Use precision-guided munitions? Their number is limited, and the cost is too high in order to use them to destroy buildings and structures.

Aviation? Of course, some high-rise building, most likely, will be completely destroyed by several corrected aerial bombs of the KAB-1500 type or one FAB-3000, but these ammunition are expensive, their use requires the carrier to approach at a sufficiently high altitude directly to the front line, where it can become a prey for funds air defense (air defense) of the enemy. In addition, the FAB-3000 air bomb still needs to be hit, since it is uncontrollable. The effectiveness of the interaction between the Russian Air Force (VVS) and the Ground Forces (SV) remains in question, it is unlikely that we have already implemented the principles of building multi-domain forces, that is, deep horizontal connections directly between air and ground combat units.


Funnel from the FAB-3000 bomb

Maybe short-range weapons will help?

Potentially, a tank can bring down a multi-storey building, the problem is that the tank “does not lay down” the target with one shot. In the meantime, the tank will work on the building, they can work on it with a grenade launcher, anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) or unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) - kamikaze.

Hypothetically, the most effective means for destroying buildings and structures are the TOS-1A Solntsepyok heavy flamethrower system or the new TOS-2 Tosochka wheeled combat vehicle. Based on open data, TOS show very good results in the destruction of enemy strongholds, however, there is no information confirming that TOS can “fold” a multi-storey building. This is especially true for industrial structures, which are much more resistant to external influences.

It can be assumed that this will require shooting the entire package of TOS-1A / TOS-2 ammunition into the building, and this will have to be done from a short distance, since the TOS projectiles are unguided and are intended for firing at areas. Accordingly, at close range, TOS-1TA / TOS-2 can be destroyed, both with the help of grenade launchers, ATGMs or kamikaze UAVs, and with the help of heavy machine guns and rifles, since compared to the tower tank the TOS-1A guide package is much less protected, and the TOS-2 is completely made on the basis of a lightly armored wheeled vehicle.


Work TOS-1A

Thus, there is an objective need to create special conventional munitions of increased power (BPM) designed for the rapid, highly effective destruction of multi-storey buildings, industrial facilities, fortified strongholds, as well as the manpower located in them.

Conventional ammunition of increased power


The topic of the need and possible ways to create ammunition of increased power has been raised by the author more than once.

For example, in the material "Aircraft projectile" of the XXI century we talked about the possibility of creating a cruise missile (CR) or, rather, a kamikaze UAV of increased power on the basis of civil and transport aircraft that have served their purpose.

In the media, you can sometimes see the shops of the enterprises of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, struck by the Caliber missile system or the Iskander operational-tactical missile systems - despite severe damage, often the equipment remains intact (at least partially), it can be restored and transferred production in other premises. The same applies to the facilities of the Ukrainian fuel and energy complex - they can often be restored after being struck.

After the impact of an aircraft projectile carrying about 20-40 tons of explosive, there will be nothing to restore. Moreover, when it comes to the destruction of bridges across the Dnieper, which would allow denazification of half of Ukraine before the end of 2022, opinions are often expressed that this can be done without the use of tactical nuclear weapons impossible - they say, these structures were built too reliably in the USSR, however, a projectile carrying 20-40 tons of explosives could well provide this.

An even more radical type of weaponry can be considered unmanned vessels - obsolete transport vessels or submarines destined for decommissioning, equipped with remote / autonomous control systems and loaded with explosives. We considered their transformation into a powerful weapon in the materials Operation "Baltic Ballet" и AUV "Dagon" - non-nuclear heir to "Poseidon", the destroyer of naval bases and coastal infrastructure.


The most powerful non-nuclear explosion equivalent to 2,9 kilotons, loaded with TNT, pyroxylin and picric acid of the French military transport "Mont Blanc", which occurred on December 6, 1917 in the harbor of the Canadian city of Halifax, as a result of which the port and urban area of ​​​​Richmond were completely destroyed, due to the collapse buildings, fires and a wave eighteen meters high, about two thousand people died, another nine thousand people were injured - such can be the power of conventional ammunition

Echoes of the implementation of this concept are visible in the use of a crewless boat used to undermine the bridge piers in the urban-type settlement of Zatoka, Odessa region. However, there the power of the explosion, apparently, was relatively small. The explosion of a kamikaze ship turned into a weapon of increased power can be compared with the explosion of a tactical nuclear charge - in this case, nothing would be left of the bridge at all.


Undermining the bridge support in Zatoka by a crewless boat

Another example of the use of increased power ammunition is the transformation by Russian fighters of an MTLB light armored tractor into a kamikaze armored vehicle and the destruction of an enemy stronghold with its help.

Russian fighters placed several OFAB-100-120 air bombs and a cable with TNT from the UR-77 Zmey Gorynych demining device in the MTLB - in total they got about a ton of explosives. Then the MTLB without a crew was sent to the enemy’s stronghold and was remotely blown up at the moment when the fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) approached it. According to various sources, from 60 to 100 enemy fighters were destroyed. According to some reports, MTLB kamikazes have been used by Russian troops several times already.


MTLB-kamikaze - a harsh but forced decision

Of course, using the MTLB in this way is not a very prudent approach, but it clearly demonstrates both the need and the effectiveness of increased power ammunition.

In order not to shoot at the enemy with lightly armored tractors, it is necessary to develop a special ammunition, more precisely, a complex that includes ammunition and a combat vehicle designed to transport and launch it. Let's call it conditionally a complex for the destruction of buildings, structures and strongholds of the enemy "Hammer".

"Hammer"


Structurally, the Molot complex should be close to the TOS-2 Tosochka, but with a number of significant differences.

The firing range of the Molot complex should be about five kilometers, this is necessary in order to maximize the mass of the warhead, but, on the other hand, to get it out of the fire of grenade launchers and small arms of the enemy.

Instead of a package of dozens of guides, the Hammer complex will contain 1-2 ammunition with a warhead weighing about 1 ton or more. The number of ammunition and the mass of the warhead must be determined from the test results.


The alleged appearance of the Hammer complex without a camouflage frame

It is possible that the optimal solution would be the consistent use of two ammunition, one with a thermobaric warhead, the second with a high-explosive warhead. First, thermobaric ammunition should be used, which ensures maximum damage to manpower in the shelter it occupies, and the second - with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead, should cause maximum destruction to the attacked structure. And it is possible that the best solution would be to use a single ammunition with the maximum possible mass of a high-explosive warhead.


And this is how the Hammer complex should look like in the stowed position

Ammunition of increased power of the Molot complex should be equipped with a guidance system - something simple used in existing Russian ATGMs, for example, a "laser trail" or even wire control.

Presumably, the Molot complex should be placed on a wheeled chassis, since it provides greater mobility - it is simply dangerous to keep ammunition of such power at the forefront - it is easy to imagine what will happen if it is attacked by a kamikaze UAV at the moment when the Molot is located next to your troops. The Hammer complex should quickly move out of the rear, strike and immediately leave. The best solution would be to disguise the Molot complex as a covered truck. The body on top of the ammunition must have at least anti-bullet / anti-fragmentation protection, since the consequences of its detonation near friendly troops can be tragic.

Conclusions


Ammunition of increased power is vital for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation - this is clearly shown by the experience of conducting a military defense in Ukraine. It is necessary to implement the development of ammunition of increased power of various classes, for example, an infantry fighting vehicle based on a transport ship carrying an explosive charge that can wipe out an entire coastal city from the face of the earth, or an outdated diesel-electric submarine turned into an autonomous uninhabited underwater vehicle (AUV) - kamikaze, or a transport aircraft ready for decommissioning, which can be turned into a cruise missile with a high-yield warhead - Western leasing companies want their aircraft back, so maybe it's time to listen to them?

The concept of the Molot complex, designed for the use of increased power ammunition at close range, stands apart. On the one hand, this increases the risks, both for the complex itself and for those who may be near it at the time of an enemy attack. On the other hand, the use of the Hammer complex will have a monstrous psychological effect.

Strike - and there is no building, there are no survivors either. Another blow, and again: there is no building, there are no survivors either. Death without options, without chance. What will it be like to defend positions for those who take up defensive positions in the next building?

The Molot complex should have a relatively low cost, since it will not contain high-tech solutions - satellite communications and navigation, thermal imagers, expensive turbojet engines to ensure long range and flight speed, terrain correction systems, ring laser gyroscopes and other high-tech components.

Thus, the Molot complex can become a relatively simple and inexpensive means of breaking into the defensive positions of the enemy, both during the NMD and in future military conflicts. With the help of the Molot complex, it is possible to “gnaw through” enemy fortifications in the shortest possible time, seizing the initiative and ensuring the access of the RF Armed Forces to the operational space.
113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    23 March 2023 03: 16
    Attention!
    Also, this car would have to be remote-controlled, or for the tractor to drop the container and leave, the disposable container unpacked and struck.
    Or for a tractor to carry several containers, scatter them at different points and they fired a volley. At the same time, one should not forget that Ukraine currently has an advantage in the field of intelligence, and you need to think about security in advance
    1. +4
      23 March 2023 03: 40
      the Hammer complex can become a relatively simple and inexpensive means of breaking into the enemy’s defensive positions,
      But how many of these Molotovs are needed until the end of the NWO? Darkness-darkness!
      1. +12
        23 March 2023 03: 43
        Put on the conveyor. Breakthrough technologies are not needed. The ideal option is a heavy glide bomb with an auxiliary engine like the V-1. The carrier patrols behind the front line, it will quickly reach the point of application.
        1. +11
          23 March 2023 10: 18
          So they showed recently UMPC - the Universal Planning and Correction Module. Clings to falling bombs of any caliber. It is dropped from an aircraft outside the range of air defense and plans to the target.

          Cheap and cheerful.
          1. +13
            23 March 2023 13: 07
            Quote: umah
            UMPC - Universal planning and correction module. Clings to falling bombs of any caliber. It is dropped from an aircraft outside the range of air defense and plans to the target.

            There are enough such modules on the FAB-500 \ 1500 + crew training and the reliability of the mat part, and the issue of destroying highly protected enemy positions on the front line and tactical rear has been resolved. And if such a FAB in the ass is a jet engine from the MLRS (Grad, Hurricane), then it will be easy to do without aircraft.
            There is another way - up to 10 Tochka-U missiles are stored in the Russian Federation - the ammunition load of ten missile brigades after they were re-equipped with Iskanders. Refine the Tochka-U guidance system with the Glonas module (as they did with the Iranian Shahed, having received Geran-000 and 1) and get a wonderful tactical missile system of special / high power (2 kg of warheads) for destroying oporniks and others highly protected targets. This would be the best way to dispose of a huge number of missiles and ... save money on disposal. With simply invaluable benefits for the RF Armed Forces in the current conflict.
            Quote: umah
            Cheap and cheerful.

            Exactly .
            There is also experience - the experience of wars in BV and Donbass 2014 - 2022. - the creation of ammunition (unguided) based on the Grad MLRS engine and a powerful warhead (up to a ton). Flies not far, but VERY powerful. The Syrians even composed launchers for such a system based on a tank chassis. Modify, if possible, improve accuracy, test and launch in a series.

            And further . For several years, even before the start of the SVO, I advocated the creation of a tank with a weapon of special power (152 mm.) To destroy protected / highly protected enemy positions and urban areas, direct fire during assault operations. A kind of assault tank.
            Now these are already missed opportunities - time has been lost.
            But there is one solution.
            We take several dozen old "Acacias" from storage and make an upgrade - we put a more powerful engine, strengthen the armor (especially the tower and forehead), install side screens and remote sensing screens, lattice screens. We optimize the sight for direct fire ... And we get a powerful assault self-propelled gun capable of bringing down a capital building with just a few direct hits.
            It is best to cover such assault self-propelled guns with the help of the BMPT "Terminator", which will detect and extinguish all / most of the threats from the sheltered infantry, while the "Acacia-Sturm" destroys the building / I with direct fire.
            Quote: umah
            Cheap and cheerful.

            Exactly . And also FAST - from setting a task to entering the troops.
            1. +5
              23 March 2023 21: 59
              North Korea has a 600mm MLRS! It would be possible to purchase a pair for testing, and then documentation for production. As Lukashenka did by buying Chinese technology for the Belarusian Polonaise. It would be possible to import - the North Koreans would hardly have refused!
            2. -3
              24 March 2023 00: 15
              There is another way - up to 10 Tochka-U missiles are stored in the Russian Federation - the ammunition load of ten missile brigades after they were re-equipped with Iskanders

              already similar points-at are not stored. Otherwise, they would have been used long ago. It was a good rocket. And now it would be very handy. For some reason we are in a hurry to write off and cut everything. And there is little to do to replace it. Iskanders and calibers alone are clearly not enough. Now not only dots-y, but slopes would come in handy. The rockets were powerful. After all, there were more of them first. Improve guidance and business. An no. It is easier to write off and hand over in metal. At least they left the engines. They could be used to launch heavy FABs, as the Americans did in the AGM-154 JSOW they created.
              1. 0
                24 March 2023 10: 26
                Quote: wladimirjankov
                At least they left the engines.

                recourse
                So the rocket of the Tochka-U complex (in the common people 9M79M) is the engine.
                There is the RDTT!
                Or did you offer to saw off the tail compartment with a hacksaw and attach [quotewladimirjankov] to launch heavy FABs [/ quote]
                belay

                That's what you were going to save here SEPARATELY

                [quotewladimirjankov] how the Americans did it in the AGM-154 JSOW they created. [/ quote]
                This bomb has no engine: NONE.
                And the Americans, for her sake, did not saw the tails of Sergeant, Lance or Pershing missiles
            3. +2
              24 March 2023 17: 37
              Everything has already been invented before us - SU / ISU-152. They may even still be in storage.
            4. +1
              24 March 2023 18: 22
              In my opinion, this idea is already 80 years old. The ISU-152 is much better armored than the Akatsiya.
              I believe that stopping development on the topic of heavy and anti-tank self-propelled guns in Khrushchev's time was a mistake.
              Such a machine would be useful in any street fighting.
            5. +1
              25 March 2023 00: 10
              Quote: bayard

              And further . For several years, even before the start of the SVO, I advocated the creation of a tank with a weapon of special power (152 mm.) To destroy protected / highly protected enemy positions and urban areas, direct fire during assault operations. A kind of assault tank.
              Now these are already missed opportunities - time has been lost.
              But there is one solution.
              We take several dozen old "Acacias" from storage and make an upgrade - we put a more powerful engine, strengthen the armor (especially the tower and forehead), install side screens and remote sensing screens, lattice screens. We optimize the sight for direct fire ... And we get a powerful assault self-propelled gun capable of bringing down a capital building with just a few direct hits.
              .
              ISU-152
              good
            6. 0
              28 March 2023 02: 54
              Quote: bayard
              another way - up to 10 Tochka-U missiles are stored in the Russian Federation - the ammunition load of ten missile brigades after they were re-equipped with Iskanders. Refine the Tochka-U guidance system with the Glonas module (as they did with the Iranian Shahed, having received Geran-000 and 1) and get a wonderful tactical missile system of special / high power (2 kg of warheads) for destroying oporniks and others highly protected targets. This would be the best way to dispose of a huge number of missiles and ... save money on disposal. With simply invaluable benefits for the RF Armed Forces in the current conflict.


              It is high time. And as much as possible.
              Tens of thousands!
        2. +4
          23 March 2023 13: 03
          You give 10X and 16X to the front!!!!



          Although in fact the Bicycle (Hammer) was invented and it is called UPAB-1500. Yes, now the range is only 50 km when dropped from a height of 15 km, but I think work is underway to increase its range. You can go an even more interesting way and add a solid propellant booster to the UPAB, as is done with some Western analogues (AGM-154 JSOW) or our X-38 GROM. Well, you can try to make a jdam-type adapter for our heavy FABs - it will still be cheaper than creating and subsequent use of such a Hammer! It is cheaper to drop from a height than to create an unguided rocket with a minimum deviation. But the creation of a rocket that throws UPAB to a certain height makes perfect sense.

          All our problems are connected with the unsuppressed air defense system of Ukraine!!!
          1. +2
            23 March 2023 15: 33
            Although in fact the Bicycle (Hammer) was invented and it is called UPAB-1500. Yes, now the range is only 50 km when dropped from a height of 15 km, but I think work is underway to increase its range. You can go an even more interesting way and add a solid-propellant booster to the UPAB, as is done with some Western analogues (AGM-154 JSOW) or our X-38 GROM.

            I completely agree that a planning bomb with the GLONASS system is the simplest and cheapest option, any missile will lose in cost - it requires a jet engine, it's expensive. Well, the author of the article remained in terms of the level of thinking in the middle of the last century, he was especially "pleased" with the control of a rocket by wire. I am sure that his Hammer project will never be realized.
            1. 0
              23 March 2023 23: 15
              guided missile by wire

              This is the best variant. Now there are examples of fiber-optic control at a distance of up to 60 km.


              1. +1
                24 March 2023 14: 50
                This is the best variant. Now there are examples of fiber-optic control at a distance of up to 60 km.

                It was you, obviously, who remembered the Polifem rocket, there was such a project that firms from Italy, France and Germany pushed through at the end of the last century. They managed to shove a coil of fiber optics into the rocket and control its flight through the cable. They sawed the budgets of three countries for seventeen years, in the end this project was closed due to the pointlessness of continuing the work. Ostap Bendery was not only in the USSR, the ways of legal appropriation of money are varied, and the scammers are inventive!
          2. 0
            24 March 2023 17: 42
            The cost of delivery is only a bit high - several tens of tons of kerosene and a couple of aircraft hours. But the same bomb, but with an engine from a conditional "Grad" with a launch from a disposable container - this is really interesting. Such containers can be discreetly placed on the breakthrough site and, at the right time, raise the guides and make a volley. The effect will be deadly.
            1. +1
              30 March 2023 13: 16
              The cost of delivery is only a bit high - several tens of tons of kerosene and a couple of aircraft hours

              Those. Do you take into account the cost of kerosene, but do you not take into account the cost of a jet engine, which is disposable for a rocket? Moreover, the engine is not from hail, but more rockets. For example, Poplar throws a weight of only 500 kg - also not very impressive. A rocket throwing a payload comparable to a half-tarot bomb will cost an order of magnitude higher, if not more, than a gliding bomb with a similar warhead weight.
            2. 0
              April 26 2023 09: 48
              When there is a "breakthrough site" it is already too late to covertly place anything on its path, especially when it comes to some towed containers with unguided missiles. We must act quickly and put out the fire. For these purposes, MLRS and aviation have already been invented by mankind.
              The author is generally right about the need to have cheap weapons of super-high power to destroy fortifications. The only thing that the author suffered in some extreme areas and dimensions. For these purposes, as well as for unification, it is enough to develop a TOS-2 with an increased caliber, but a smaller ammunition load. The thermo-baric warhead, which the author is obviously also not aware of, is much better at destroying buildings than a high-explosive one.
      2. +5
        23 March 2023 09: 35
        Naval warehouses have reactive depth charges of various calibers and capacities, and bombers for them. Against modern nuclear submarines, capable of rushing at a speed of 25-30 knots and dodging the crowd, they are useless, but put in any armored vehicles and you get a modern "stormtiger" that folds the building with one hit.
        1. 0
          23 March 2023 10: 08
          Quote: eule
          Against modern nuclear submarines, capable of rushing at a speed of 25-30 knots and dodging the crowd, they are useless

          And they have long been used as anti-torpedo means of self-defense of the ship.
        2. +2
          23 March 2023 13: 19
          Quote: eule
          Naval warehouses have reactive depth charges of various calibers and capacities, and bombers for them.

          Quote: eule
          put it in any armored vehicle and you get a modern "stormtiger" that folds the building with one hit.

          But a sensible proposal. On the chassis of an old tank, such a launcher, provide drives for it, work out aiming ... It will really look wild, but as an option. Or modify the PU into something more compact for ease of placement / use.
          1. +1
            23 March 2023 16: 29
            Quote: bayard
            But a sensible proposal. On the chassis of an old tank, such a launcher, provide drives for it, work out aiming ... It will really look wild, but as an option.

            Forward to the past! smile
            1. +2
              23 March 2023 19: 37
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Forward to the past!

              I don’t know what kind of suitcase is on the Matilda’s ass (is it like her?), But the photo of the BT-7 with two “jet torpedoes” from the 30s is much more impressive.
              In the end, they attached anti-aircraft modules from ships to the asses of the MTLB smile , so what will be the worse launchers for jet bombers on tank hulls? A kind of TOS-light. Again - the disposal of old and more unclaimed ammunition.
              1. +1
                24 March 2023 10: 23
                Quote: bayard
                I don’t know what kind of suitcase is on the ass of “Matilda” (is it like her?)

                This is the fruit of the unnatural connection between the army and the navy - "Aunt Motya", a re-armed launcher under the RSL of the "Hedgehog" system.

                Or the engineering tank Matilda Projector, Hedgehog, No. 1 Mark I. The developers did not philosophize slyly and decided that 7 RSL with 16 kg of torpex each would be enough for everything that the Japanese could build in the jungle and on the islands.
                Antipodes, what to take from them. smile
                1. 0
                  24 March 2023 18: 01
                  This option will be appreciated by the rembats of the Pacific Fleet. They probably have plenty of RBU - 6000 and the installation range is almost like that of TOS, though only 24 kg of explosives per pipe! MTLB is most likely not enough as a platform in terms of carrying capacity, but if you wish, you can choose the right one.
            2. +1
              23 March 2023 23: 23
              Forward to the past!

              MLRS is not the past, it is an uncontested option for increasing the crushing power of a fire raid: it fired off a package in 20 seconds and left (BM-21).

              Coming soon across the country


              Options for the price of used cars

              1. 0
                24 March 2023 10: 29
                Quote: Sergey Venediktov
                MLRS is not the past, it is an uncontested option for increasing the crushing power of a fire raid: it fired off a package in 20 seconds and left (BM-21).

                And what's with the MLRS? It was about ersatz engineering tanks for the destruction of fortifications - naval RBU on the chassis of armored vehicles:
                Quote: eule
                Naval warehouses have reactive depth charges of various calibers and capacities, and bombers for them. Against modern nuclear submarines, capable of rushing at a speed of 25-30 knots and dodging the crowd, they are useless, but put them in any armored vehicles

                And conventional MLRS are extremely poorly suitable for work even on field fortifications.
                Yesterday-today, the "Grady" of the Armed Forces of Ukraine worked out in the village of Donetsk and at the Sifonnaya station, occupied by ours. On Sifonnaya, these arrivals of "Grads" had about the same effect as the endless volleys of our MLRS on the enemy's fortifications. There was a fire in one place, the fire was extinguished. Probably, the command from our side, having received a report that the exact coverage of the VP by "Grads" did not particularly affect the combat capability of our personnel, who were in shelters captured from the Armed Forces of Ukraine, should draw some conclusions that the MLRS with conventional warheads , probably not very effective against well-prepared well-fortified strongholds with a developed system of full-profile trenches and deep shelters. This is not the camp in Zelenopolye in the summer of 2014, where people and equipment were tightly packed without much protection in open areas. Here - COMPLETE FORTIFICATIONS. And there are already, excuse me, BM-21 installations that fired 500-600 missiles at a given area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbenemy fortifications (this is from one car! Only from one car !!!), but at the headquarters everyone is perplexed "Why don't they surrender? Where is victory?"
                © Murz
      3. 0
        23 March 2023 12: 08
        That's for sure...
        For Bakhmut alone, the breakthrough of "Molotov" would be required ...
      4. +1
        25 March 2023 19: 28
        It was necessary to finish off the gob in boilers in 2014, the Nazi reptile and listen less to our European colleagues. Then there would be no fortifications, and "hammers" are not needed.
    2. +1
      23 March 2023 22: 27
      The author forgot to mention large artillery, and special power.

      Thus, "destruction groups" took part in the Berlin operation.
      They included 203 mm high power brigades, 280 mm special power divisions.

      At the moment, the RF Armed Forces are armed with 203-mm 2S4 Tyulpan mortars and 2S7 Pion howitzers.
      They were put into service against the backdrop of the fading of the "rocket euphoria".

  2. +8
    23 March 2023 03: 37
    In general, "Point" is at minimum range in terms of range, but ultimatum in warhead. But the range is needed, and I think it’s not difficult, to add at least up to 10 km, because a truck 5 km from the LBS is very vulnerable.
    "laser trail" or even wired control.
    The wires are not suitable, a too powerful engine for a ton of warheads is needed, it will tear or burn without looking.
    1. +11
      23 March 2023 03: 58
      Ammunition of increased power "Hammer": for the destruction of buildings and strongholds on the front line
      I was delighted, I thought something new .. but no, only the author's fantasies. Oops.
  3. +3
    23 March 2023 03: 52
    And the old dots, which were replaced with Iskanders, are not a pity, one is missing, maybe ten, and at least for each pillbox, until they run out ... At least the missiles for them are still old, it’s not a pity
    1. -4
      23 March 2023 04: 31
      Quote: Egor Adashev
      And the old dots

      Their warheads are much lighter, and there is no accuracy.
      1. +7
        23 March 2023 05: 46
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Quote: Egor Adashev
        And the old dots

        Their warheads are much lighter, and there is no accuracy.

        The Vodokanal building in the Petrovsky district of Donetsk was destroyed by a Tochka-U ballistic missile launched by Ukraine. This was announced on March 22 by the head of the Kirov service of Vodokanal, Alexander Ulavin. “Arrival was at 3:45.
        1. -2
          23 March 2023 06: 59
          How much does a one-two-story brick building need? If they were aiming at him.
      2. +4
        23 March 2023 07: 04
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Quote: Egor Adashev
        And the old dots

        Their warheads are much lighter, and there is no accuracy.


        They have enough accuracy. That's why they called it that. That with skillful use they hit the mark.
        1. +1
          23 March 2023 08: 47
          Quote: sergo1914
          They have enough accuracy. That's why they called it that. That with skillful use they hit the mark.

          With QUO from 165 m?
          1. +9
            23 March 2023 13: 30
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            With QUO from 165 m?

            But is it not an option to modify the guidance system with the Glonas unit? They managed to make "Geran-1 \ 2" from the "Shaheds", but here - no way?
            10 missiles with warheads of 000 kg. are worth taking care of their CORRECT disposal. The Armed Forces of Ukraine now use them, and often quite effectively. Can you imagine what will happen if such modified tactical missiles begin to be used by the RF Armed Forces? And massively? By returning to service from 500 to 4 Tochek-U divisions and organizing their complete disposal on the fronts of the NWO?
            For reference, the last brigade was re-equipped from Tochek-U to Iskander just 3-4 years ago. So the materiel must be suitable for modernization / restoration of combat readiness. And specialists who are familiar with these complexes should be in abundance.
            1. 0
              23 March 2023 17: 30
              Quote: bayard
              But is it not an option to modify the guidance system with the Glonas unit?

              This is a missile, which means that the guidance system is very densely packed, and it cannot be remade from a floundering bay. It is possible to fasten the glider to the bomb quickly, but here it is more difficult.
              Quote: bayard
              For reference - the last brigade was re-equipped from "Point-U" to "Iskander" only 3 - 4 years ago
              And they stopped producing rockets for 15 years, no less. The fuel storage periods have expired, and our replacement standards are higher than those of ukrov.
              1. +3
                23 March 2023 19: 24
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                This is a missile, which means that the guidance system is very densely packed, and it cannot be remade from a floundering bay.

                For the sake of returning 10 missiles to service ... yes, even 000 - 2000 "Point-U" with acceptable accuracy, I'm sure they are worth such an effort.
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                And they stopped producing rockets for 15 years, no less. The fuel storage periods have expired, and our replacement standards are higher than those of ukrov.

                In \ to such missiles only Soviet-made, so they organized the replacement of fuel. And they didn’t fail - it still launches, and far from everything can be shot down. The APU air defense is weaker than ours, so the effect will be a multiple of the higher - the percentage of defeat / achievement of targets. Warhead in 500 kg. it's worth taking care of it.
                1. +2
                  24 March 2023 03: 30
                  Quote: bayard
                  For the sake of returning 10 missiles to service ... yes, even 000 - 2000 "Point-U" with acceptable accuracy, I'm sure they are worth such an effort.

                  I can’t argue here, but this is subject to the desire and time. And capacities for reloading, and here there may be (I'm sure there is) the same "optimization" as with the repair plants of the Moscow Region.
                  Quote: bayard
                  so they arranged a fuel change
                  Well done, what to say.

                  Quote: bayard
                  Warhead in 500 kg. it's worth taking care of it.
                  I can't argue either. And by the way, I even agree with the decent accuracy of the Tochka-U missiles, it was, with the exact positioning of the launcher.
  4. +4
    23 March 2023 04: 40
    the comrade said that the gorynych turned out to be useless, the range is too short + unmasks, artillery and mortars are immediately aimed at your corridor
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. +11
    23 March 2023 05: 25
    Interestingly, when I read such "opuses", the image of the landowner Manilov pops up in my memory? Of course, it would be nice to have two or three hordes of combat robots with plasma guns and blasters, mobile teleporters, and a dozen strike cruisers in orbit in the war. No, well, what, let's draw and go into battle! The idea of ​​the weapon described above is simply a miracle, how good, and everything would be fine, but now it is NOT, and tomorrow it WILL NOT be. But we (according to TV) have an incredible stock of ODABs. So, instead of irresponsible dreams about what is not there, it is necessary to come up with tactics for delivering these same ODABs to the right place without loss on our part. But you have to THINK! Fantasizing, of course, is much more pleasant. But fantasies do not bring victory closer. Only angry.
    PS To everyone who believes that it is impossible to cut the wings of dreams and fantasies, I remind you that you must dream silently, silently realize your dream, bring it to the assembly line and supply it to the troops in the required quantity. And after that, you can blow your cheeks and admire yourself.
    1. +3
      23 March 2023 10: 02
      what is there to think? need a domestic JDAM based on ODAB
      1. +4
        23 March 2023 13: 37
        Quote: Arsen1
        need a domestic JDAM based on ODAB

        It exists and is already being used in NWO. But it is necessary to have a sufficient number of them, to master the tactics of the combat use of these ammunition by the crews, to ensure their sufficient reliability (for there are cases of failure and, apparently, simply loss of their carriers).
        And also figure out how to attach a rocket engine / booster from MLRS (Grad, Uragan) to them for use from ground-based launchers.
    2. +4
      24 March 2023 00: 22
      incredible stock of ODABs

      How many millions is 1 ODAB worth?



      How many billions does a new ODAB carrier cost?

      1-2 billion

      How much it costs water pipe rocket?

      1 kg of TNT costs 140 rubles. 1 kg cast iron 20 rubles

      The idea of ​​the weapon described above is simply a miracle, how good, and everything would be fine, but now it is NOT, and tomorrow it WILL NOT be.



      Let's order the Syrians - let them do it...for fertilizer/grain that we want to give away for free in Africa. Africa can also be contracted for such projects. The most important thing is not a question of the organization of production, but a question exchange organization, let the Syrians do the production.

      The rocket at GOLAN-1000 is welded cast iron water pipe with a diameter of 500 mm with TNT, initiated by 1 MLRS rocket of 122 mm caliber, used instead of a fuse




  7. +5
    23 March 2023 05: 26
    It's good that there is an idea: only the implementation should have been yesterday.
  8. +6
    23 March 2023 05: 43
    In addition to the "Hammer", "Hurricane", "TOS", etc., it is necessary to have an adequate leadership of the army, capable of giving an order to use such weapons.
    Yesterday, Zelensky in Bakhmut, "located in a semi-encirclement and controlled by Russian troops by 70%", was rewarding his Nazis, and the Russian command at that time was probably "chewing snot."
    So who is lying about Bakhmut? Ukrainians or Gen. Konashenkov?
    How old is Gen. Gerasimov was going to fight in the NWO? 10, as in Afghanistan, what would then disgracefully withdraw their troops?
    Stop chewing snot. We need to start fighting.
    1. +2
      23 March 2023 10: 42
      Kramatorsk. From there, people were on the video.
    2. -4
      23 March 2023 11: 48
      So who is lying about Bakhmut? Ukrainians or gene. Konashenkov?

      Do you have doubts who is lying? You are the enemy. Accordingly, they must be destroyed.
      Evidence.
      During the war, the civilian population does not and cannot have reliable information.
      It has always been (fog of war) even more so now (deep fake).
      Therefore, it is not a matter of having information, it is a matter of faith.
      It is beneficial for each side to be believed.
      If you trust the enemy, you are helping the enemy.
      Therefore, you are the enemy.
      Therefore you must be destroyed.

      When we (Russia) understand and accept this, we will win.
      1. +4
        23 March 2023 17: 57
        For you in the fog of war: the surrender of the Krasny Liman, Izium, Kherson, fruitless assaults on urban-type settlements, sending the T-62 to the front, and now the T-55 have taken a picture of the echelon. Cruiser Moscow is still in the fog for you? I have a friend like that. He has a TV instead of a head. "You don't understand, you're saying everything wrong, I don't want to listen to you" - Drug addict Solov'v TV! He tells the truth, how to take a syringe from a drug addict, it is clear that he is against it, everything is more pleasant in a narcotic haze than in an unpleasant reality. And who are the enemies of Russia?
  9. +3
    23 March 2023 06: 34
    And, there were also systems that, after minimal refinement, could be adapted for these purposes - for example, SCAD or Pioneer, and the same Tochka-U. And there is no need to reinvent the wheel, conventionalize the old carriers of YaB. They remembered Koenigsberg, but how many trains with ammunition of all kinds were used there ??? So attack aircraft are good, but, as Wagner says: give warheads .....
  10. +12
    23 March 2023 06: 35
    Fantasists ... why be trifles, let's vigorously loaf.
    Enough excuses, our whole misfortune is that we were not ready from the point of view of modern technology, and this is UAVs and electronic warfare, aviation that cannot counteract air defense, communication and there is nothing to say. The justifiers see all the reinforced concrete "fortifications", although not a single one has yet been shown, for some reason they all come across from manure and sticks.
  11. +2
    23 March 2023 07: 19
    It all reminds me of Syrian crafts made from gas cylinders. Only high power. However, if such a projectile of 1-2 tons will have good accuracy, then why not.
  12. +1
    23 March 2023 08: 42
    It would only be the desire of the Supreme to deal with this issue ....
  13. +9
    23 March 2023 09: 01
    All our troubles are from unsuppressed air defense! With air supremacy, you can drag as much as you need, where you need it, and many times! fellow
    And carrying multi-ton warheads + fuel around the city, through your battle formations, is not a good idea ... sad
    It’s better, after all, to focus on means of suppressing air defense!
    IMHO, of course hi
    1. +1
      23 March 2023 09: 03
      And dragging around the city, through your battle formations, multi-ton warheads + fuel is not a good idea

      It remains only to use a ram in the form of a log .... drinks
    2. +3
      23 March 2023 12: 22
      Focus on suppressing air defenses. It's easier to say. In fact, this is another, already discovered by everyone, defect in the construction of our army. Here in the Air Force. All the generals were surprised to find that it turns out that the Air Force concept is based on "gaining air superiority", it remained in the 80s, and the entire advanced world switched to the SEAD concept. But we missed that too...
      1. 0
        23 March 2023 18: 16
        It is understandable when an army encounters enemy equipment with unexpectedly high performance characteristics. But the performance characteristics of their own technology are known. And she is. At least the fight against your own technology, as some well-known achievable standard, should be planned? Especially since we were selling it. They completely forgot how to think, all the steam went into the whistle.
  14. +3
    23 March 2023 09: 19
    It is not clear why Tochka-U is not used, of which there are a great many in warehouses? Urgently begin to shoot the existing missiles. In the meantime, come up with and start launching another missile to the existing launcher - as simple as three rubles, with a range of no more than a howitzer, but with better accuracy and much more ammunition to replace the released fuel. Here you have the finished "Hammer" and you do not need to invent anything supernatural.
  15. 0
    23 March 2023 09: 33
    I wonder if mortar ammunition with air blasting is used in the NWO zone? I read that even in the Second World War the Germans actively used this type of mines on lying infantry. The attacking infantrymen were laid on the ground with machine gun fire and worked with air blasted mines. The plot is based on real events.
    1. +1
      23 March 2023 12: 16
      Quote: O. Bender
      I wonder if mortar ammunition with air blasting is used in the NVO zone? I read that even in the Second World War the Germans actively used this type of mines on lying infantry.

      Radar fuses on lamps for a 120mm mine in 1941?
      Where is this grass?
  16. +3
    23 March 2023 09: 38
    Use precision-guided munitions? Their number is limited, and the cost is too high to use them to destroy buildings and structures.

    Dear Author, the use of categories more / less (more expensive / cheaper) implies a comparison of quantitative characteristics that you have not given, from the word at all. For some reason, when comparing high-precision samples with conventional ones, they compare only the cost of their production, ignoring the cost of delivery, storage and actual use (wear and tear of the barrels, the probability of hitting the carrier, which is proportional to the time it was in the firing zone, etc.). A separate question is why do you think that your "hammer" will be cheaper, say KAB-1500? It is essentially a highly specialized guided munition.
  17. +3
    23 March 2023 09: 44
    Engineer 74. I completely agree with you. Unsuppressed air defense ya is a bone in the throat of our aviation. We can’t throw cast iron, the risk of losing an aircraft is high. there is no one to develop it? Or do we not know something? And so it’s a massive UAV raid with lenses, followed by an attack on identified air defense targets, and then an attack on ground, bridges, bases, etc.
    1. 0
      23 March 2023 10: 46
      Who just did not write about air defense and aviation. It is not clear how many complexes the Ukrainians have. Moreover, the delivery of complexes is in full swing.
  18. +1
    23 March 2023 10: 51
    Alas! A very voluminous commentary to the article was almost finished, but ... one careless movement (!) And everything turned out to be erased (my computer has been buggy for a long time!) ... Now, perhaps, I will not have enough time or energy to restore that comment! It's a pity! Because I really wanted to "speak out" on the topic; I also thought a lot about this topic ... and the material was chosen, it seems, not bad ... But ... "not destiny"!
  19. +1
    23 March 2023 11: 11
    Quote: Amateur

    Yesterday, Zelensky in Bakhmut, "located in a semi-encirclement and controlled by Russian troops by 70%", was rewarding his Nazis, and the Russian command at that time was probably "chewing snot."
    So who is lying about Bakhmut? Ukrainians or Gen. Konashenkov?
    Stop chewing snot. We need to start fighting.

    if you don’t chew snot and don’t let them in here, then from the news, if you read it with your head, you can understand that he was not in Bakhmut, but in the Bakhmutovsky direction. And those are two big differences. but your nickname speaks for itself, the main thing is not to reflect, the main thing is to distribute
  20. 0
    23 March 2023 12: 19
    Quote: fuffi
    Quote: Amateur

    Yesterday, Zelensky in Bakhmut, "located in a semi-encirclement and controlled by Russian troops by 70%", was rewarding his Nazis, and the Russian command at that time was probably "chewing snot."
    So who is lying about Bakhmut? Ukrainians or Gen. Konashenkov?
    Stop chewing snot. We need to start fighting.

    if you don’t chew snot and don’t let them in here, then from the news, if you read it with your head, you can understand that he was not in Bakhmut, but in the Bakhmutovsky direction. And those are two big differences. but your nickname speaks for itself, the main thing is not to reflect, the main thing is to distribute

    Waiting for a guarantor on the other side?))
  21. +4
    23 March 2023 12: 29
    Quote: bk316
    If you trust the enemy, you are helping the enemy.
    Therefore, you are the enemy.
    Therefore you must be destroyed.

    Hmm... With freaks like you, you don't even need enemies - we'll cut our own throats.
  22. 0
    23 March 2023 14: 00
    Maybe you shouldn’t invent, but once again look at the experience in Syria, at hellish caliber mines from gas cylinders. https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/yuripasholok/765139/13568210/13568210_original.jpg
  23. +2
    23 March 2023 14: 04
    The guided missile on the Tornado S rocket launcher should be good? Maybe it would require multiple hits because it only has a 250kg warhead, but the accuracy is good enough.
  24. +4
    23 March 2023 14: 09
    Found an ax in the woods. Back in 1944, in addition to Katyusha, Andryusha, a heavy tadpole with a rocket engine and a powerful warhead, was developed and widely used. Launched from wooden frames. He flew close, but it hurt. Stands in art. museum in St. Petersburg.
  25. 0
    23 March 2023 15: 18
    People talked about this back in 14-15 years, for years the Urintsy advanced their oporniks close to the cities and positions of the LDNR. But, no one scratched.
  26. +2
    23 March 2023 15: 25
    No, well, you can dream.
    At the beginning of the 7,5s, an aerial bomb weighing 44,5 tons and with a capacity of 20 tons was tested. They called this ammunition the "Daddy of all bombs." If only it could be mounted on a rocket, and its range would be a hundred kilometers, because the rocket will come out in 30-XNUMX tons. The launcher will be approximately the same as the Soviet SCAD, at least. Here is just one question - what for all this, if there is tactical nuclear weapons?
    The fact that tactical nuclear weapons are not currently used in the outskirts does not mean anything, because the war there is now special and unique. In any other place, company oporniks would be destroyed by a warhead of 1 kt.
    Well, something like this.
    1. 0
      24 March 2023 14: 23
      Poplars are exchanged for Yars. Here on the Poplar ODAB engine and fasten it. Correct color tape.
  27. +2
    23 March 2023 16: 05
    the author, everything has already been invented before us. google "stormtiger" - a product of the gloomy German genius of a known era. 380mm bomb launcher with 350kg direct fire projectile.
    also, do not forget about our "tulip" - quite a remedy for buildings.
    as for the "hammer", then the rocket should either be made controllable - which means goodbye cheapness and mass character, or it will be impossible to get uncontrollable even for 5 km
    but, of course, all these are palliatives - a radical solution would be a large-caliber gliding precision bomb.
  28. +3
    23 March 2023 16: 28
    I understand that UPAB-1500V is very small and they are expensive. But is it really so difficult for our designers to turn a simple old air bomb into a planning one? Following the example of the Ukrainian-American B61-12, where the tail part is simply screwed onto the old product
  29. 0
    23 March 2023 16: 49
    The Germans had such a thing - "Sturmtigr". Gun 380 mm. Just to fold the house was done. For fighting in the city.
    1. +1
      23 March 2023 17: 55
      It was not a gun, but a launcher. A cropped torpedo tube in an armored wheelhouse.
  30. 0
    23 March 2023 16: 53
    And our soldiers also welded some pieces of iron to the 305-mm RS. And they launched on the ground into a neighboring house. A few pieces were enough.
  31. 0
    23 March 2023 17: 22
    There is a nuclear charge of low power.
  32. +2
    23 March 2023 17: 52
    You just don’t know the author. Everything has been invented and tested for a long time. Just look at the war in Syria. There are assault tanks and installations to support them and MLRS of special power. including through city blockages. 54,55-3 pipes with a caliber from 4 to 300 mm without any outriggers. Range from 600-3 km. We go further "Sturmtigr". A great idea is everything, just implement it in modern processing. And of course our experience in ISU-5 replenish ammunition and destroy buildings, also from VO the famous "duplex" and "troychatka" reserve rates of art of special power, put some on the wheels, some on the tracks. Here are the simplest and cheapest options. There would be a desire and an order.
  33. +2
    23 March 2023 18: 00
    So it seems the Syrians have been using this for a long time. The Golan-1000 installations, of course, are a little handicraft, although they are made soundly, and ours can be factory-made with a more powerful engine, why not do it ???
  34. +1
    23 March 2023 18: 27
    I would write as it should, but I can’t. Ours still won’t do it, and then the Ukrainians will kill us with such systems.
    .
    The system described in the article in combat practice will be ineffective.
    1. 0
      23 March 2023 21: 58
      I completely agree with you. There are simpler solutions. After all, it’s not so much a matter of how to destroy a house, but how to do it accurately and efficiently, from what distance, to destroy the entire house or a separate part, by air or ground. war is already real and there is nothing wrong if we learn to sweep away cities without nuclear weapons
  35. 0
    23 March 2023 22: 16
    Vicki writes about 390 Tulips in storage. Various types of ammunition, weighing more than 200 kg. Good range. Sufficient mobility. Where are they in the army? After all, they will cope with the tasks that the author announced (in terms of the destruction / destruction of the "supports" and the buildings turned into them).
    1. 0
      24 March 2023 05: 01

      Cetarb kilk
      Yesterday, 22: 16

      Vicki writes about 390 Tulips in storage. Various types of ammunition, weighing more than 200 kg. Good range. Sufficient mobility. Where are they in the troops?


      I completely agree, only for Tulips you need an adjustable mine of the type "Edge"
      To work according to the principle, one shot, one hit target ....
  36. +1
    23 March 2023 22: 17
    Well, we made the "dad of all bombs" with us. But it is practically impossible to apply it - planes do not fly.
    But it could be put on a rocket engine and slam on the fortifications.
    South Korea did it, but we didn't.
  37. +2
    23 March 2023 22: 31
    This Hammer is complete garbage, planning an adjustable bomb of 1,5-3 tons at times more efficient and faster.
  38. 0
    23 March 2023 22: 56
    Hmmm ... our task is to destroy buildings? But who and on what shisha will restore all this? If we do not plan to restore anything, the Hammer is also possible. If we plan, it is better to invest in high-precision weapons.
    1. +1
      24 March 2023 17: 57
      So if they are already being destroyed to the ground, only manually and with great sacrifices.
  39. 0
    23 March 2023 23: 36
    Agree, there is something abnormal in the proposals on methods for turning Ukraine into ruins. This is our land, our former homeland, which was part of the USSR. Well, I understand, if the use of neutron weapons was proposed, which does not cause long-term radioactive contamination, but effectively strikes the enemy’s manpower without turning cities into ruins. Yes, and it is necessary to use such weapons not so much in cities as in concentrating the enemy in the rear and in his logistics centers. You can't fight much without water, food and BC. But seriously, Russia is not a gladiator and not a fighting dog to fight the avatar of NATO in the ring of the world amphitheater. It is necessary to turn the living space of the enemy into ruins. And this enemy is NATO and the United States as its main element. If you don't want hundreds of millions of human victims, start striking at their eyes and ears in the face of a satellite constellation. At the same time, there will be no direct casualties, but our guys in Ukraine will immediately feel that the enemy is deaf and blind. If strikes in space do not reason with these gentlemen, then war is objectively inevitable. And why not avoid it, no matter how cowardly we hide our heads in the sand. Agree, the opposite side is defiantly not afraid of Armageddon and has already confidently crossed all the red lines. So what do we hope for? Don't we remind people who were brought to execution, gave them shovels in their hands, and instead of hitting the heads of the executioners with these shovels, they dutifully dig their own grave?
    1. 0
      24 March 2023 17: 58
      No, this is already a broken branch and will not grow back. You can only grind into flour and bake new bread.
  40. 0
    23 March 2023 23: 50
    A civilian kamikaze aircraft, having served its own, will it be reliable.?
    As a bomber, it can be taken by enemy air defense. And now imagine that this happens halfway over the city. How much does the author load explosives into it, 20-40t?
    1. +1
      24 March 2023 18: 02
      Stupid idea about civilian aircraft. Firstly, there are not so many of them, secondly, the price will be prohibitive, and thirdly, they will be knocked down. We need something like the Soviet "Andryusha" only with a larger caliber and with a guidance system. No need to think that it will be very expensive - no more than 152mm Krasnopol, and the efficiency is 1000 times greater.
  41. +3
    23 March 2023 23: 53
    BOPS with a depleted uranium core are considered by "wise men" and "propagandists" to be almost a "nuclear" weapon, since the word "uranium" is there. Although these ammunition (with a depleted uranium core) are more than dirty (in a biological sense) weapon, contaminating the area with particles of heavy metals does not pull. Everyone knows about the dangers of mercury or lead (they say that Rome died because of the plumbing of lead pipes. Yes, and increasing the octane number of gasoline with additives from TESlead. Everyone knows.) Moreover, this harm applies to uranium cores, all the more that when such a core hits a barrier, a huge amount of energy (thermal) is released, where both uranium and armor and earth (if in the ground) burn, this is what is called contamination of the territory with heavy metals.
    I propose to scare the Ukrainians and the whole world with new weapons of increased power and by pumping hydrogen into ammunition - to make "hydrogen" bombs out of them, by analogy with "uranium" ammunition.
    The main thing is to scare and fool. And how it really is - no one knows yet.
    Or maybe it's better to use the "rubber bomb" from the old Soviet joke, which "has been jumping for a week and continues to crush enemies."
  42. +2
    24 March 2023 00: 45
    Since the days of the Soviet army and its successor, the Russian, there have been two global problems. And in terms of importance, they can be put in one position. These problems have not been resolved to this day, from the word "generally". We have no problem hitting a target. Fortunately, our valiant designers piled up with a slide of different bomb-rockets to spray any adversary on the atoms.
    Problem number "one": first you need to find where you need to hit. With technical intelligence, such as optical, radar, thermal, etc. we have nothing. Not at all! The development of ground, air and space systems for technical reconnaissance is in its infancy. Satellites must be hovering over the battlefield 24/7/365! And the data must be in real time. And we can only paint our rockets under "Khokhloma" and "Gzhel".
    Problem number two: control and information transmission systems. Even what they managed to find / discover must be transferred in a timely manner to those units that can destroy this target. And how are we?! We will transfer a battalion / regiment / division / corps / army to the command post. There are shoulder straps. There, everyone will make agreements, scratch their turnips that they have. What can you hit. Will pass on your thoughts. In short, even if they still find something, then the goal is no longer relevant. It should be very different from what we have now. Attacking a platoon / company "opornik" located in a reinforced concrete building, do not have enough of their own fire capabilities to defeat? There is no need to drive tankers there with the task of spraying ammunition. Tank fail? Will cope. How much time and BC will it take him to lay down a reinforced concrete building? And the risk of getting an ATGM or RPG from the nearest window is very high. But the ability to quickly call for help from aviation with powerful weapons for a platoon / company will greatly simplify the fulfillment of the assigned tasks. A front-line bomber with the same gliding bombs, loitering in a safe area, will much faster and more efficiently disassemble the reinforced concrete "support". But this information must be delivered to him quickly and efficiently. And most importantly, timely. And we have problems with that. I do not in the least detract from the feat of arms of our Warriors on the battlefield, but generals should think about how to perform tasks effectively. That's what they academies zanchivayut.
  43. +1
    24 March 2023 09: 47
    Does the author write about a mortar? The caliber is about 1000 mm, the weight of the projectile is a ton or two. From modern composite materials (carbon fiber, etc.) you can make something relatively light, fitting into 20 tons, to be transported by wagons.

    Even if due to the survivability of the barrel - 100-200 shots and scrap, bring a new one.

    Although KAB 3000-5000 will be faster and cheaper
  44. 0
    24 March 2023 10: 09
    Something similar already exists. Complex of missile and bomb weapons "Thunder" in the version of OD. According to open sources, the composition of the OD mixture has been changed, aluminum and magnesium powder has been added to piperylene (in two different tanks?) - the declared power is equivalent to four ODAB -500 (again, according to public sources). In TNT equivalent, multiply by 1.8 = 3.6 tons. The range of application is more than 100 km. In addition, for the Tornado-S MLRS there is also 300mm OD, sort of like corrective ammunition. Well, no one forbids modifying the UMPC for ODAB series bombs. Even if by changing the appearance of the bomb to give it better aerodynamic properties.
  45. +1
    24 March 2023 13: 47
    In addition to increased power, ammunition must have increased range and increased accuracy. As well as increased mass production, which reduces the cost.

    The Americans have long found a solution to this problem in the form of Hymers MLRS in various calibers. At maximum range, such weapons provide maximum efficiency and maximum safety from return fire. With this approach, even increased power is not required, since it is completely replaced by increased accuracy and massive impact.

    PS. If someone wants to object, they say, the Hymers do not decide the outcome of the war, I suggest thinking about the fact that we have not yet seen the results of their actions at maximum range and mass. And in my opinion it would be better if we never saw it.
  46. +1
    24 March 2023 21: 02
    Not at all. The proven method of MTLB - kamikaze is safer. The possibility of detecting the Hammer and its catastrophic defeat is excluded. No need to reinvent the wheel. They removed the weapons from the matalyga, stuffed explosives and the same artillery shells into it and let them go on their last journey. More efficient and safer.
  47. +1
    25 March 2023 10: 07
    To resolve buildings at close range, we need something like the Syrian GOLAN-1000.

    Or something like the Israeli MAR-290 MLRS. Only with guided missiles.

    But to resolve bridges and buildings located behind enemy lines, for example, the same machine rooms of power plants. We need an analogue of the South Korean Hyunmu-5 missile.
  48. 0
    25 March 2023 19: 49
    Rszo can not only demolish the desired house, but also a couple of neighboring ones, then hammer them anyway, you can also remake old powerful bombs into controlled ones, there is still tos, there is a tulip ...
  49. 0
    26 March 2023 16: 00
    You can have as many of these ammunition as you like. The main thing is political will and a complete understanding of the goals.
    1. 0
      27 March 2023 20: 24
      Yes, we need a caterpillar armored assault self-propelled gun, even with one shell in the barrel, but of large caliber, for sure, for this purpose, for example, the T-54 can be redone by installing an armored wheelhouse with a mortar instead of a turret
  50. 0
    28 March 2023 10: 02
    Israel showed how to "fold" houses during the Lebanese war, you can borrow.
    And given the emergence of new ammunition, the implementation of the idea becomes easier.
  51. 0
    9 May 2023 20: 46
    Not a word about explosives, the improvement of which solves many problems in the development of powerful weapons. For example, experimental octanitrocubane is 2,38 times more powerful than the same TNT (Wikipedia). In practice, a mixture of hexanitrohexaazaisowurtzitane and octogen is more promising. All these developments were and are being carried out in the USA. For reference, the same hexogen and its mixtures, actively used in the Russian Armed Forces, were first synthesized in 1890 (Wikipedia). That is, about 130 years have passed since its creation... I think everyone already knows about the Russian Lancet. This is, of course, not a “Hammer,” but I think improving its warhead would turn it into a weighty “Sledgehammer” that works on “Coconuts”... Well, the creation of a new, promising explosive would make the creation of a “Hammer” easier.
  52. 0
    27 May 2023 16: 16
    esse hammer só com uma tonelada de explosivo continua fraco o kh32 tem capacidade de destruição igual e é barato por ser antigo e tem em grandes quantidade desde do tempo da URSS e é disparado de longe, poderia também usar em grande quantidade misseis OTR-21 Tochka para economizar munições mais caras, seria interessante um míssil balístico de curto alcance tipo uns 50km ou 60km com ogiva de 3 toneladas
  53. 0
    20 June 2023 21: 56
    The Syrians have such devices, it seems to be called Golan-1000. On the T-72 base, we added two guides of huge diameter and it was ready. The bicycle was invented a long time ago.........
  54. 0
    22 August 2023 19: 42
    For Fabs, we need to make a guided rocket. Make a container inside the rocket to hold the charge.
  55. -1
    22 August 2023 20: 40
    That’s why I think that for many years of the existence of the USSR and Russia they did not come up with bombs that could disable bridges. There are many bridges in Ukraine. At least those that connect with Western countries.
  56. The comment was deleted.