RCC "Neptune" - a sect of believers or is it still a weapon
What colleagues from The War Zone sometimes do is worthy of the Isaac Asimov Award. Also known as the Dell Magazines Award, it is an annual award given to undergraduate college students for the author of the best science fiction or fantasy story.
Here's how for me (it is not necessary to consider it as the ultimate truth), then everything that is dedicated to the Neptune rocket is worthy of this award. Nobody really saw the rocket, but so much has been written about it that it’s time to give an award.
So, the gentlemen from The War Zone, especially Tyler Rogoway, wrote something that is better not to read at night. Well, or only after watching the TV channel "Zvezda", the reports of the local luminaries of the camera and keyboard are somewhat leveled.
So, we will now talk about the deadly Neptune rocket, but through the prism of what American experts write and what we see. And we see that this is not going anywhere.
Since the evil allies have tied Ukraine hand and foot, forbidding the use of received long-range weapons against targets outside its borders, Ukraine is developing its own strike weapon long range. This seems to be fair and does not violate agreements with donors.
On August 23, Kyiv used a modified Neptune anti-ship cruise missile to destroy the Russian S-400 air defense system in the western part of the occupied peninsula, a representative of the Ukrainian defense department told The War Zone. There are plans, the official added, to eventually strike Moscow and other targets inside Russia that are banned from the use of donated weapons through Neptune's ground attack variants.
The attack on the S-400 system near the village of Olenovka on Cape Tarkhankut “was 100 percent carried out by a modified Neptune,” the official said, of course, on condition of complete anonymity.
The statements of the "official" were made a few days after the secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine Oleksiy Danilov said that a new Ukrainian missile hit the S-400. Danilov, however, did not specify what kind of weapon was used.
The announcement also follows a statement made on August 24 by Yuri Butusov, who said the R-400 Neptune anti-ship missile, modified for ground attack, was used to strike the S-360. I don’t really want to believe Yurochka, because he lies like he breathes and, moreover, he can give master classes to our people from DIMC.
But what our Ministry of Defense later issued seems to confirm the statement of the Ukrainian official.
The first statement was made on Monday, when the Telegram channel of the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that “a Ukrainian cruise missile was shot down by air defense forces on duty over the Black Sea off the coast of the Republic of Crimea.” Although the channel did not name a specific type of Ukrainian cruise missile, this statement is significant because in past statements about downed cruise missiles, the Russian Defense Ministry referred specifically to missiles donated from abroad. For example, on August 7, the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed to have shot down "nine Storm Shadow long-range cruise missiles" provided by the UK.
On Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry announced for the first time that it had shot down a Ukrainian Neptune anti-ship missile. However, the message did not say whether the missile was heading for a ship or land.
Back in April of this year, another UAF spokesman said his country was working on turning the Neptune into a ground strike weapon, but it needed a new guidance system that it didn't have at the time. In particular, certain types of chips were required to complete the system, but in general the system was close to completion.
It was further said that Ukraine had developed a GPS guidance system that would take the missile to a predetermined location. The missile's infrared homing head then searches for and locks on a target based on a preloaded image, and then makes a final attack on that target. If it cannot match the target, the missile will abort its attack. In general, there is nothing new and breakthrough, all cruise missiles work on this principle.
Currently, the Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG cruise missiles donated to Ukraine use just such a guidance scheme. Using it on the upgraded Neptune will be reminiscent of the path taken by the RGM-84 Harpoon, which turned it into a SLAM (Stand-off Land Attack Missile) missile with a modification with an infrared passive homing head.
In the end, the next SLAM-ER will be an even bigger step forward from its forefather Harpoon.
The Americans believe that Russia launched countermeasures against DSMAC-enabled missiles just as Storm Shadow arrived in Ukraine. We are talking about the use of special compositions when painting ships, on the one hand, these special paints change the silhouettes of ships, confusing the GOS of missiles working for identification by the image loaded into the processor, on the other hand, special compositions reduce the IR signature at wavelengths, by which seekers work, confusing their guidance logic.
Essentially, the images that the seeker "sees" will not match the images/guidance models loaded into the missile's computer, and thus the intended target will not be attacked. How effective such a countermeasure can be is not clear; the effectiveness of countermeasures against cruise missiles is revealed precisely as they are applied.
In addition, according to some experts in the US, these special painting jobs may make it difficult to identify specific ships in commercial satellite imagery. A small addition, so to speak, a bonus.
Of course, staining with special squads is not a panacea (tested by the same Americans), but all methods are definitely good in the fight.
In general, based on some data obtained from Ukrainian sources, there is a suspicion that Ukrainian engineers, when adapting the Neptune to land use, may try to use a different guidance method than sending the rocket to a specific point using GPS. Of course, here no one is talking about super-new developments, everything is more trivial: old (and not very old) rockets are flowing from Europe, from which you can really borrow something.
You can rely on GPS accuracy, but there is one point: when working along the leading edge, which is a rather dynamic system, work on coordinates is not always effective, and when attacking targets that are at a decent distance, you can easily run into the work of electronic warfare systems, just jamming frequencies on which satellite navigation works. And that's all, the flight is over, the crew says goodbye to you.
Russia has proven and effective electronic warfare systems built specifically to counter cruise missiles, and localized GPS jamming is a very real thing that has already affected the effectiveness of other precision weapons such as the M31 missiles fired by HIMARS.
But, apparently, this does not frighten Ukrainians, since from time to time various interviews got on the Web, from which it followed that work to increase the range of Neptune did not stop.
Fired from the same launcher as the anti-ship variant, the converted Neptune has a range of about 400 km and a payload of about 350 kg. If so, that would make it the longest-range missile ever built by Ukraine. However, it is not yet possible to independently verify these claims.
In addition, the range of "Neptune" has one big minus. The rocket is subsonic!
The practice of SVO in Ukraine has already shown that subsonic cruise missiles are good only when there is no worthy counteraction. That is, air defense systems capable of detecting and hitting a flying missile, and aviation. Everything is simple here, if Ukrainian MiG-29s and Su-27s in the regions of Central Ukraine easily shot down Russian Calibers, then why can't our planes do the same with Neptune? Yes, easily, because Russian planes are head and shoulders above Ukrainian ones. This is aviation of a different generation, more modern and with great capabilities.
It is worth noting here that when the Russian media reported that the Neptune was shot down, there was no hysteria and accusations of lies from the Ukrainian side. Well, at least from sane sources. That is, people even in Ukraine are well aware that if they shoot down Caliber in “packs”, then this will not cause problems for the Russian military either. Killed, and more than once.
That's about the fact that "more than once."
Here, too, not everything is so luxurious. If you estimate and calculate, again, based on the data of the Ukrainian side, if Neptunes were made, then no more than two dozen, counting test samples. And here to talk about efficiency somehow the language does not turn.
On Sunday, September 3, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told the Ukrainian official news outlet Ukrinform that his country had "significantly increased" the production of Neptune anti-ship missiles.
Here, of course, it is difficult to draw at least some conclusions, because if 3-4 missiles were produced per year, then an increase of 1-2 pieces is, yes, significant. And if they made one rocket - well, you understand ...
But it is clear that they will increase production.
Firstly, the production facilities of the Artem corporation are not affected, there is where and to whom to do it (if they don’t rake it under the gun).
And secondly, the United States, Great Britain and France limited the use of donated weapons by Ukraine only on Ukrainian soil, including Crimea. There are no such exceptions for modified Neptunes or any other Ukrainian-designed weapons.
In Ukraine, they do not hide their ambitious plans for future attacks by Moscow. Moreover, it is really possible to increase the range of the missile by reducing the weight of the warhead. We reduce the payload, increase the amount of fuel. This is a common modification for cruise missile variants.
It is clear that the weight of such strikes will be more political than military. Of course, you should not flatter yourself, it is much easier to detect and shoot down a subsonic cruise missile than a drone, but we will probably not give advice to the Ukrainian side.
But we will voice three questions to which answers may not be given, due to the fact that they (questions) are almost rhetorical.
Three questions
First. First of all, how many of these missiles can Ukraine produce and how quickly can they do it?
The effectiveness of this type is also in question, regardless of the claimed early success (meaning the tale of "Moscow" and getting into the S-400). Rockets are good, as practice shows, when they are, and in sufficient quantities. If GAKHK "Artem" will continue to manually and individually assemble several P-360 "Neptune" per year, this will not make any sense at all.
Second. This is something to think about. Where did the Ukrainians suddenly get and develop an active radar seeker similar to our ARGSN-35?
Excuse me, it’s not so easy to “tear” even elementarily, especially when the entire (or almost all) component base has remained abroad, in an unfriendly state. "Import substitution"? Well, here, I'm sure everyone chuckled.
Then it turns out that the Neptune GOS is imported. And here we come to the third question.
Third. I am personally outraged by the approach of some "experts" and authors (including those on the "Review"), who, with a blue eye, write nonsense like "Neptune" - this is supposedly a development based on the obsolete Soviet Kh-35 missile. They write and do not blush.
I just think it would be very helpful to remind such "experts" that the X-35 has indeed been in development since the 70s. Yes, this is a Soviet development. But after the final refinement, the rocket was put into service only in 2003. As part of the ship complex "Uranus", which was purchased for themselves by such recognized whims as the Indians.
And in 2008, the Kh-35 was adapted for ground use. And it turned out "Ball", a complex that today covers our shores. And in 2010, the X-35 received a residence permit in the sky, both on airplanes and helicopters.
I would like to say, yes, you decide, gentlemen, is it such an outdated and useless missile or the basis of our defense in the short-range anti-ship missile class? Is it morally old or the best that we have come up with?
Some manage to push this in one article at once. And this is reminiscent of the work of the American media in relation to the F-22. The best in the world, the best, but we will rivet the F-35. Here we see the same thing.
The R-360 Neptune is not much different from the X-35. And if in fact the GOS is not from Ukrainian developers, but from overseas ones, and many people think the same way, then “Neptune” should not be underestimated. The result is a rocket at least as good as ours. The only question is quantity.
According to the military statistical bulletin The Military Balance for 2022, the Armed Forces of Ukraine had 1 RK-360MTs complex. These are 6 launchers of 4 missiles, a complex control center, 6 TZM and another 6 TM. That is, 24 missiles at the start and 48 more in reserve.
It's not much, but it all depends on how you use it and how you evaluate it. Underestimation does not lead to anything good, as practice shows. This has already happened more than once: from “Kyiv in three days” to more stupid statements. The result is known to be still there. Quite far from Kyiv.
The effectiveness of Neptune in any iteration directly depends on the number of missiles that Ukraine can produce. We will talk about dozens - there will be something to think about in terms of protection. If everything remains at the level of piece-by-piece collected single copies, we will live from “peremoga to peremoga”. Once a year, according to the schedule. Like a festive prayer service in a sect of believers, nothing more.
Information