Let me express my doubts

54
Let me express my doubts

Many Western, especially American media, at the instigation of the Ukrainian ones, naturally began to broadcast very loudly that the Russian army had used P-35 missiles against air defense positions near Odessa.

It is clear that this was presented under the premise that Russia’s missile arsenals are empty and something needs to be done. And so the P-35s removed from storage were used.



When home-grown bloggers from all over the world began to reprint the photos of “evidence” presented by the Ukrainians, that’s fine. But when publications like NI start writing about it, it even becomes a little offensive. Yes, with reservations, but they wrote it. Russia is increasingly using the old weapon, especially missiles, and those that were not originally even intended for this.

Having eaten the hedgehogs, as they say, let’s take on the rockets?

Let me disagree.

Moreover, it makes sense to understand what happened at all, because it’s a shame for the state, and there are too many factors that make you think very hard about what really arrived there.

So, the version of the Ukrainian side and everyone else: P-35 missiles from the Utes and Redut coastal anti-ship systems were used. The missiles, naturally, were repurposed to attack ground targets. Here's the evidence: something fell.






By the way, based on the photographs of the “wreckage of the P-35”: there is no exact data regarding where the rocket fell, as well as the reasons for the fall. Either the missile was shot down by Ukrainian air defense, or it fell on its own due to some kind of failure. And vice versa, there is also no information that air defense targets in the Odessa region were hit by the P-35.

In general - a set of riddles.

However, before we move on to commenting on what the Ukrainians, British, Americans and others have scribbled, it’s probably worth taking a look at what the P-35 is? And how can it even correspond to what has been written about it abroad?


The P-35 missile was created at OKB-52 of the great Chelomey and entered service in 1962. Just 62 years ago. One might say – almost not old. And at that time, it was generally quite a decent weapon, because the P-35 could fly from 100 to 300 kilometers at a speed of 1200-1300 km/h. The range directly depended on the altitude. At a minimum altitude of 400 meters and the flight distance was minimal, about 100 km, and at an altitude of 6 to 7 meters the rocket could fly up to 000 km.

The P-35 carried a high-explosive warhead weighing 560 kg, and could also carry a special one with a yield of 20 kilotons. The first warhead was intended for individual ships, the second for AUG-type formations.


The missile had a combined guidance system: radio command on the cruising leg of the flight and active radar guidance on the final leg. During the cruising phase, the rocket was manually controlled by an operator who monitored the flight using the ship's radar or coastal anti-ship missile system. That is, I emphasize, the missile had to fly above the radio horizon in order to remain in the radar field of view. The operator used radio commands to keep the missile on course and manually carried out initial guidance to the target.

About 20 km from the target, the radar homing head came into play. The missile captured the target selected by the operator with its homing head and, descending to a height of 100 meters, carried out the attack. The option of attacking ground-based radio-contrast targets was possible. In this case, the missile was also aimed by the operator and attacked from a dive at an angle of approximately 80 degrees. It was possible to fire a missile in autonomous mode, relying on data from the inertial unit, but then, as expected, it was not a matter of choosing a target and the accuracy was appropriate.

The P-35 could also be controlled using target designation signals from Tu-95D, Tu-16D aircraft and Ka-25Ts helicopters.

We understand that these planes and helicopters have not been in service for a long time, the ships on which the P-35 launchers were located have long been cut into metal, the question arises: what is left?

And the coastal anti-ship complexes “Utes” and “Redut” remained.

“Cliff” is generally a separate topic; there were only two of them: “Object 100” and “Object 101”.


“Object 101” was built in 1976 on Kildin Island, 1,5 km from the Murmansk coast of the Kola Peninsula. The complex was in service until 1995, when the regiment was disbanded, the personnel were sent to the “mainland”, and all the assets of the missile system were left on the island. Today the complex is completely destroyed; for those interested, there will be a link to a photo tour at the end of the article.

“Object 100” in Crimea consisted of two divisions built in 1971, the first was in the mountains near the village of Oboronnoye, the second was six kilometers to the east, near the village of Rezervnoye. As part of the agreement on the division of the Black Sea fleet in 1996, “Object-100” went to Ukraine. In 2002, “Object 100” was disbanded, weapons and equipment were dismantled, the division near the village of Oboronnoye was not mothballed and collapsed. The division near the village of Reservnoye was mothballed by specialists of the Navy and was preserved. In 2014, Russia reactivated the division and in 2016 introduced it into the 15th coastal missile brigade of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Two launchers for two missiles each near Sevastopol. We will take advantage of the fact that there are enough clips of missile launches, but we will note for ourselves that flying to Odessa from near Sevastopol is more than a doubtful matter.

There still remain the Redut BPKRK, armed with the same P-35s on the chassis of the ancient ZIL-135, which were assembled in Bryansk as the BAZ-135MB. And here, too, not everything is smooth and smooth.


The composition of the Redut complex was as follows:
- self-propelled launcher SPU-35B on the BAZ-135MB chassis;
- a machine with the Scala control system (4P45);
- towed radar (usually “Cape” of various modifications);
- transport-charging machine (TZM).

What interests us most in this list is the Mys-M1E coastal radar, which was located in a towed trailer and was part of the Redut complex.


The radar was developed and produced by the Saratov Radio Instrument Plant, and this is what can be said about this radar: the maximum detection range for medium-displacement surface ships (frigate-destroyer) is up to 200 km. Anything less means that the detection distance also decreases. And yes, the radar must be higher than the radio horizon, and the missile must fly even higher, without leaving the radar beam.

Well, the accuracy of the P-35 in terms of COE ranged from 0,5 to 1,5 km.

For the sixties of the last century - quite decent. Today, of course, everything looks very dim, because it is clear how ineffective the P-35 is as a weapon. All its shortcomings can be combined into one big pile and this is what happens:
- noticeable on radar due to its size and shape;
- low flight speed will allow interception of even MANPADS;
- the rocket flies at a high (by modern standards) altitude;
- the missile does not maneuver even during the final segment of the flight, which makes it an easy target;
- the missile is guided on the cruising segment, which makes it especially vulnerable to electronic warfare;
- The seeker is focused on high-contrast “ship” type targets.


But the main disadvantage is the “short-range” radar, which limits the use of P-35 missiles over long distances. Of course, we can say that the radar was probably modernized (no), and that the missile was also not left “from the 60s.”

Yes, they didn't leave it. And there was modernization, after which a new rocket was obtained, 3M44 Progress. And this happened in 1982. The flight altitude was reduced to 25 meters, the length of the final section was increased from 25 to 50 km, and the noise immunity of the missile's communication channel with the operator was improved. The missile's flight range was increased to 460 km.

But, I emphasize, the Redut complex was designed to destroy strike groups, cruisers, destroyers, landing ships and large enemy transports. High-contrast targets, clearly visible against the background of the sea surface in the radio range.

And in 2020, Redoubt was dismissed. By 2022, the remaining launchers (8 units left) were shoved into Patriot parks, perhaps something else was left in reserve in Crimea. But it is unlikely, given the age of the rockets. Still, the use of such a missile is dangerous in principle, and there are also doubts about the operability of the control systems, the elemental base of which was forever outdated 20 years ago.

Now according to what they say there, behind the invisible line of the information front.

And everything is very difficult there. Yes, photographs of rocket debris began to appear on social networks and were actively discussed. According to unconfirmed reports, the weapon was shot down by Ukrainian air defense systems, although this was not confirmed by independent experts, and Ukrainian off-channels somehow kept silent about this victory. It is also unclear where and when the rocket fell. It is completely unclear where the launch came from, although it is clear that it was not from Utes.

What is certain is that the P-35/3M44 missiles were not previously known to have been used in the conflict. In addition to its significant size, the distinctive features of the rocket are a cigar-shaped body with an engine air intake underneath and highly swept wings that open after launch.

Okay, we've identified it. P-35, 3M44, not so important.

Returning to the missile debris, it seems likely that it is a 3M44, although it is also possible that it is a P-35 from older stock.

Here is another question: from whose reserves are the missiles? I didn’t see anything in any photo that would indicate that the missile belonged to Russia.

Meanwhile, let me remind you that from 1996 to 2014, the Utes launchers were under the jurisdiction of Ukraine. And the Ukrainian military even fired these missiles somewhere a couple of times.

Attention, question: who said that there are no reserves of these missiles left in Ukraine? I'm not talking about tens, I'm talking about units. But when the first division of the Utes was destroyed, should the missiles have been taken somewhere? To some warehouses? And who said that they weren’t taken to Lesovoe, Gorodok, Bogdanovka?

And here we come to a very sensitive moment.

Dear readers, how long has it been since we heard about the successful launches of Tochka? "Flight"? "Swift"? "Hymarsa"? S-200? In general, about successful launches from Ukrainian territory, at least something other than drones-kamikaze?

By the way, it’s especially interesting about the “Hymars”. Apparently, everything is over.

I won’t say anything, the Ukrainian missilemen tried to use to the fullest what was at the disposal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. And even if there were victories, they were caused precisely by the use of missile weapons, this cannot be denied.

But overall everything is somehow quiet. There was a splash with a landing ship, and so – drones and nothing more.

But from our side the missiles were still flying. More, less – it doesn’t matter. They are flying. And you can say whatever you want, but the fact is that Russia does not have problems with missiles, and if there are, it is not as noticeable as in Ukraine. To be convinced of the correctness of these words, it is enough to simply look through the TG channel of Shariya or UNIAN to make sure that they flew and are flying.

But on the Ukrainian side, everything is somehow more modest. Yes, drones are coming. And they cause damage. But not as significant as we would like. And obviously I would like more.

And here it is not even a theory that arises, but an outright certainty that it was not the work of Ukrainians? After all, this is not the first time they have taken something very ancient from their arsenals and tried to cause damage with it.

To strike accurately, Russia still has the Kh-101, Kh-55, and not so much, but for sure - the Kh-22 and Kh-32. And there is no need to launch an ancient missile somewhere towards the enemy with a CEP of one and a half kilometers.


Some Russian Internet experts have already choked with delight, talking about how the dismantled P-35 missile was disposed of by some Ukrainian air defense system. As always, there is no evidence, but the CEP of 500-1500 meters from the manufacturer suggests that on land such a missile can only be fired at a “City” type target. You might not get into anything smaller.

But the Russian command does not set such goals, does it? From the first day of the SVO, we were talking about the targeted destruction of important objects, but not about the haphazard destruction of urban buildings.

Why are we accused of using the P-35?

Simply because we actually used them. Like target missiles. The P-35/3M44 is simply no longer suitable for anything larger. And here's just the proof:


Actually, 2020. "Utes", the half that remained in working order and the remaining missiles were used as drones-targets for testing air defense systems during live-fire exercises.

After all, now the Russian Black Sea Fleet has much more modern coastal defense missile systems, namely the longer-range mobile 3K60 “Bal” and the supersonic mobile complex K-300P “Bastion”. The missiles of these complexes fly the same 300 km, but at a higher speed, and we’re not even talking about accuracy.

Yes, there were one-time uses of air-launched anti-ship missiles Kh-22 and Kh-32 “Storm”. And it’s clear why there were attempts to use them: enormous flight speed and a very powerful explosive charge.

However, practice has shown that despite the fact that the X-22 and X-32, in theory, have the ability to work against ground targets, they are not suitable for this. Yes, their supersonic speed, as well as their steep dive on the target, make them a huge problem for Ukrainian air defense. But the accuracy on targets (CEP 100-300 m) really left much to be desired, and after several uses, these missiles were abandoned.

And they could have gone further, because even the Ukrainian side admitted that the air defense could not intercept a single X-22.

Having more accurate missiles, pray tell, why do we need to use outright antiques? Even the 3M44 with its archaic inertial guidance system is no good, what can we say about the P-35?

Of course, this does not prohibit the other side from fantasizing. But what can I say, if they have S-300s and especially S-400s hitting houses, to be honest, I don’t even want to comment. Of course, in any war there is a place for improvisation, and the North Military District also showed that both sides can improvise.

As for this particular anti-ship missile, it seems realistic that this 3M44 (if it really is it) was tested for possible use as a cruise missile by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. And apparently, something went wrong, and the rocket simply fell due to the failure of its ancient equipment.

This perfectly explains the complete lack of information about where all this happened, because everything clearly happened at some training ground closed to the masses. Where the systems of the old rocket were tested. The check showed that 3M44 is not suitable. It’s hard to say why there was such a howl. Like a brick in an information war? Yes, it will do, but no more than that.

Frankly speaking, it is stupid to believe that “Targets in Odessa were hit by missiles of the legendary Utes and Redut complexes,” as some media outlets have already written. It is very doubtful that missiles that are more than six decades old and are aimed manually can hit anything. But it is even greater stupidity to believe that our army can do such a thing.

The only thing that bothers me is the arrival of such a rocket into another residential building. And cries about the fact that “Russia does not care about the lives of civilians.” But such a thing could easily happen, and they would poke it in our faces. Have you run 3M44? You. How are the targets? Who cares? This means, as always, Russia is to blame.

And now, after the information warriors began to celebrate the destruction of something there in Odessa with the help of the P-35... Nobody knows what, but they are celebrating from the heart. And I quietly expect another meanness from the other side. I've already seen a lot, you know.

Of course, after attracting the old ones tanks As self-propelled guns, we can say that there is nothing to be surprised by, but for some reason there is such confidence that not everything is so bad and we will not have the shame of firing museum missiles “towards the positions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.” And in general, museum exhibits should be in museums, but we, thank Rostec, have something to hit on that side.

Well, after the President of Ukraine signed a decree on preserving Ukrainianness in my region and neighboring ones, I think we shouldn’t be surprised at such requests.

Promised photo tour:
https://dzen.ru/a/YZmy6setzTkDm5LQ
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +23
    29 January 2024 03: 58
    What is the offense in using anything at all that has been taken out of storage? Anything is better than recycling.
    1. Eug
      +15
      29 January 2024 06: 27
      That's it! You should be proud, but here it’s almost whining...
    2. +13
      29 January 2024 07: 45
      Just look at how many “improvement proposals” are being introduced into the SVO! "Visors" on tanks, ship(!) bomb throwers, anti-aircraft guns on "motor skids"... and much more! And all because a lot of engineers and other technical workers were mobilized! But they sometimes get bored... all the time, for example, shooting from a cannon! And nostalgia for your previous work may appear! Why am I saying this? Besides, maybe some mobilized, honored innovator of a decent company, missing his previous work, thought: “Why is this “stupid” standing here idle and no one cares about her? What if we hit her adversary with it? and the “comrades in the shop” answer... Come on, Vasily, stop fooling around! It’s anti-ship! Its locator is designed for ships! “You’re lying, you won’t get it!” answers the leading engineer and honored innovator of a decent company..." I Ratsukha came up with! I’ll put my old Chinese-made iPhone with a navigator into it! And I’ll turn off the locator!” That’s roughly how it was! And the “world” thought: “The Russians are running out of missiles!” Oh, and fools, this “world”!
      1. +4
        29 January 2024 09: 47
        The main thing is that it flies and lands where it needs to go, the rest is details. laughing

        Hello, Volodya!))
        1. +1
          29 January 2024 12: 16
          Quote: Sea Cat
          The main thing is that it arrives where it needs to...

          I wish you good health, Kostya! I agree...when the desired result is obtained, it is very good!
        2. +6
          29 January 2024 12: 41
          Quote: Sea Cat
          The main thing is that it flies and lands where it needs to go,

          Agree. This is a very good way to recycle old BZ. The whole point is that at least 2 (in accordance with the air defense firing algorithm) new foreign-made missiles will be used against our old missile defense systems. And this is a serious waste of such a scarce dill air defense base. They don’t send very many of them anyway, and then you have to spend on dummies. No, NOT ICE!
          AHA.
      2. +1
        29 January 2024 10: 41
        True, sometimes such rationalization, if the rationalized contains explosives, explodes with the rationalizer himself, and it’s good that if only with him.
        1. +1
          29 January 2024 12: 32
          Quote from AdAstra
          if the rationalized contains explosives, it explodes with the rationalizer itself

          You don't see the difference between a novice innovator and an established one...! And the difference is like between a 1st category mechanic and a 7th category mechanic! In order for a novice innovator to become deserved, he must live his life for “so many years” in “works and achievements”! Yes, according to your forecast, a novice “innovator” may not become “deserved”... but an “innovator with extensive experience” is another matter! wink
          1. +4
            29 January 2024 13: 57
            Well, yes, and he knows safety precautions like the back of his hand. Yes
            1. +2
              29 January 2024 15: 31
              So... as popular wisdom says, “...on the asphalt” and two are enough! wink
          2. +2
            29 January 2024 15: 28
            “Tolya, why did you burn all our work?”
            - I did not mean to. It was an experiment. On the subject of rationalization proposals.
            - And it was impossible to leave at least bookkeeping from the dining room?
            - What is it?
            - Today, the pay was supposed to be.
            - I did not think.
            - I didn’t think! Now think about how to take the first train to the troops, or else put him in a cage like a giraffe.
      3. +1
        31 January 2024 06: 12
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        I came up with a ratsukha! I’ll put my old Chinese-made iPhone with a navigator into it! And I’ll turn off the locator!” That’s roughly how it was! And the “world” thought

        Here’s an article about how “the old anti-ship missile (which hits a ship) has an accuracy of “500-1000 m” and similar nonsense. Iranian “Shaheds”, having received a Russian navigation unit, hit a “squirrel in the eye” at distances of hundreds kilometers, while also circling for the sake of decency, to activate enemy air defense, and Chelomey’s great creation with a speed of 2M and a warhead of 560 kg is impossible to teach the same? Yes, now all the reserves of these missiles must be dragged to the Crimea (and not only) together with their ground self-propelled launchers (there are definitely such in the Far East) and utilize them to their advantage, discharging enemy air defenses and causing maximum damage to the fascists.
        And praise be to Ahura Mazda that this is exactly what is happening.
        Moreover, the modernization of SSGN Project 949 has now begun, and therefore the potential of the magnificent heavy anti-ship missiles "Granit" is being released. For their proper disposal, it is true that ground launchers must be invented for them, but this is already a matter of technology, because missiles definitely deserve proper disposal. But those remained from the ammunition loads of the 4 nuclear-powered cruisers of Project 1144, as well as the coastal stock of them from the cruiser "Moscow". All this also needs to be prepared for practical use against the enemy. And their warheads are even more powerful - they were sharpened against aircraft carriers.
        I also have a persistent misunderstanding as to why we are neglecting such huge reserves of Tochka-U missiles. There should be about 10 of them at the storage bases. And this is simply huge potential.
        Has the fuel in the TTD degraded?
        - There is a possibility and technology to replace it, because the Ukrainian Armed Forces have modernized their Tochka-U and recharged them with fuel.
        Is the accuracy of these missiles insufficient by today's standards?
        - So install a domestic navigation unit there (after all, they installed it on the Shaheds, and what kind of Geranium went fellow ).
        There are no personnel to carry out this work and capable of applying them?
        - Come on, the last brigade in the RF Armed Forces was rearmed from Tochki to Iskander 4 years ago. And in Belarus they are still in service to this day. So, everything necessary to modernize and return these missiles to service is definitely there, and the potential is 10 missiles with a range of 000 km. for a warhead of 120 kg. definitely worth it. This is what kind of (!!) massing can be ensured during offensive operations and during the disorganization of the enemy’s operational rear areas. fellow
    3. +1
      29 January 2024 14: 35
      It's hard to disagree! Everything that needs to be disposed of must be disposed of and sent to its intended purpose. And in this sense, RBU 6000 and 2m3m and rockets and bombs are normal. This is a test of characteristics and conclusions, and benefits, and one might say savings. In any case, the package of collected data will be useful not only for modernizing existing products, but also specific technical specifications for future weapons. And we NEED it!!! As the Romans correctly said: - Do you want peace? Get ready for war!
  2. +8
    29 January 2024 04: 11
    I never cease to be amazed at the breadth of my horizons and level of competence of the author! fellow
    1. +1
      29 January 2024 05: 45
      I always read his articles with great pleasure! Very informative, richly illustrated)
      1. +1
        29 January 2024 11: 29
        log back in winked
        Your comment is too short...
    2. -1
      29 January 2024 11: 27
      "zaliz" - counted, take a cookie laughing
  3. +3
    29 January 2024 04: 52
    Quote: Sancho_SP
    What's the harm in using anything taken out of storage?

    No offense, the author explained in detail that these missiles have a KVO (deflection) of up to 300m, i.e. if someone recognizes their use for purposes, then you won’t be able to get away with it if you accidentally fly into a “non-military” object
    1. KCA
      +3
      29 January 2024 05: 18
      The CEP up to 300m is very blurry, the ancient X-22 has 8 options for equipping warheads and guidance systems, which one did the author mean? Maybe anti-radar? Or with TYABCH? Not clear. The X-32 is fresh, in service since 2016, exact data about it is not disclosed, everything is at the discretion of the experts
    2. +2
      29 January 2024 09: 28
      But don’t give a damn even if it actually arrives? Our own anti-aircraft missiles fly in - no one deals with it. That side declares “it’s all Russia” and that side is ordered to believe. All.
      1. 0
        29 January 2024 12: 43
        And don’t give a damn, even if it actually arrives

        what can we do, our geostrategists continue to “play” by someone else’s rules....
    3. +7
      29 January 2024 12: 56
      Quote: Vladimir80
      for these missiles the KVO (deflection) is up to 300m, i.e. if someone recognizes their use for purposes, then you won’t be able to get away with it if you accidentally fly into a “non-military” object

      These missiles have a control/guidance scheme: TU+SN(gsn=arls). Who is stopping you from bringing it to the Odessa port from the sea? And it is clearly visible and will turn when the operator needs it. And let them rejoice - they shoot them down over the sea, using up scarce missiles. And so that the dill air defense guys don’t get too bored, a couple of anti-radar missiles, such as the Kh-31PD, can be placed in the salvo... Look, at the same time, the dill will lose both the air defense and anti-aircraft radars. It won't be superfluous either. And most importantly, everything that is shot down over the sea will sink into oblivion. And there will definitely be nothing to show.
    4. 0
      30 January 2024 07: 32
      For such missiles, I believe, a target is selected in an open field, but through the area where air defense systems are supposed to be located.
      An air defense system has been detected - the task is completed. An air defense system crashed a missile into a residential area - a problem with the air defense system.
  4. +13
    29 January 2024 05: 17
    Damn! What are we even talking about? It’s all on the surface! Any junk, instead of being written off and disposed of due to old age and expiration of guarantees, is used to identify enemy air defenses. This, as it were, is the default world practice. There is no need to multiply rumors and entities. All the noise in this regard, it only speaks about the level of incompetence of the experts and their wishes.
  5. +6
    29 January 2024 05: 40
    During the Great Patriotic War in the Far East, T-26s and BTs fought and nothing, not en masse, of course, but still, so what?
  6. +14
    29 January 2024 05: 54
    A huge article that can be condensed into:
    1. There is no exact information about where the rocket was flying from and to.
    2. There is no exact evidence that it was P35 or its further development.
    3. Each side had a few pieces left after the division.
    1. +3
      29 January 2024 07: 03
      Quote: AC130 Ganship
      1. There is no exact information about where the rocket was flying from and to.
      2. There is no exact evidence that it was P35 or its further development.
      3. Each side had a few pieces left after the division.

      4. Well, wow, you all...discussed someone’s “misunderstanding” in all seriousness!
    2. 0
      29 January 2024 23: 49
      It will go like the conclusions of the article.
  7. +12
    29 January 2024 06: 25
    An ancient rocket flies like ..... a mammoth. Big as mammoth eggs. The operator of the Patriot air defense system (or any other) sees it and is obliged to react.
    In the end, everyone is happy:
    1. The American military-industrial complex received another order for a rocket.
    2. Ours revealed the operation of air defense systems.
    3. Fleachers - topic for the week.
    PS They could even get hit with a bonus, for something that was not very protected.
  8. +9
    29 January 2024 07: 04
    "When was the last time we heard of a successful use of Hymars? We're probably done." Shine and bravo!
    Well, well, we don’t hear about successful applications here. Precisely because they are successful. Just the other day, by some miracle, Ilovaisk was mentioned at the “Russian Spring”. So... modestly... briefly... Because such a paragraph happened there that at least something had to be given out to let off steam. And if something is not so resonant, we won’t find out about it unless we deliberately interfere with the enemy’s information field
  9. +5
    29 January 2024 08: 07
    I don’t understand, what’s the problem? We shoot with this, but we don’t shoot with this?
    1. +8
      29 January 2024 09: 06
      Quote: kor1vet1974
      I don’t understand, what’s the problem?

      The author just has his own vision of what is happening. He has already “buried” the tanks, and apparently he has heard about the use of “false targets” out of the blue
      1. +4
        29 January 2024 09: 08
        The author just has his own vision of what is happening
        Is it like directors? Yes? "I see it that way.." smile
    2. +1
      29 January 2024 10: 01
      The problem is that with a high probability old anti-ship missiles using inertial guidance can end up in the residential sector due to low guidance accuracy and this can be actively used for propaganda in Ukraine and Europe. That's why the author is trying to cast a shadow on the fence.
      1. +2
        29 January 2024 13: 04
        Quote from solar
        old anti-ship missiles using inertial guidance may end up in the residential sector due to low guidance accuracy

        We are talking about the P-35 anti-ship missiles and the Progress, which have SU = TU + SN (AGRLS). The 35th does not have inertial guidance. This is not an OTRK with SBP for stationary ground targets, where +/- 1,5 km is an “excellent” rating!
  10. +4
    29 January 2024 09: 05
    I wrote before and will repeat now that nothing prevents the use of this missile as a decoy for the Ukrainian air defense system...
  11. +6
    29 January 2024 09: 14
    So much text and so little content.
    And in 2020, Redoubt was dismissed.

    Did not send. The photo at the beginning of the article shows the launch of a 3M44 Progress missile from the Utes silo-based missile system from the Black Sea Fleet coastal missile brigade on October 19, 2021.
    Official message of the RF Ministry of Defense
    October 19 (2021) - a detachment of ships and a coastal missile brigade of the Black Sea Fleet (Sevastopol).

    During the bilateral exercise, a detachment of Black Sea Fleet ships will practice actions to repel a mock enemy missile strike with anti-aircraft weapons.

    Combat crews of the Utes silo-based missile system from the Black Sea Fleet coastal missile brigade will launch the Progress target missile, and the personnel of the Admiral Grigorovich frigate at sea must escort it and destroy it from the anti-aircraft missile system.

    The Progress target missile will be launched at a distance of up to 300 km and an altitude of up to 1000 m. Monitoring the firing results and tracking the target missile will be carried out using unmanned aerial vehicles and ships participating in the exercise.

    (https://pda.mil.ru/pda/events/desc.htm?id=6986@morfSimpleEvent)
    Question to the author - if the 3M44 Progress missile is used as a target, what prevents it from being used as a decoy target for enemy air defense?
    Let me remind you that the distance from Sevastopol to Odessa in a straight line is 300 kilometers, the route passes over the sea.
  12. +2
    29 January 2024 09: 21
    Why "fence a garden" out of the blue? The missile will work well as a “false target” in the area of ​​the real one.
  13. +2
    29 January 2024 09: 38
    So far, all this is fortune-telling on coffee grounds.
    Maybe, maybe not...
    Even if the CEP remains largely the same (which is questionable, what prevents an old Chinese iPhone from being shoved inside))), it means that bullets should not be fired into populated areas. But it’s possible to go to strong points in the fields.
    And a false target. And with luck, the target is defeated. And if they fail, you never know how many lunar landscapes they created? - one more, one less...

    Fortune telling on coffee grounds, I repeat...
  14. 0
    29 January 2024 10: 26
    Knocking out the air defenses of the guys is a primary task, and if you can use outdated types of weapons for this, then this is the right decision.
    They launched a cruise missile
    they highlighted targets for her from a drone,
    and 500 kg of explosives are guaranteed to do the job...
  15. +1
    29 January 2024 11: 18
    Why hasn’t the option of using missiles to overload enemy air defense systems been considered, but for training purposes they are used without warheads??? They launched it somewhere into the steppe with a passage over Odessa, as a result the air defense worked, perhaps by expensive and few patriots, and in the second and third wave there are missiles and drones from military units.
  16. +2
    29 January 2024 11: 42
    1.
    Okay, we've identified it. P-35, 3M44, not so important
    - how important it is.
    And why is it 3M44, and not 4K44?!... with all its consequences and inflows.
    2.
    KVO 500-1500 meters
    - where did you find this and under what conditions does this happen?
    3.
    carried a high-explosive warhead weighing 560 kg
    - and not 800-1000 kg?!
    4.... I didn’t even write about the rest... stop
  17. 0
    29 January 2024 12: 19
    The author correctly noted that missiles are used as targets. Of course, we don’t know for sure, but it seems quite logical to use an outdated and ultimately considered free complex as targets for “saturating” Ukrainian air defense. Judging by the photographs again, there weren’t even warheads there...
  18. 0
    29 January 2024 17: 34
    If even free-falling bombs with minor modifications turn into almost a sniper weapon, isn’t it possible to inexpensively modify this missile so that its accuracy approaches the minimum acceptable, and then only for the sake of not hitting a residential building?

    "With more accurate missiles, pray tell, why would we use outright antiques?" - the answer, exclusively for overloading enemy air defense. Yes, even if you shoot cast-iron blanks and missiles from a children's carousel, the enemy will waste his anti-missile defenses...
  19. 0
    29 January 2024 18: 38
    In general, RIA Novosti quoted some “source” from the Moscow Region. As usual, anonymous. He said that it was for Odessa’s air defense that several missiles were exchanged. Using a remote control system. No other details.
  20. 0
    29 January 2024 19: 31
    It can be like a decoy rocket. It flies and calls down air defense fire on itself. A good thing.
  21. +1
    29 January 2024 21: 39
    Many Western, especially American media, at the instigation of the Ukrainian ones, naturally began to broadcast very loudly that the Russian army had used P-35 missiles against air defense positions near Odessa.

    The author, Roman Skomorokhov, seemed to be trying to find a justification for using the P-35 at the present time. But why look for excuses?
    There are weapons. There are uses for it. SVO is in progress. If our baton blew away the VSUshny drone to a hairdryer, then we should be ashamed that the baton was used? Or should modern technology be happy that the drone was shot down and not hit in the head of a person?
  22. 0
    29 January 2024 22: 16
    The last time the Ukrainian Armed Forces used the “point” was last week, if that happens. It is clear that all three missiles were shot down. What would we do without it?
  23. 0
    30 January 2024 04: 18
    There is nothing shameful in using old weapons. The only causation of the situation is that the leadership of the country as a whole and the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation suffer from the same old Russian disease - loud boasting .... real and imaginary achievements .... as a result of their sensitive leadership. such a mixture of truth and lies thrown into the world information space subsequently causes such passages.....how to stop this? take away from the President of the Russian Federation the symbolic red button to start something all over the country. the leading slaves at such a symbolic moment of launch are trying to stake themselves in front of the shining sun of the country....what if he remembers?....and elevates him when needed......
    in such a situation it is difficult to demand truthful reports from officers. personal career comes first.
    who remembers, this is increasingly reminiscent of the late Brezhnev times..... "our dear Leonid Ilyich...."
  24. 0
    30 January 2024 08: 11
    If the target is destroyed by an old missile that has undergone deep modernization, then that’s good. Just great! As far as one can understand, all the rocket systems are fully operational, except for the completely outdated electronics. Almost 600 kg of explosives is just a gift. Excellent controllability, which made it possible to reduce the flight altitude to 25 m.
    What is the problem? Why is the author so lamenting? What, a rocket with such excellent characteristics should rot and be written off without any use? There are electronics for missiles. And high-sensitivity radar, and positioning systems, and video cameras, everything is there. You just need to make signal conversion units to “make friends” with an excellent rocket and modern electronic components.
    What are the enemy media chattering about? So what?! Why on earth is the author so concerned about them? It looks kind of strange. Personally, I would be much sadder to hear that once again the radical reconstruction of a successful ammunition was stifled by bureaucracy and the expectation of bribes.
    I hope that their media is right, and our specialists have the intelligence and ability to use these missiles.
  25. 0
    30 January 2024 13: 44
    I don’t understand, why is the author making excuses? The Ukrainians, with the converted TU-141 and TU-143 reconnaissance aircraft, did a good job for us in some respects... They shot down a fighter on a light-engine airplane in our country, and model aircraft structures are making a mess of our targets! The question is not old age and backwardness, the question is technical suitability and planning of the operation... I missed it, I look at our level of high technology, now a magnetic storm will cover all systems...
  26. 0
    31 January 2024 00: 34
    There is nothing shameful! Throw everything that comes off the guides into the firebox, freeing up space in your arsenals. The Russian industry has already developed, both for the front and for reloading!
  27. 0
    1 February 2024 11: 35
    I also have a persistent misunderstanding as to why we are neglecting such huge reserves of Tochka-U missiles. There should be about 10 of them at the storage bases. And this is simply huge potential.

    Not only missiles up to R-17 and anti-aircraft S-75, but also all combat, training, civil and so on aircraft in storage. Including the Yak-18 and An-2, if anything has survived to this day.
  28. 0
    1 February 2024 22: 06
    The author did not even consider the option of breaking through the air defense of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with the help of such decoy missiles; if you remove the warhead, then in theory they should fly much further, shoot everything towards Odessa with parallel fire by more accurate and modern missiles and drones.
    And to speculate on what Western non-partners will think about our combat experience and ingenuity is the lot of the lackeys.