The issue of medium-range missiles

24
Recently, we often hear about medium-range missiles, especially from our "partners." What is their concern? After all, America is used to dictate its "democratic" principles to everyone.

Here we recall the words of our president that we have something to answer, and to respond very effectively. And the sanctions imposed on our country, and all efforts aimed at isolating our country, lead to the conclusion: America is afraid of something.

So what we had. The Treaty on the Elimination of Medium and Small-Range Missiles (DRSMD), signed by Moscow and Washington 8 December 1987. The parties to the agreement pledged not to produce, test, or deploy ground-based ballistic and cruise missiles of medium (from 1 thousand to 5,5 thousand) and short (from 500 to 1 thousand kilometers) range. In the process of implementing the INF Treaty of the USSR, it was necessary to eliminate two times more missiles than the US (1846: 846), and almost three times more launchers (825: 289). Our eliminated missiles could carry almost four times more nuclear warheads than the US (3154: 846).

For more than two decades, our country has managed without medium-range and shorter ground-based ballistic missiles. Since then, the situation has changed significantly, and already six countries have medium-range ground-based missiles. Among them, China, Iran, North Korea, India, Israel, Pakistan.

Without a doubt, under the conditions of the US deployment of a global missile defense system and the growth of medium-range threats, the potential of the SNF will be insufficient for nuclear deterrence in all strategic areas.

Recently, the theme of the Mk-41 launchers, which the United States intends to deploy in Poland and Romania as part of the implementation of a "phased adaptive approach" to the deployment of a global missile defense system, is becoming increasingly topical. These launchers are capable of launching medium-range cruise missiles, and their ground variant can be considered as a direct violation of the INF Treaty. This is how the claims of Moscow were listed in the ministry (http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1351376).

What can we counter as an answer?

ICBMs - Р-26 "Frontier".

Little information. But the possibility of application - up to 5500 km. Dmitry Rogozin called "Frontier" a "missile defense killer", implying that its combat units are unable to intercept neither the existing nor the promising missile defense system. As follows from the explanations of specialists, the combat equipment of the PC-26 missile complex flies along an unpredictable trajectory after separation from the rocket itself. The on-board computer constantly changes the course on the principle of sampling random numbers. You can not intercept the rocket.

Air defense and EKR.

Russia. SAM S-400 "Triumph" - (SAM) a new generation. Designed to destroy all modern and promising means of aerospace attack - reconnaissance aircraft, strategic aircraft (including invisible aircraft) and tactical aviation, tactical, operational-tactical ballistic missiles, medium-range ballistic missiles, hypersonic targets, jammers, airborne radar and guidance aircraft, and others.

Note that the maximum speed of the targets hit is 4800 m / s. Although already have a C-500. And even C-1000.



America. "Patriot" PAC-3. The maximum target speed is 2600 m / s.

Main TTX MIM104 rocket:
- rocket mass - 912 kg;
- The mass of the warhead - 24 kg;
- The maximum range of the intercepted target - 80 km;
- The maximum height of the intercepted target - 24 km;
- The minimum distance to destroy targets - 3 km;
- The minimum height of the flying target - 60 meters.

The lack of a missile defense mode. He needs a special satellite that is in orbit. This satellite should inform the location of the rocket and the trajectory of its flight to the PATRIOT location station. It takes as long as 90 seconds.

The satellite grouping of the American missile defense is designed to track the launches of ICBMs. It consists of eight spacecraft of the type “Imyus-2” (DSP) and six SBIRS-High, patrolling over the Pacific, Atlantic, Indian oceans and the European zone. The technical characteristics of the satellites make it possible to have a global area of ​​view in longitude and latitude. The time of receipt of information - no more than two minutes after the discovery of the launch of a ballistic missile.

The issue of medium-range missiles


The advertised THAAD + “Arrow-3” is a ground-based mobile missile system for high-altitude over-atmospheric interception of medium-range missiles.

Aegis combat system is an American naval multipurpose combat information and control system (BIUS), which is an integrated network of ship means of illumination of the situation, means of destruction, such as anti-aircraft guided missiles Standard missile 3 (SM-3). The deployment of SM-3 sea and land-based missiles in northern and southern Europe is planned to be completed by the 2020 year, which, according to many Russian missile specialists, may question the stability of strategic nuclear forces on the European territory of Russia. And the question of the capabilities of the SM-3 rocket is well worth the open. This could trigger a strong arms race in Europe.

The cost of the rocket ranges in the range of 12-24 million. $. Total rocket manufacturer delivered more than 135 rockets, as of 2012 year.

About TTX little information.

21 February 2008 of the SM-3 rocket was launched from the Lake Erie cruiser in the Pacific Ocean and three minutes after the launch, an emergency reconnaissance satellite USA-247 at 193 7 m / s (580 27 KM / h) Some sources believe that the fact of destroying a target moving along an unchanged and previously known trajectory does not indicate the actual capabilities of this system and the SM-300 rocket 3B Block (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM-1).

Most likely, it cannot work on low flying targets.

This is where the question arises of the effectiveness of the American missile defense system for the CD at a speed of more than 2-4M. A denezhek already vbuhano lot.

Aviation. Boris Obnosov, Director General of Tactical Missile Armament Corporation, said that in 2016, the Russian army would receive the latest modification of an aircraft missile for a fifth-generation Russian fighter (PAK FA), ITAR-TASS reports.

He clarified that we are talking about the latest modification of the aviation cruise missile - X-74М2.

Boris Obnosov, Director General of the Tactical Missile Armament Corporation (KTRV): At present, the BrahMos Russian-Indian missile is considered to be the fastest cruise missile in the world. Its updated sample can reach speeds of sound speeds 7-8.



Now the rocket is capable of hitting ground targets at altitudes up to 10 meters. The maximum range of flight along the combined trajectory is 290 km, with low-altitude - 120 km. On the cruising stage, the maximum flight altitude reaches 14 km at a speed of 2,5-2,8M. The missiles of the ship complex have a combat unit with a mass of 200 kg, while the variant launched from a fighter (BrahMos A) can carry an 300 kg warhead. The altitude at the final leg is 10-15 m. Apparently, a breakthrough has been achieved in increasing the launch range to the target.
24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    24 December 2014 07: 57
    Oh and vinaigrette in the author’s head ... I started with the BMBM, and for some reason I ended up with Bramos, which is so the RCC, and has no relation to the BMBM or ABM ... What is the point of the article? Do we need a BDSD? Yes, it’s not a question; we are leaving the contract and all matters. What did the author want to say? What is a U.S. missile defense system created to fight the anti-missile system? Well, to hell with her, we already do not have a BRDS, why should we be afraid?
    1. +7
      24 December 2014 08: 46
      Yes, the author has a little - "everything is confused in the Oblonskys' house"

      We can add that one of the means to circumvent the ban on land-based missile defense is the construction of low-cost small missile ships with Caliber launchers - where instead of anti-ship missiles (why missile launchers on the Volga or the Caspian, for example?) Can be used to target missiles designed for European purposes - it seems like they are doing now with Buyans of Dagestan in the Caspian Sea

      About Iskander it was necessary to reveal the topic - - if the contract is violated, then some of the missiles will probably be replaced with missiles with ranges up to 2 500
      And now Iskander partially compensates for the deployment of pro in the border areas - as a means of suppressing it

      And Bramos never flew with 8 speeds of sound - we must clarify that this is a promising future hypersonic missile based on Bramos - (if it is done yet) someday it will fly

      The issue of the range of 290 km is most likely related to restrictions on the sale - that's why they took onyx - because the granites initially exceeded 300 km - the maximum for the sale of rocket technology. In general, I am sure the same onyx can be increased the launch range up to 500 km or more - if only the guidance appears again instead of the "legend" - now the "Lianas" were launched to replace the "legend" as they write the latest news
      1. 0
        24 December 2014 08: 58
        Quote: Talgat
        We can add that one of the means to circumvent the ban on land-based missile defense is the construction of low-cost small missile ships with Caliber launchers - where instead of anti-ship missiles (why missile launchers on the Volga or the Caspian, for example?) Can be used to target missiles designed for European purposes - it seems like they are doing now with Buyans of Dagestan in the Caspian Sea

        Such ships are defenseless from the air and their destruction will not cause anything other than yawning. Moreover, they can act only in the Baltic, in the Black Sea they are useless.
        Quote: Talgat
        About Iskander it was necessary to reveal the topic - - if the contract is violated, then some of the missiles will probably be replaced with missiles with ranges up to 2 500

        What the heck? Isn’t it easier to launch them from airplanes, it’s much more flexible and faster. And no contracts need to be violated.
        Quote: Talgat
        The issue of a range of 290 km is most likely associated with restrictions on sales - therefore, they took onyx - t granites initially exceeded 300 km - the maximum for the sale of rocket technology. In general, I'm sure the same onyx can increase the launch range to 500 km and more

        All supersonic RCs are limited in range by fuel supply. At a maximum range of 300-500 km. they fly only when using altitudes from 6 to 10 km., and at this altitude they are easy prey even for such old air defense systems as Hawk. Not to mention aviation or Patriot. At an altitude of up to 100m. they have a range of not more than 150km., or even less ...
        1. +2
          24 December 2014 15: 56
          Quote: Nayhas
          Quote: Talgat
          We can add that one of the means to circumvent the ban on land-based missile defense is the construction of low-cost small missile ships with Caliber launchers - where instead of anti-ship missiles (why missile launchers on the Volga or the Caspian, for example?) Can be used to target missiles designed for European purposes - it seems like they are doing now with Buyans of Dagestan in the Caspian Sea

          Such ships are defenseless from the air and their destruction will not cause anything other than yawning. Moreover, they can act only in the Baltic, in the Black Sea they are useless.
          Quote: Talgat
          About Iskander it was necessary to reveal the topic - - if the contract is violated, then some of the missiles will probably be replaced with missiles with ranges up to 2 500

          What the heck? Isn’t it easier to launch them from airplanes, it’s much more flexible and faster. And no contracts need to be violated.
          Quote: Talgat
          The issue of a range of 290 km is most likely associated with restrictions on sales - therefore, they took onyx - t granites initially exceeded 300 km - the maximum for the sale of rocket technology. In general, I'm sure the same onyx can increase the launch range to 500 km and more

          All supersonic RCs are limited in range by fuel supply. At a maximum range of 300-500 km. they fly only when using altitudes from 6 to 10 km., and at this altitude they are easy prey even for such old air defense systems as Hawk. Not to mention aviation or Patriot. At an altitude of up to 100m. they have a range of not more than 150km., or even less ...

          1. They are under the umbrella of the Air Defense Forces, the ships of the coastal zone, and yes, they have already been ordered to the Black Sea (SUDDENLY!), Not to mention the fact that even the "needle" on the brawlers is enough to intercept the same tomohawks.
          2. It is not easier, no R-500 aircraft will lift it, more precisely, it can be launched by missile carriers, but even they cannot launch.
          3. Undoubtedly, but real data neither for the high-altitude trajectory nor for the low-altitude one are available to us. For the same missile launchers from the "caliber" complex, range data from different sources vary from 1500 km to 4500 km.
          1. 0
            24 December 2014 18: 03
            You correctly understood me Dog of war - if you use Buyans, etc. as a means to launch the Kyrgyz Republic (since land installations are prohibited by contract) then no enemy aircraft will be threatened by them - they will be launched from the rear

            Is it easier from an airplane - yes - of course - there are strategists for that - they are also carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic - but how many are there? Tu 160 more than a dozen and Tu 95 several dozen - and they are also needed for other purposes - so it’s cheaper to configure Buyanov - inexpensive carriers capable of launching CDs on European targets from the Volga or the Caspian

            In terms of ranges, I do not argue - RCC 200-300 km. But I read that they are now being developed and of greater range. As for the combined flight altitude - yes - on the march flying high 0 can be shot down - but they have not arrived yet. And before the attack they go down and it’s harder to shoot down.
            1. 0
              24 December 2014 18: 37
              I didn’t even argue with you, but with your opponent.
            2. -1
              24 December 2014 19: 37
              Just aviation will be the most vulnerable part of the strategic nuclear forces in a conflict. Because there are only 2 bases in Engels and the Far East. Get a cruise missile on the runway - and the war is over for them. They cannot take off. It’s not even necessary to destroy every plane
              1. 0
                21 March 2015 13: 15
                True, but not quite! Now all the important objects are covered by new electronic warfare systems! Missiles will either miss or explode on approach! The systems are new and co-secret, so far little is known about them, but partially the information has been dumped in the media after the crisis in Ukraine! Moreover, our electronic warfare systems are already able to take control of drones and much more! So, that is not so simple!
        2. +1
          24 December 2014 16: 42
          All supersonic RCs are limited in range by fuel supply. At a maximum range of 300-500 km. they fly only when using altitudes from 6 to 10 km ....... At an altitude of up to 100m. they have a range of not more than 150km., or even less ...

          ...... X-22 range up to 350km, practical up to 270-300km .... After starting from the carrier and capturing the target, it goes to low altitudes ... hi All flight at speeds greater than 2m ....
      2. 0
        24 December 2014 09: 38
        Quote: Talgat
        And Bramos never flew with 8 speeds of sound - we must clarify that this is a promising future hypersonic missile based on Bramos - (if it is done yet) someday it will fly

        It’s written after all that sample.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +2
      24 December 2014 16: 36
      Quote: Nayhas
      Oh and vinaigrette in the author’s head ...

      Olivie
    4. 0
      21 March 2015 13: 19
      Not certainly in that way! We have them, just their production is classified! Yes, and Iskander is not so simple! It is believed that its range is underestimated specifically and is about 800-1000 km!
  2. +2
    24 December 2014 08: 03
    INF must be in service, and in sufficient quantity.
    And FSU, that our sworn partners will howl at it.
    There was a desire to use a tagged warhead instead of a warhead when the Pioneers were destroyed by launching, but, alas, there was no possibility.
    1. 0
      24 December 2014 16: 48
      What for? As a weapon of the first strike, they are not needed: it is not in our interests to start a nuclear war. For a retaliatory strike, it is better to make ICBMs that can be used to strike directly at the territory of the main enemy, and not at its advanced bases.
      1. 0
        24 December 2014 19: 33
        For all purposes, ICBMs may not be enough. Here in Ukraine they will deploy the US missile defense bases or something else, in the Baltic states too. But what, shoot a sparrow from a cannon when you can RSD? In addition, RSDs are more mobile, easily masked, and coordinates are unknown. And if you exit the contract, then the number is unlimited. You can cover the whole of Europe completely. And an order of magnitude cheaper. The main thing is to shorten the decision-making chain on their application. And then until it comes to Putin, and then he will be awake, will call to consult Obama and Merkel! And at the strategic nuclear forces all the coordinates of the mines are known to a meter.
        1. 0
          3 February 2015 04: 47
          Putin will call Obama and Merkel ... ???? You are sick old man !!!
      2. +1
        25 December 2014 01: 48
        Quote: Kalmar
        What for? As a weapon of the first strike, they are not needed: it is not in our interests to start a nuclear war. For a retaliatory strike, it is better to make ICBMs that can be used to strike directly at the territory of the main enemy, and not at its advanced bases.

        I'll try to explain on the fingers.
        To begin with, a couple of European countries have besides the "main enemy" of nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles, in addition, our "main enemy" has nuclear arsenals (aerial bombs) and delivery vehicles at bases in Italy, Germany, Japan and Turkey.
        Using ICBMs to destroy targets in Europe is akin to hammering a nail with a sledgehammer. Plus an important nuance in the form of flight time.
        Let us note in parentheses that in the case of a large drum, it is necessary to neutralize some "comrades" at the BV, also possessing nuclear weapons, and, naturally, it is necessary to extinguish and close a gas station on the Arabian Peninsula for repairs.
        I’m silent about our celestial friends who may well try to take advantage of the situation.
        Thus, the INFs are the same restraining and sobering factor as the strategic nuclear forces, only for the nearest neighbors within a radius of 5000 km.
  3. +1
    24 December 2014 08: 04
    If you need RSD and RMD, everything can be done beautifully and without violating the contract:
    During the Soviet period, "geophysical" rockets were assembled in Petropavlovsk (Kazakhstan), but not only, first of all, rockets better known as SKAD. \
    It is also possible to "restore" production by assembling more advanced RSD and RMD.
    to make a mobile complex for them (one of the factories of large-capacity tractors was also in Petropavlovsk) and that’s it!
    1. 0
      24 December 2014 19: 25
      Kazakhstan will not do this, so as not to spoil relations with the United States
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. 0
    24 December 2014 13: 28
    Quote: Aasdem
    The maximum range along a combined trajectory is 290 km, with a low altitude - 120 km.

    Range, of course, is not enough.
  6. picca2
    -1
    24 December 2014 14: 14
    Nayhas (2)
    Oh and vinaigrette in the author’s head ... I started with the BMBM, and for some reason I ended up with Bramos, which is so the RCC, and has no relation to the BMBM or ABM ... What is the point of the article?


    This is the meaning. Since "Brahmos" does not belong to the MRBM. Do not forget, even though it has an Indian name, that this is a Russian development based on Onyx. And there is also a type of "forgotten" "Granite".
    Regarding vinaigrette, it’s vinaigrette, which consists of various components. Read about current trends in the development of missile weapons.
  7. picca2
    0
    24 December 2014 14: 36
    Nayhas Quote (2)
    All supersonic RCs are limited in range by fuel supply. At a maximum range of 300-500 km. they fly only when using altitudes from 6 to 10 km., and at this altitude they are easy prey even for such old air defense systems as Hawk. Not to mention aviation or Patriot. At an altitude of up to 100m. they have a range of not more than 150km., or even less ...
    You can immediately see a "specialist" ... What speed characteristics of the target are you talking about, which "Hawk" is capable of hitting? With a range of this air defense system 30 km ...
    1. +1
      24 December 2014 19: 24
      It is doubtful that a fighter, even a supersonic one, could bring down a supersonic missile.
  8. 0
    24 December 2014 18: 24
    Everything is tied to the Americans on satellites tracking and strikes so it is necessary to eliminate them first and foremost. Do we have weapons for electronics? Their satellites now need to be stocked up and we are still selling them rocket engines for launch, scribe.
  9. +1
    24 December 2014 19: 21
    The author beautifully listed measures against enemy missiles. It is only known that protection alone will not save. If the United States launches 8000 cruise missiles in Russia, then any missile defense will drown. The number of missiles that break through will be calculated not in percent, but in tens of percent. So we need to build up our means of attack. And RSD and cruise missiles. And accept what is more profitable for us, without copying the United States.
    1. +1
      25 December 2014 02: 09
      Quote: kuz363
      If the United States launches 8000 cruise missiles in Russia, then any missile defense will drown.

      The fruit of feverish imagination?
      To launch this amount, it is necessary to concentrate the actual number of rocket data carriers at the right time and in the right place.
      Do you think this will go unnoticed?
      In addition, our "sworn partners" have produced 7300 Tomahawks for the entire time, besides, 2000 of those produced were spent in Yugoslavia, twice in Iraq, and in Libya.
  10. 0
    24 December 2014 19: 55
    Quote: kuz363
    If the United States launches 8000 cruise missiles in Russia, then any missile defense will drown.

    One cruise missile is shot down by one projectile of 20 mm caliber and above. Flocks of cruise missiles without cover from above are fun for fighters. Do not scare people in vain. As long as our radars see their missiles against the background of water or land - a strike by the Kyrgyz Republic against Russia is useless in a military sense.
  11. sfsdf3edg
    0
    25 December 2014 03: 31
    Guys, I recently learned about one chip, with the help of a bucket you can seduce any girl in a couple of minutes. For the male, it also does not have a weak effect, I advise as I tried it myself. More details here - http://strigenko.blogspot.com
  12. for
    0
    26 December 2014 19: 05
    Currently, the fastest cruise missile in the world is the Russian-Indian BraMos missile. Her updated sample can reach a speed of 7-8 sound speeds.

    Lie.
    He could not say that.
    Since I myself considered and optimized this rocket, I perfectly know its capabilities.
    The stock is, but not the one indicated in the article.
    I get the impression that Obnosov is fooled, and those who are above him are fooled.
    It is not surprising that almost no one of the real Onyx developers is left.
  13. picca2
    -1
    29 December 2014 17: 21
    Quote: Petrovich
    Currently, the fastest cruise missile in the world is the Russian-Indian BraMos missile. Her updated sample can reach a speed of 7-8 sound speeds.

    Lie.
    He could not say that.
    Since I myself considered and optimized this rocket, I perfectly know its capabilities.
    The stock is, but not the one indicated in the article.
    I get the impression that Obnosov is fooled, and those who are above him are fooled.
    It is not surprising that almost no one of the real Onyx developers is left.


    The X-90 missile is launched with the help of Tu-160M ​​strategic bombers, which are a symbol of Russian military power. "M" - modified - means in this case that the wings of the machine are increased. The experimental X-90 was successfully tested in February 2004, during the strategic command and staff exercises "Security 2004" in the presence of Vladimir Putin.
    ALL "bullshit" ....
    and this too ... http: //youinf.ru/best_raketa_ru/
    For some reason, the P-1000 "Vulcan", the rocket 3M70 - SS-N-12 mod.2 SANDBOX with its parameters were suspended ....
  14. for
    0
    13 January 2015 15: 27
    Quote: picca2
    "M" - modified - means in this case that the wings of the machine are increased.

    E-uh, my friend, here you are deeply mistaken.
    The increase in wings on the finished supersonic bomber ......... nonsense. Not a single self-respecting (and not self-respecting) Civil Code will ever take such an adventure, there are no fools.
    Initially, during design, it was optimized for the requirements of technical specifications and any changes in the aerodynamic layout will only worsen its performance characteristics.
    As for the Kh-90, it did not leave the LKI stage, and in the Security 2004 exercise they fired a slightly different product.