Military Review

"Flexible" tactics of the possible use of TFR X-101 against NATO air defense outposts on European theaters. What nostalgic US Air Force?

88



The first combat use of the Caliber long-range tactical missiles, as well as the X-101 strategic cruise missiles, made a huge impression on the Western world. Hard times passed when hundreds and thousands of American "Tomahawks" dictated with impunity the unipolar concept of world order in the Balkans and the Middle East, and Russia, mired in its own problems and Yeltsin's corruption, was “left to sit” on the sidelines of participating in the most important geostrategic redistribution, confining itself to the march - to Pristina.

It was then that the US Congress and the United States Air Force, hoping for a further fall in the Russian economy and the impoverishment of the intellectual potential of the military-industrial complex, made a fatal strategic miscalculation, which has been regretted for 15 years. It was decided to close the development program of the low-profile TFR AGM-129A (ACM). First of all, this miscalculation created serious problems in the capabilities of conducting unique strategic aerospace offensive operations by the US Air Force, since, in light of the development of modern air defense systems, the tactical and technical capabilities of the existing Tomahawk and AGM-109C missile defense systems (CALCM) completely inadequate to retain dominance over key "players" in the Asia-Pacific and European theater of operations (Russia and the PRC). And as we know, the basic concept of Western domination in the World today rests on the standard SVKNO (by the forces of conventional subsonic TFRs and long-range tactical missiles), since the concept of “global lightning strike” (“fast global non-nuclear strike”) is still completely “raw” due to the lack of promising small-sized aeroballistic and cruise missiles X-86A, etc.

The US Air Force is armed with more than 700 TFR AGM-86C CALCM. The range of these missiles is 1200 km, which is absolutely no different from the more inconspicuous and advanced AGM-158B JASSM-ER. This indicates a very low strategic aviation The US Air Force in the implementation of long-range non-nuclear attacks: aircraft are forced to get as close as possible to the coverage area of ​​modern enemy air defense aircraft, because of which the probability of its successful result is reduced to zero. The cruisers of the Ticonderoga and EM Arley Burke, equipped with more long-range Tomahawks, cannot provide sufficient efficiency in comparison with long-range aviation.


THE ADVANTAGES OF THE SKR X-101 WILL NOT ALLOW THE CERTAIN NATO COMMAND IN EUROPE AND NORAD. WHAT IS A UNIQUE ROCKET UNDER IN MODERN CONDITIONS?

Back in the distant 1983, in the design department of NPO Raduga, the unique at that time strategic cruise missile X-55 was developed. The range of the first TFR modification was 2500 km; the rocket had a circular cross section of the fuselage and a straight wing spanning 3,1 m; X-55 can be equipped with a warhead weighing up to 0,41 tons. The next version, the X-55CM, has an increased flight range to 3500 km, thanks to which it became possible to make an MRAU far from the patrol areas of enemy fighter aircraft. Another, the most modern modification - X-555, has a reduced flight range to 2500 km, but a significantly better guidance system using an optical-electronic relief correlation system and GLONASS navigation. Meanwhile, all these modifications have one important drawback, which affects the negative outcome of a strike operation in conditions where the enemy uses a large number of DRLO planes, as well as ground and air interception devices. The missiles have a relatively large radar signature (from 0,1 to 0,3 м2), because of which their detection by modern radar systems, air and ground-based will not be difficult.

For example, analyzing the data of a highly authoritative table-reference book of detailed tactical and technical characteristics of modern radars on the website of the Stealth Machine (paralay.com), it can be clearly calculated that the airborne radar AN / APG-77 of the inconspicuous Fighter 5 of the F-22A generation “ Raptor ”is capable of detecting the CKR X-55 / X-55CM at a distance of up to 150 - 160 km, and the AN / APG-79 radar of the F / A-18E / F Super Hornet fighter at a distance of 100 km. The AWACS E-3C / G AWACS aircraft are able to detect X-55 with their AN / APY-2 radar at a distance of 300 - 350 km. Such a state of affairs could not satisfy the Russian Air Force at all, since the detection of our subsonic air attack assets by the enemy at such a long distance makes it possible to prepare and distribute all air and ground-based air defense systems to repel a blow: the effectiveness of the MPA will decrease sharply; remember the times of “Storm in the Desert”, when even a weak Iraqi army, located in the information blockade, using the Osa-Shilka ZRSK-ZSU link, managed to intercept at least 20 KR “Tomahawk” during the operation, imagine how many times the number will increase with the use of such SAMs as “SAMP-T”, VL MICA, “Patriot PAC-3” or the new promising offspring MBDA - short-range SAMs FLAADS, these systems are simultaneously capable of shooting down air targets over 10 (and their calculus on modern theater goes for tens, not counting hundreds of MANPADS operators who receive tactical information about targets from the same DRLO aircraft). The X-55 and even the X-555 began to need a speedy modernization, the emphasis of which was on a radical reduction in the radar visibility of missiles.

Work on the project TFR X-101 began in the middle of the 80-s. and were initially aimed at a significant increase in the range of the X-55 cruise missiles, and later, after observations made during military operations in Yugoslavia and Iraq, work was continued on the missile radar signature. This can explain the 14-year run between the start of the design work and the first flight tests of prototype TFR X-101, last autumn 1998 of the year.

X-101, developed by the ICB Raduga and brought to operational readiness in 2012, received a number of significant technological improvements, thanks to which it can be attributed to the high-precision weapons of the next generation. The main structural elements of the X-101 are special composite materials and radar absorbing coatings, and the fuselage has the most flattened contours with the implementation of the side ribs (as in the nose of the Su-34 fuselage), which made it possible to achieve an incredibly low ESR in 0,01 m 2, commensurate with artillery guns NURS. The maximum speed of the rocket was kept at the level of 1000 km / h, the weight of the warhead was at the level of 0,41 t, while the range was increased by 57% (compared to X-55CM) and reached 5,5 thousand km. This required approximately 900 kg to increase the mass of the TFR fuel, and the mass of the rocket itself increased to 2300 kg, which required the installation of a retractable straight wing of a larger area with a span of 4,4 m to achieve sufficient load-bearing properties. The 5500 km range is a truly outstanding quality of the X-101 in the class of strategic cruise missiles, because even the most long-range US TFR AGM-86B ALACM (only in nuclear design) has a range of 2780 km (less than the X-55CM). Not surprisingly, the U.S. Armed Forces are very unhappy with the X-101's baptism of fire.

The American E-2D and E-3C airplanes are simply “blind” in relation to this rocket already with 100 - 120 km, and the “Super Hornet” and “Raptor” will not “examine” the object with the EPR in 0,01 m 2 already with 65 — 80 km Such stealth allows the most efficient use of the terrain, as well as some operational voids between enemy air defense batteries for a sudden breakthrough in areas where the radar systems of the air defense missile system cannot be detected and escorted by X-101.

The huge radius of action and small radar signature of the T-TX X-101 perfectly narrows the capabilities of the air defense fighter aviation of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). Huge expanses of the northern part of the Asia-Pacific region are now completely surmountable for the X-101 rocket with a range of 5500 km and the crews of our Tu-95MS (in the photo) and Tu-160 now it is not necessary to enter into the zone of the 525 squadron of inconspicuous F-22A fighters “Raptor” (pictured), deployed at the airbase “Elmendorf-Richardson”


During the escalation of a likely major conflict in the European theater of war, such gaps in the NATO defense may be numerous, and they will certainly be identified by ORTR planes, AWACS and A-50 aircraft, as well as the DER-systems of precision-guided Su-34 bombers, and then a sudden and merciless MRAU will follow. It can be assumed that these NATO S / A zones will try to be eliminated by patrolling with specially designated fighter links, but it will not be so easy to implement such well-established work in the “chaos” of air war, with active use of EW facilities, and a weakened place will be found.

ASYMMETRIC ANSWER OF US ARMED FOR SCR X-101 IS NOT ONLY FOGGLY, BUT AND LOCAL

In previous articles, we several times mentioned some threats related to the purchase of the low-profile AGM-40 JASSM tactical long-range cruise missiles (about 158 km) by the Polish 500 air force, as well as a possible contract for the missile-upgraded AGM-158B JASSM-ER (range - 1300 km), which with a certain probability can overcome similar weakened zones of 1, 2 and 4 commands of the Air Force and Air Defense in the Western and Southern military districts, and then enter the airspace of the Russian Federation over the internal, most industrial, regions mi of the former Moscow district, including the Nizhny Novgorod and other areas. Indeed, the western and southwestern operational areas can be considered the most missile-dangerous in this regard, due to the maximum density of units in the European NATO countries in a relatively small area of ​​Europe, especially since the US will continue to reinforce its air forces from Russian borders, threats whole mass. But not everything is so terrible.

The AGM-158B JASSM-ER, with its low flight profile (25 - 30 m), still has more than the X-101, the EPR (around 0,1 m2) and is not at all a strategic flight range. Considering the fact that all modern air defense of Russia is built on divisions, brigades and shelves of the C-300PS / PMU-1 and C-400, which are attached to specialized low-altitude detectors (NVO) 76HXNUMNHNMNUMXX6, and the radars of illumination and targeting (RPN) 30HNNNHNMNHNMNHMNUMXX6, and Radar 926X40, and Radar 6NXNHMNXX. on a specialized tower 30ВХNUMXМД, interception of JASSM-ER will be simplified. These on-load tap-changers are able to detect the latter at a distance of about 101 km. American and European air defense systems are not equipped with such high towers, and therefore the range of capture of small-sized X-17 will not exceed 20 — XNUMX km.

The American counterpart of our strategic X-101, - TFR AGM-129A (ACM), began to be developed from the year 1983. And in the summer of 1985, the first B-52H of the Strategic Air Command of the US Air Force were equipped with AGM-129A. This rocket then represented one of the most perfect means of air attack. The most progressive trends of stealth technologies were taken into account in its design, and the range reached 3700 km. The radar signature in the PPS and the PPS were reduced due to the implementation of the ribbed form forming the nose of the rocket, as well as the shape of the tail unit with the beaver tail nozzle. Also, stealth of the wing and the use of composites contribute to stealth. This nozzle design also reduces infrared signature and acoustic visibility: between the working turbine of the F112-WR-100 engine and the edges of the inverted trapezoidal nozzle integrated into the fuselage tail, there is a solid air chamber that cools the jet. Heating of the working surface of the chamber is not visible not only from the side of the PPS, but also from the side projections, because it is covered with a special heat-absorbing envelope in the inner cavity of the rocket's tail. It is worth noting that this detail of the disguise of the AGM-129A rocket remains the most progressive, even among modern cruise missiles.

Tail portion of the SCR AGM-129A


The rocket’s modern guidance system, which includes not only an inertial guidance system, satellite correction and an optical-location sensor on the final leg of the flight, but also a special laser altimeter LIDAR instead of a radio altimeter, the data from which are compared with reference maps incorporated into the rockets storage of the onboard computer for missiles, which does not allow the means of passive XRE of ground and air-based to displace the missile from the radiation of this device. It is known that X-101 on the march section of the route also applies this principle.

It was originally planned to manufacture 2500 TFR AGM-129A, which was planned to arm B-52H, as well as a more dangerous machine - B-1B “Lancer”. The latter, in view of their small EPR (7 — 9 м2), could penetrate the airspace of the USSR and the Russian Federation from the northeast operational direction (from the Arctic Ocean), and represented a great threat to the military-industrial infrastructure of Siberia and the Far East, so as AGM-129A missiles were able to reach the central regions and southern borders of our country from the northern coast of Russia.

The preliminary “sentence” of the ACM program was made in 1992, when the United States Air Force decided not to adapt the TFR AGM-129A to equip the B-1B “Lancer”. In conjunction with this strategic missile carrier, the missile was able to pose the greatest threat to our air defense, and from almost any strategic directions


But the collapse of the USSR played into the hands of our Armed Forces: the large-scale production of American missiles was first “stung” to 1000 units, and then they froze 509 products altogether. In the spring of 2012, the last of the remaining 460 AGM-129A missiles was eliminated, and now the likelihood of resuming production of a similar, more sophisticated version seems to be difficult, because the expensive and unprofitable projects that they still need are plenty for Americans today. The X-NUMX generation F-5A / B / C fighter jet generation program alone, known as JSF, alone costs 35 million dollars, which is 1500 times the cost of the 60 construction and maintenance program of the low-profile DDG-3 class impact destroyers. Zumwalt. The mite is also provided by the configuration of warheads of mothballed AGM-1000, which is “sharpened” for nuclear warheads, which will require quite a bit of time and cost for conversion into high-explosive fragmentation versions of combat units. During this time, both the US Air Force and the Russian Air Force will have time to switch to completely new hypersonic EHVs such as X-129A and U-51.

What to say! It was such an annoying surprise that the “deliberate” American air forces were waiting for at the most difficult hour for our country, because the X-101 rocket built in “troubled times” allowed us to surpass the West in this class of weapons for decades.
Author:
88 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Gandelman
    Gandelman 11 December 2015 06: 11 New
    -102
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
    1. Don karleone
      Don karleone 11 December 2015 06: 17 New
      50
      Thank you for still having (USA) soldier
      1. kodxnumx
        kodxnumx 11 December 2015 07: 35 New
        20
        I hope this is not the last surprise for our partners! laughing
        1. oldseaman1957
          oldseaman1957 11 December 2015 08: 31 New
          +7
          "Было принято решение о закрытии программы развития малозаметной СКР AGM-129A (ACM)"" - А всё-таки радуют нас иногда "партнёры". Пусть и не по своей воле...
          1. Throw
            Throw 11 December 2015 11: 47 New
            15
            X-101 .. fuselage .. has the most flattened contours

            ))) фюзеляж имеет не "сплющенные обводы", а треугольное сечение.
            Для того чтобы увеличить массу ракет, но при этом уместить их в барабан бомбоотсека "тушки":
          2. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 12 December 2015 04: 09 New
            +7
            Quote: oldseaman1957
            "Было принято решение о закрытии программы развития малозаметной СКР AGM-129A (ACM)"" - А всё-таки радуют нас иногда "партнёры". Пусть и не по своей воле...

            I would be more pleased if Gorbachev and his colleagues died, and did not come to power.
        2. NordUral
          NordUral 11 December 2015 16: 27 New
          +1
          Better to let them remain a surprise if a terrible moment comes.
    2. oleggun
      oleggun 11 December 2015 06: 25 New
      26
      Ага, именно поэтому американцы покупают у нас РД-180,летают на наших ракетах на МКС и наши радары видях их "стелсы". Учите матчасть, прежде чем высказываться.
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 11 December 2015 06: 55 New
        +3
        Quote: oleggun
        Americans buy from us RD-180

        Маккеюшка сказал "Табань!", будет продвигать запрет на покупку двигателей.
        1. vostok68
          vostok68 11 December 2015 14: 00 New
          +8
          Noble comrade! I almost drowned the aircraft carrier! But I do not blame him (that I didn’t drown), it is very difficult alone!
          1. 52
            52 11 December 2015 18: 37 New
            +2
            But he tried to drown, that we cannot but approve! No to American Professionalism! smile
    3. KOH
      KOH 11 December 2015 06: 25 New
      +6
      But we have a Rogozin trampoline, especially for launching amers into space ...))))
    4. Yak28
      Yak28 11 December 2015 06: 42 New
      26
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      We are not lagging behind everywhere, but in the number of aircraft and missiles for various purposes, we are lagging behind sharply, and if we compare the power of the fleets of Russia and the USA, there’s an abyss there. And we have few human resources, unlike NATO. Indeed, Gorbachev and Yeltsin did with Russia what the Germans failed during the first and second world war
      1. Starley from the south
        Starley from the south 13 December 2015 13: 32 New
        -2
        Who about what, and lousy about the bath! What are your words suggesting raising your paws up?
    5. dchegrinec
      dchegrinec 11 December 2015 06: 59 New
      +4
      A hasty hare has an ass full of manure! What is now evident from the USA.
    6. sanja.grw
      sanja.grw 11 December 2015 07: 47 New
      +3
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      Especially in shit democracy, most probably am
    7. meriem1
      meriem1 11 December 2015 09: 06 New
      12
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.


      Who are you ??? Liberasty robbed the country and fled for the hill ??? Drag the rest of the defeatists and destroy your new homeland with your whining ...
    8. War and Peace
      War and Peace 11 December 2015 09: 15 New
      +5
      nice to read such articles, thanks to the USSR for foreseeing such situations for decades to come ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. War and Peace
          War and Peace 12 December 2015 00: 31 New
          +1
          Quote: Orionvit
          And did the USSR foresee such situations? Just a shame for a very expensive weapon.


          so what? the fact that cruise missiles is a formidable and promising weapon, and that the KhA101 has now fired so successfully is a merit of military planning of the USSR ...
    9. subbtin.725
      subbtin.725 11 December 2015 09: 17 New
      +5
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      Who are we???
    10. lotar
      lotar 11 December 2015 09: 29 New
      13
      Столь сильное заблуждения лишь связано с вашин незнанием реальности.Ракетостроение,Радиолокационные станции и РЭБ лишь те сферы которые известны многим,которые опережают евпропейские и янковские аналогичные системы,а ещё есть немало сфер о которых пишут меньше,но тем неменее тоже имеют явные превосходство в отношении наших "друзей".Например,кристаллы,которые производятся только в России под нужды БАК,сверхвысокочастотная база электронных компонентов,которую несмотря на все сложности продолжали поддерживать.И это те что приходят на первый взгляд,а сколько их всего,неизвестно.Так что спешить с такимы выводами,значит намеренно или по незнанию вводить в заблуждения остальных людей.
      1. Starley from the south
        Starley from the south 13 December 2015 13: 38 New
        -1
        Moreover, in the 60 years, our defense scientists began to create unmatched microwave systems based on magnetrons. And even now we are far ahead of everyone in this area, so far ...
    11. DobryAAH
      DobryAAH 11 December 2015 11: 02 New
      +3
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.


      We stand in the stables with horns and an udder.
    12. The comment was deleted.
    13. ver_
      ver_ 11 December 2015 11: 20 New
      +2
      ... burry forgotten ...
    14. Mama_Cholli
      Mama_Cholli 11 December 2015 11: 45 New
      0
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      I completely agree. These two have done a lot. which the USA could not do.
      1. Things
        Things 11 December 2015 12: 21 New
        0
        Quote: Mama_Cholli

        I totally agree. These two have done a lot. which the USA could not do.

        I will correct a little winked
        These two (and their teams) did what their puppeteers from the States and Britain entrusted to them; what they could not do with their own hands.
    15. The comment was deleted.
    16. Serafim-k
      Serafim-k 11 December 2015 11: 53 New
      +2
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      Good joke .. thanks .. pleased .. fellow
    17. Volzhanin
      Volzhanin 11 December 2015 11: 53 New
      +4
      If we are talking about pederasty, fascism, racism, Nazism, chauvinism, lies, hypocrisy, cynicism and other abominations, then we lag behind the empire of lies for an eternity.

      With skillful and competent leadership, lag in other areas can be eliminated in no more than 4-5 years.
    18. cormorant
      cormorant 11 December 2015 12: 28 New
      +7
      Gandelman, I myself am a Crimean woman, I have been living here for 50 years. The daughter of an officer. Just believe me, it’s not so simple with us ...
    19. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 11 December 2015 12: 49 New
      +2
      maybe you are behind, but we are not ..... how can you be so narrow-minded?
    20. NEXUS
      NEXUS 11 December 2015 16: 05 New
      +3
      Quote: Gandelman
      We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

      Горбачеву и Ельцыну еще многие поколения будут говорить"спасибо" и склонять этих выхухолей по падежам.А по поводу отстаем на 20 лет во всем...хм...Весьма смелое заявление.Тогда вопрос-А Россия -это Гвинея Бисау или Зимбабве?
      Отстаем то мы во многих сферах,начиная от промышленности и заканчивая кораблестроением.Но давайте вспомним космос,в котором на сегодняшний день мы на лидирующих позициях,так же можно вспомнить танкостроение и многое другое,где США совсем "не опережают".
      In some ways they are us, and in something we are theirs.
      1. Starley from the south
        Starley from the south 13 December 2015 13: 47 New
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        But let's recall the cosmos in which today we are in a leading position,

        Scientific space, in it we are far behind. Because back in the late 80's, the three-thirds came to leadership in this area, who still reproduce themselves. And since then we have not had any notable achievements in the scientific exploration of space. Spending billions on such ambitious projects as flying to Mars or building a station on the moon is like throwing money away. First, all the leaders of the scientific space programs themselves must be let go. This is worst of all when there are no frames!
        1. ver_
          ver_ 13 December 2015 20: 18 New
          -1
          .... Ostap dragged bumps ...
    21. Homo
      Homo 11 December 2015 16: 18 New
      0
      Quote: Gandelman
      We are 20 years behind the United States in all areas.

      Is it really bad with logic? How can you keep up with yourself? tongue
    22. .Strannik.
      .Strannik. 13 December 2015 12: 10 New
      0
      Что ж вы его так, он же написал - "Мы т. е.( США) отстают от России, и они т.е. (Америка) за это благодарят наших горячо любимых и почитаемых за это Горбачева и Ельцина....
  2. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 11 December 2015 06: 21 New
    +9
    Quote: Gandelman
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

    do not try to commit suicide ... we are not lagging behind in all areas, we are ahead of ourselves in some places.
  3. Wolka
    Wolka 11 December 2015 06: 23 New
    +4
    however, useful information, especially for all hat-takers and hotheads ...
  4. subbtin.725
    subbtin.725 11 December 2015 06: 29 New
    +4
    One can only admire the truly talented people, truly patriots of our country, who in difficult years did not fall for the fees of our sworn overseas friends. And of course, these people should not need anything.
  5. shinobi
    shinobi 11 December 2015 06: 37 New
    +6
    It is not worth it to rely on the fact that the Yankees will not be able to recreate their offensive missile potential.
  6. smart75
    smart75 11 December 2015 06: 38 New
    +7
    "Одна только программа разработки и серийного производства истребителей 5-го поколения F-35A/B/C, известная как JSF, обходится в 1500 млн. долларов, что в 60 раз превышает стоимость программы строительства и обслуживания 3 малозаметных ударных эсминцев класса DDG-1000 «Zumwalt»"

    I do not understand: is this a mistake or a lie? 1500 million = 1.5 billion $.
    And this is 60 times the cost of 3 Zumvoltov ?!
    For reference: the construction of Zumvolt cost more than 3 billion.

    I will quote an article with VO
    "Программа по эсминцу DDG 1000 феноменально дорога, к тому времени, когда все три корабля будут поставлены флоту, на них будет потрачено в течение более 20 лет примерно 22 миллиарда долларов, на исследования и разработку, проектирование и постройку. Первоначально планировалось построить 28 кораблей, затем семь, затем два и наконец три, все из одной и то же статьи расходов. ВМС США заявляют о средней стоимости эсминца класса Zumwalt в 3,3 миллиарда долларов, но многочисленные критики предупреждают, что эта цифра может превысить 5 миллиардов долларов за штуку.
    По крайней мере на сегодняшний день, эти прогнозы не оправдываются. Пока стоимость одного Zumwalt составляет «примерно 3,4 миллиарда долларов»."

    Source
    http://topwar.ru/59991-vstrechayte-zumwalt-esminec-nevidimka-amerikanskih-vms-vy
    ydet-v-more-sleduyuschey-vesnoy.html
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 11 December 2015 12: 31 New
      0
      I read that along with weapons, the Zumvolt’s cost is close to the cost of the last aircraft carrier: $ 4,4 yards and $ 4,5 yards, respectively. This despite the fact that the capabilities of Zumvolt do not differ from the capabilities of a gunboat from the middle of the last century.
    2. Fulcrumxnumx
      11 December 2015 13: 46 New
      +2
      A little confused, 1500 billion, i.e. 1,5 trillion $ .. and about Zumvalt, then yes, each ship will cost 4,4 billion, and the whole program + service of three ships of the class = 22 billion dollars.
  7. Svarog5570
    Svarog5570 11 December 2015 06: 47 New
    +5
    in military technology, we never lagged behind, and the dashing 90s crippled the defense, but the potential laid down in the USSR would not let it fade, and now even more so.
  8. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 11 December 2015 06: 55 New
    +1
    As long as nuclear charges exist, no one will attack anyone! Another question is that with the help of such cruise missiles you can implement your foreign policy! As it is now in Syria, we are reducing the capabilities of our rivals, including making Turkey and others think! NATO's European allies are also sitting now ... knowing that we can!
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 11 December 2015 12: 30 New
      +2
      For example, non-nuclear Turkey will attack us. Use nuclear weapons as indecent. So we will butt with a rather large army. The use of Raman gives the effect of nuclear weapons, because destroys factories, factories, command posts and bridges. But without collateral casualties, it is selectively and clearly dosed. Of course, if China or India attacks us, then the Kyrgyz Republic may not be enough.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  9. Alex_59
    Alex_59 11 December 2015 07: 02 New
    +9
    Somewhat far-fetched article.
    it can be clearly calculated that the on-board radar AN / APG-77 of the inconspicuous 5 generation fighter F-22A “Raptor” is capable of detecting X-55 / X-55СМ ASRs at a range of 150 - 160 km
    Сильно сомневаюсь в подобных выводах. Известные данные по AN/APG-77 это 225 км по цели с ЭПР 1м2. Нащ старенький "Заслон" от МиГ-31 берет на сопровождение цель с ЭПР 2м2 на дальности 90 км, а цель с ЭПР 1м2 летящую на высоте 60 метров берет на сопровождении на удалении 20 км. Т.е. условия обнаружения (грубо) в 4 раза хуже для целей летящих на малой высоте. Цифру 225 км для РЛС AN/APG-77 можно делить на 4 - это около 55 км.
    the Iraqi army, using the Osa-Shilka ZRSK-ZSU combination, was able to intercept at least 20 KR during the operation
    In the desert and with a fair amount of luck. Shilka most likely were object air defense - i.e. were directly located at the attacked objects. You can’t put Shilka on the ways of approaching.
    the detection of our subsonic air attack means by the enemy at such a great distance allows us to prepare to distribute all air and ground air defense systems to repel the strike
    Well, air defense systems can still be redistributed on-line. And here are the ground ones. What is it like? They found the CR, realized that the air defense systems were not there and teleported them along the route of the alleged routes of the KR?
    imagine how many times this number will increase with the use of SAM-SAMP-T, VL MICA, “Patriot PAC-3” or the new promising brainchild of MBDA - short-range air defense systems FLAADS
    If the air defense system guards the target of the attack, then all that the AWACS can help them with is to indicate the time and azimuth of the approach. Detect and take on the tracking of these air defense systems will have to themselves. And they will be able to do this from the turn of the radio horizon, which in ideal desert conditions is about 10-15 km, and in Europe with its forests and hills even less. Given the velocity of these air defense systems, these air defense systems will have no more than 1 minutes for the entire interception cycle. Of course, they will bring down something. But it’s unlikely that everything will fly.
    not counting hundreds of MANPADS operators receiving tactical information about targets from the same AWACS aircraft
    These generally break off. They chtoli around the territory of NATO will be placed? Not? And how then? They will run after the missiles, trying to get in the way of their approach chtoli?
    1. Iline
      Iline 11 December 2015 09: 02 New
      +9
      A fairly adequate article, only in his reasoning the author was somewhat distracted from the realities.
      In serious hostilities, Long-Range Aviation in our nuclear triad is a second-tier weapon, that is, it is used for undestroyed targets of the Strategic Missile Forces and the Navy. This can be explained by the rather low number of strategic aircraft in the country. After the first nuclear strike, one can imagine the state of enemy air defense and a control system for these forces. Therefore, it was considered quite impossible not to bother with the X-55 EPR and flight range. For all this, these missiles, when crossing the front line, have such an unpleasant moment for the enemy as the habit of undermining their nuclear warheads under any influence of any air defense systems on them. Those. when trying to bring down this missile, air defense systems in this zone can be considered destroyed, and the path for other missiles is clear.
      Well, the moment that our military science does not stand still, but moves forward somehow pleases to be honest.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 11 December 2015 18: 16 New
      0
      Quote: Alex_59
      In the desert and with a fair amount of luck. Shilka most likely were object air defense - i.e. were directly located at the attacked objects. You can’t put Shilka on the ways of approaching.

      ЕМНИП, там дело не в везении было, а в том, что "Томагавки" шли по ограниченному числу коридоров, которые иракцы довольно быстро засекли.
      Quote: Alex_59
      Нащ старенький "Заслон" от МиГ-31 берет на сопровождение цель с ЭПР 2м2 на дальности 90 км, а цель с ЭПР 1м2 летящую на высоте 60 метров берет на сопровождении на удалении 20 км.
      They forgot about the flight altitude: from a height of 6000 meters, target capture with an EPR of 1 square. a meter flying at an altitude of 60 meters is produced at a range of 20 km.
      Quote: Alex_59
      Well, air defense systems can still be redistributed on-line. And here are the ground ones. What is it like? They found the CR, realized that the air defense systems were not there and teleported them along the route of the alleged routes of the KR?

      Нет. "Распределение" в данном случае означает распределение целей между бригадами, полками и дивизионами (а также между ИА и ЗРК - зоны работы или конкретные группы целей). При этом надо учесть рабочие сектора ЗРК, имеющийся боекомплект и боеготовые ПУ, время перезарядки, возможные потери и многое другое.
      Quote: Alex_59
      If the air defense system guards the target of the attack, then all that the AWACS can help them with is to indicate the time and azimuth of the approach. Detect and take on the tracking of these air defense systems will have to themselves.

      Собственно, это стандартная практика работы ЗРК по воздушным целям. ЦУ "сверху" + картинка на ВИКО (по данным РЛС ОВЦ/ОНЦ от ртб) -> разворот АП (и ПУ - для тех, у кого они наводимые) на примерный азимут/угол места -> по приходе цели на заданный рубеж включаем высокое (точнее, переключаем с эквивалента) -> быстрый поиск и захват -> сопровождение, пуск и наведение.
      RTB radar, AWACS and other detection systems can only help with lighting the general situation in the air, determining the approximate coordinates of targets / groups of targets and their approximate composition, and target distribution. For the actual work of missiles for the purpose of detection, capture and tracking must perform the radar of the SAM itself.
      Quote: Alex_59
      These generally break off. They chtoli around the territory of NATO will be placed? Not? And how then? They will run after the missiles, trying to get in the way of their approach chtoli?

      Well ... if you know the TERCOM corridors and strip the GPS signals from the CR - how much would it not? wink
  10. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 11 December 2015 07: 02 New
    +3
    I will discuss it in an amateurish way ... EW systems in YaSU must be put into orbit and suspended there over the enemy’s deployment areas, then nothing will help them and the system itself will not be available either.
    1. dchegrinec
      dchegrinec 11 December 2015 07: 10 New
      +7
      Why in orbit, on the moon, put a tower and that's it! And within a radius of several light years, enemies will fly like space debris!
      1. Fox
        Fox 11 December 2015 21: 33 New
        0
        Quote: dchegrinec
        Why in orbit, on the moon, put a tower and that's it! And within a radius of several light years, enemies will fly like space debris!

        ))))) then the death star))))) definitely. repeat
  11. aviapit123
    aviapit123 11 December 2015 07: 38 New
    +2
    So, bit by bit, can you upload intelligence to the network? ...
    1. ibu355yandex.ru
      ibu355yandex.ru 11 December 2015 09: 09 New
      +1
      And no one guaranteed that the administration of this resource is located in Russia, on the Lubyanka ... Intelligence information is also collected from open sources, and not just undercover!
    2. ibu355yandex.ru
      ibu355yandex.ru 11 December 2015 09: 09 New
      0
      And no one guaranteed that the administration of this resource is located in Russia, on the Lubyanka ... Intelligence information is also collected from open sources, and not just undercover!
  12. Shark Lover
    Shark Lover 11 December 2015 08: 38 New
    +5
    Can you imagine what can be created in a normal economy in the Russian Federation? The government would change, not for us, legally)))
    1. Victor Demchenko
      Victor Demchenko 11 December 2015 14: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: Shark Lover
      The government would change, not for us, legally)))

      but from now on in more detail, pzhlsta! Yes, and ishsho for us, the orphans: legally - how is it? what the government itself will not resign, and you cannot push the guarantor in this matter, its work is comfortable with the government. our Duma thinks about anything, but not about the citizens of the country. we are gray for them, and are needed only before and during the elections. so what to do? request
  13. engineer74
    engineer74 11 December 2015 08: 43 New
    +2
    With the performance characteristics of our KR it is clear - impressive! good
    А как с количеством? Хочу, чтобы в НАТО тоже страшилка ходила о 10000 Х-101/102 и 50000 "Калибров"!
    (Real figures, please do not upload! Only Old from open sources, if anyone has.) wink
  14. P. Yaroslav
    P. Yaroslav 11 December 2015 08: 59 New
    +3
    It pleases all this of course, but the article’s too relaxing tone is:
    X-101 allowed us for decades to get ahead of the West in this class of weapons.
    You need to learn from the mistakes of others. The enemy must not be underestimated. The USA miscalculated, we cannot afford such luxury. Hope that
    The F-5A / B / C fifth generation fighter development and serial production program alone, known as JSF, costs $ 35 million
    затормозит развитие вооружений "партнеров" не стоит.
  15. Yurmix
    Yurmix 11 December 2015 09: 15 New
    -1
    Quote: kod3001
    I hope this is not the last surprise for our partners!

    Yes, I think a surprise in the revival of the BZHRK equipped with the X-101.
  16. Old26
    Old26 11 December 2015 09: 16 New
    +5
    Quote: Gandelman
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

    Well, about all areas you are bent, but in many respects we really have a fairly significant lag. For a quarter of a century, Americans have been using the Kyrgyz Republic in non-nuclear equipment, and on a massive scale, for the first time you did it and the quantity was not 800-1000 per race, like the Americans, but the quantity was hundreds. Plus, if they were used UABs much earlier and quite massively, it’s very rare with us

    Quote: kod3001
    I hope this is not the last surprise for our partners! laughing

    Не стоит надеться и уповать на то, что в рукаве есть сюрпризы. Развитие техники идет примерно одинаково, что в США, что в России. Не бывает такого, что у одних прорыв, а у других ничего. Сюрприз же по большому счету был для масс, что в Европе, что у нас, ну и для СМИ разумеется, которой привычнее "жаренные" материалы, чем анализ материалов, особенно военных. Делай они это - никакого сюрприза не было. Западные "размякли" после развала Союза, а наши по большому счету никогда этого не делали. Вот поэтому для СМИ это и сюрприз. А ведь о дальности КАЛИБРА в варианте 3М14 было известно еще в 2013 году...

    Quote: oldseaman1957
    "Было принято решение о закрытии программы развития малозаметной СКР AGM-129A (ACM)"" - А всё-таки радуют нас иногда "партнёры". Пусть и не по своей воле...

    Such errors have been and are with us and with them. For example, we at one time closed a number of missile programs, motivating this by the fact that what for do it, since the Americans have not yet gone into the SAM-D series. Well, there are enough other examples ...

    Quote: CON
    But we have a Rogozin trampoline, especially for launching amers into space ...))))

    Если Жирик или Рогозин допускают д.ебильные высказывания "на потеху толпы". то не стоит повторять их раз за разом. Да, амеркианцы после закрытия программы и прихода Обамы оказались в достаточно сложном положении (спасибо Обаме), но уповать, что это продлится вечно или десятилетия глупо и недальновидно. 2016-2017 год - это годы, КОГДА НАЧНУТ ИСПЫТЫВАТЬСЯ В ПИЛОТИРУЕМОМ ВАРИАНТЕ их космические корабли, причем сразу нескольких типов. Наш с 2018 теперь перетянули на 2024. И надо сказать спасибо американца, что они покупали наши двигатели, помогая при этом сохранить производство.
  17. Yurmix
    Yurmix 11 December 2015 09: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: kod3001
    I hope this is not the last surprise for our partners!

    Yes, I think a surprise in the revival of the BZHRK equipped with the X-101.
  18. Belousov
    Belousov 11 December 2015 09: 19 New
    +3
    Qualitatively, our weapons are noticeably superior to analogues, even those that are still in development by the enemy. But as for the quantitative ratio, then there is a complete seam. And this in the end can be a very important factor. In principle, putting it on the stream is still easier than inventing something fundamentally new, so we can catch up with the states. But not with such a government ... And again, there is no need for fairy tales about the good king and evil boyars.
    1. Victor Demchenko
      Victor Demchenko 11 December 2015 14: 52 New
      +1
      I repeat:
      Quote: Shark Lover
      The government would change, not for us, legally)))
      but from now on in more detail, pzhlsta! Yes, and ishsho for us, the orphans: legally - how is it? what the government itself will not resign, and you can’t push the guarantor for this matter, its work of the government suits. our Duma thinks about anything, but not about the citizens of the country. we are gray for them, and are needed only before and during the elections. so what to do? request
  19. scientist
    scientist 11 December 2015 09: 44 New
    +1
    The technology of cruise missiles is very good and promising, but expensive. Therefore, it is strange that the option of civilian or dual use of this technology is not considered. For example, for emergency delivery of goods to remote areas. Half a ton of cargo together with a rocket can safely land by parachute in the final section, and the carrier itself can be made reusable, which will significantly reduce the cost of delivery.
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 11 December 2015 10: 32 New
      +3
      Quote: scientist
      and the carrier itself can be made reusable, which will significantly reduce the cost of delivery.

      Пословица: "за морем телушка-полушка, да рубль перевоз". Себестоимость доставленного груза будет безпрецедентно высокой.
      1. scientist
        scientist 11 December 2015 11: 07 New
        +2
        Quote: V.ic
        The cost of delivered goods will be unprecedentedly high.

        those. old missiles cheaper to recycle in color. met?
        And why high? the device is unmanned, which means there are no requirements for security and any additional support systems. If you transfer the engine to ordinary kerosene, the range will decrease slightly, but the service life will increase significantly. The relative fuel consumption is not much more than a conventional aircraft, or maybe less. KR is not much different from a drone.
        1. V.ic
          V.ic 11 December 2015 13: 30 New
          0
          Quote: scientist
          those. old missiles cheaper to recycle in color. met?

          Ознакомьтесь с описанием изд. "Рейс". Кстати "кушает" именно керосин. Там ВСЕГО на 5 (ПЯТЬ)пусков "гарантия". Вывозить с места приземления "на оленях" или "на овцебыках" будете?
        2. vostok68
          vostok68 11 December 2015 14: 16 New
          +1
          At least the KR has a small turbojet resource (I think for one flight), and the entire resource is intended only for storage!
  20. Termit1309
    Termit1309 11 December 2015 10: 31 New
    +2
    Quote: Old26
    That is why this is a surprise for the media. But about the range of the CALIBER in the 3M14 variant was known back in 2013 ...

    In the range can be believed. They did not expect that Russia would be able to produce them in series.
  21. snc
    snc 11 December 2015 11: 08 New
    +1
    Scientist: And what prevents these half a ton from parachuting from a transporter?
    Regarding the X-101 (102) itself: I VERY want to make a mistake, but only the engine itself openly hanging on the pylon gives an EPR of 0.1 approximately. EPR 0.01 is probably achieved only for limited angles from above, when the engine is closed by the rocket body.
    1. Vita vko
      Vita vko 11 December 2015 11: 14 New
      +1
      Quote: snc
      Scientist: And what prevents these half a ton from parachuting from a transporter?

      for example, non-flying weather over an area where people are in distress, or just the economic sense of driving a huge transporter for the sake of several hundred kg of food and medicine.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 11 December 2015 12: 02 New
      +2
      Quote: snc
      Regarding the X-101 (102) itself: I VERY want to make a mistake, but only the engine itself openly hanging on the pylon gives an 0.1 EPR of approximately. The 0.01 EPR is probably achieved only for limited angles from above, when the engine is closed by the rocket body

      Duck is looked at her from below only by those whom she now covers and no longer than a couple of seconds. Therefore, what kind of EPR is there from below - it makes no difference. The main thing is that on top of the EPR 0,01 m2. Those. maximum stealth from AWACS and fighters. Well, SAM missiles will also attack it from above, and there the reflected signal is minimal, which is for active, that for semi-active GOS.
      1. snc
        snc 11 December 2015 14: 53 New
        0
        And no one will look at her from the front-side? Already 30 degrees from the axis of the rocket the engine will be visible. And most importantly, take care of elementary geometry, from a distance of about 150 km the enemy radar, even from heights up to 10 km, given the bend of the earth’s surface, will look almost exactly in the forehead of the rocket.
        1. snc
          snc 11 December 2015 15: 13 New
          0
          And, yes, and ground-based air defense radars yet.
  22. Old26
    Old26 11 December 2015 13: 13 New
    +2
    Quote: Iline
    For all this, these missiles, when crossing the front line, have such an unpleasant moment for the enemy as the habit of undermining their nuclear warheads under any influence of any air defense systems on them. Those. when trying to bring down this missile, air defense systems in this zone can be considered destroyed, and the path for other missiles is clear.

    And where did you find all these sacred secrets? And if the engine fails, then how ?? So damage and a mustache, a nuclear explosion ???

    Quote: scientist
    The technology of cruise missiles is very good and promising, but expensive. Therefore, it is strange that the option of civilian or dual use of this technology is not considered. For example, for emergency delivery of goods to remote areas. Half a ton of cargo together with a rocket can safely land by parachute in the final section, and the carrier itself can be made reusable, which will significantly reduce the cost of delivery.

    А зачем городить огород? Полтонны груза - это ведь боеголовки. Ей пофиг, каков диаметр отсека. А вот отправлять гражданские грузу, которые явно будут весить не полтонны, а намного меньше, да и не каждый груз можно втиснуть в этот отсек. Получится "золотая доставка". И без гарантии что ракета выйдет на цель. Ведь полетные задания для таких ракет достаточно трудоемкое дело, и она идет к СТАЦИОНАРНОЙ цели по электронным картам местности...
    So not an option

    Quote: engineer74
    Хочу, чтобы в НАТО тоже страшилка ходила о 10000 Х-101/102 и 50000 "Калибров"!

    Хотеть не вредно. Вредно будет воспринимать это как реалии. В НАТО страшилка эта не ходит. Она ходит в СМИ и головах населения. Для разведслужб такие цифры - деза, они, как и мы способны адекватно оценивать возможные реальные количества. И прекрасно понимают, что физически не может быть 50000 "Калибров" при наличии примерно десятка носителей...

    Quote: scientist
    those. old missiles cheaper to recycle in color. met?

    Maybe cheaper, but maybe not. In any case, if such products pass under contracts, then their destruction occurs in the presence of observers of the other party.

    Quote: Termit1309
    They did not expect that Russia would be able to produce them in series.

    Stupidity. That is, we sell them abroad, have our own carriers, but there is no serial production ??? And what then ??? Another thing is that there may not be a large series yet, there are still thousands, but in any case there is a series, albeit a small one, but there are

    Quote: Vita VKO
    for example, non-flying weather over an area where people are in distress, or just the economic sense of driving a huge transporter for the sake of several hundred kg of food and medicine.

    And in the compartment of the Kyrgyz Republic of caliber 533-710 mm, will you put these several hundred kg? And most importantly, will it fly ??
  23. mamont5
    mamont5 11 December 2015 16: 16 New
    -2
    Quote: Gandelman
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

    You may be behind. Especially in brain development.
  24. Vittt
    Vittt 11 December 2015 16: 50 New
    -1
    Quote: Gandelman
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

    Мой коллега,побывавший в Америке у родственников,стал говорить так же. Я спросил - что за чудесную травку он там курнул? Он сказал - "воздух свободы" (ага,сказал я ему - после того как небедные родственники покатали тебя в круизе по Карибскому морю, недельку в 5*-отеле на берегу Атлантического океана,экскурсии в Вашингтоне и Нью-Йорке). На мой вполне логичную реплику,что он стал простой "потреблядью", он сказал,что во всём виноват Путин. На что я заржал, а он обиделся.
  25. prawdawsegda
    prawdawsegda 11 December 2015 17: 44 New
    +2
    The Soviet Union died, and how much smart was left of it. It is a pity that the narrow-minded leaders in our country fooled the people. EBN escaped, and the HMS is running somewhere!
  26. viktor561
    viktor561 11 December 2015 18: 47 New
    +2
    Quote- The X-101 rocket allowed us to get ahead of the West in this class of weapons for decades. - да верно но этих ракет единицы - до сих пор (серийные) самолеты в ВКС производства только СССР (ну часть модифицирована - те починена ) - "томагавки" то же старые но сильно серийные - только их на порядок больше, а серийных "крылатых" у нас нет запаса и еще долго не будет - не надо шапки кидать - "одна слезинка - еще не дождь, одна снежинка - еще не снег"!!!! - я так горячие головы остудить - пусковых мобильных установок и ракет "Томогавк" - в США в 150 раз больше - наших крылаток
  27. looker-on
    looker-on 11 December 2015 20: 34 New
    0
    Quote: oleggun
    Ага, именно поэтому американцы покупают у нас РД-180,летают на наших ракетах на МКС и наши радары видях их "стелсы". Учите матчасть, прежде чем высказываться.

    They do this because it is economically viable. Only
  28. leon1204id
    leon1204id 11 December 2015 21: 00 New
    0
    У нас всегда была задача сделать из .....ну что-то стоящее.И Россия в этом преуспела.Кстати,о носителях.Американцы снова приняли на вооружение В1-В "Lancer" в стратегическую триаду.ЭПР-7,5-10 м2 а у Ту-160 24 м2. Модернизация должна пойти на пользу и в этом плане.
    Well, Russia has no other choice, only know-how.
    tvzvezda.ru ›News› ... / 201505140916-9dhl.htm smile
  29. Orionvit
    Orionvit 11 December 2015 22: 47 New
    +1
    Quote: war and peace
    nice to read such articles, thanks to the USSR for foreseeing such situations for decades to come ...

    Ещё хочу добавить, что большая радиолокационная сигнатура у Х-55, не соответствует действительности. С самой ракетой знаком только по демонтажу, зато отлично знаю двигатель РД-95-300 третьей серии, которым оснащались Х-55. Ещё в далёких 80х. на предприятии изготовителе двигателей (сейчас "Мотор Сич") все ракетные двигатели этой серии изготавливались с внешними стенками из специального материала, который не давал отметку на экране радиолокатора. Поскольку материал был очень секретным, (на основе стекловолокна со спец. добавками, их так и называли "деревянными") любые отходы производства сжигались, для чего за цехом была специальная печь, под присмотром особиста. По рассказам знающих людей, завод по производству этого материала, где-то под Москвой, в 1992г. выкупили американцы и сразу порезали его на металлолом. Говорят технология сохранилась, даже в 2010 ставился вопрос о возобновлении производства двигателей этой серии, но события на украине поставили крест на всём. Радует одно, что наследие СССР ещё плохо-бедно, но живо.
  30. Orionvit
    Orionvit 11 December 2015 22: 56 New
    +2
    Quote: Good AAAH
    We lag behind the United States in all areas of the years at 20. Thanks to Gorbachev and Yeltsin.


    We stand in the stables with horns and an udder.

    I don’t know how in the stables, but for a very expensive high-tech weapon it’s a shame. These are the X-55 cruise missiles. Probably it can be disposed of for its intended purpose, or in extreme cases, let long-range pilots train at launches. After all, one such thing is worth many millions. But not so.
  31. Killj
    Killj 12 December 2015 01: 26 New
    -1
    The first combat use of tactical long-range tactical missiles "Caliber" made a huge impression on the Western world

    Who did that happen to? Journalism? Or did the military departments not know the performance characteristics of new systems?
    It was decided to close the development program of the invisible TFR AGM-129A (ACM)

    зато безпилотников достаточно для "решений"
    And as we know, it is on the standard SKVNO (using conventional subsonic TFR and tactical long-range missiles) that the basic concept of Western domination in the world is based today

    no, we don’t know from what source such far-reaching conclusions?
    still completely “raw” due to the lack of promising small-sized aeroballistic and cruise missiles X-51A

    but you don’t need to rant about the dampness of the mind, where does the data come from again?
    well and then generally having no analogues in the world ...
  32. Skifotavr
    Skifotavr 12 December 2015 04: 05 New
    +1
    AGM-158B JASSM-ER, with its low flight profile (25 - 30 m), still has a larger EPR (about 101 m0,1) than the X-2
    But this, excuse me, is already a lie.
  33. sledge
    sledge 13 December 2015 16: 58 New
    +1
    It’s interesting, when will we begin to correct the situation inside the country? When do we really start to boost the economy? When will the enterprises start working?
  34. archimer
    archimer 13 December 2015 21: 57 New
    +1
    For the Soviet Union, even cooks fought with axes!
  35. Arkon
    Arkon 15 December 2015 10: 02 New
    0
    Quote: CERHJ
    Мне конечно смешно говорить о том.что знает автор.На минуту представьте себе.что страна.которая уже более 30 лет выпускает ЛА по технологии стелс.и уже выпускает его с третьим поколением покрытия (1-F-117,2-F-22,B-2,AGM-129,3-F-35),уступает в этой технологии стране в этой технологии .которая еще не один ЛА (кроме Х-101)не выпускает серийно.это типа верить поговроке:"не было гроша.да вдруг алтын!"


    Incorrect analogy.
    England, too, by the beginning of World War II, already thirty barks produced tanks serially, so what? The superiority of English tank thought on the battlefields was not noticeable.
    And automatic weapons were not commercially launched in Russia, which did not prevent the AK-47 and T-34 from becoming the best weapon of the 20th century.
  36. Lexa-149
    Lexa-149 16 December 2015 02: 44 New
    0
    we respond to any adversary's tricks with unpredictable stupidity. The adversary relaxes, mistaking us for clinical idiots, and at this time we get the ace of trump from the sleeve! repeat