Military Review

The threat from "SAMP / T" at the Russian borders is underestimated

39

The main firing element of the SAMP / T anti-aircraft missile system is the Arabel multifunctional radar station. Passive phased arrays as well as an antenna post drive allow scanning the airspace in azimuth at a speed of 360 degrees / s (60 rpm), scanning in an elevation plane takes place by the electronic transfer of the PPAR beam. "Arabel" has a fairly high computational capabilities, providing bandwidth in 130 EC in tracking mode on the aisle, and 10 air targets in capture mode (target designation). But this MRLS has serious drawbacks before such MRLSs like our 30H6Е / 92Н6Е or American AN / MPQ-53. In order to provide a single SAMP / T battery for a full-range air defense system, the French Thomson-CSF specialists were forced to make the X-band "Arabel" antenna post rotating, which does not allow for continuous illumination of the target and forces you to rely only on the active radar GPS SAM family "Aster". During 10 airborne missiles, when part of the missiles intercept targets in one direction, and the Arabel pattern is temporarily directed in another direction, failure to capture the ARGSN Aster-30 target at the moment of approaching the target may result in a miss The MRLS at this point may not correct. Due to the use of active radar homing missiles, the width of the main beam of the beam is 2 degrees, which is greater than the "Three Hundred" and "Patriots" RPN, the accuracy of the latter is much higher. But the Arabel MRLS also has a significant advantage: the viewing sector in the elevation plane is from -5 to 90 degrees. This allows you to: detect and attack low-altitude targets even with humiliation relative to the MRLS (in case the battery is deployed on a small hill), and also intercept air attack weapons that attack from vertical directions. For example, the RPN 30Н6Е has a sector of view from 5 to 64 hail, which has serious consequences in the fight against the ALARM "ALARM" and other WTO, approaching from above



In numerous Russian media, you can find a lot of information regarding the deployment in Eastern European NATO member states, as well as in the Far Eastern allies of the United States of American anti-aircraft missile systems of the territorial missile defense system "Patriot PAC-2/3", as well as exclusively anti-missile systems of the regional missile defense system "THAAD ", But there is practically no information about the plans to pull the SAMP / T air defense system to our western borders. The first example of the use of SAMP / T to counter the Russian Aerospace Forces is the dispatch of the Italian SAMP / T to the Syrian-Turkish border, where a fairly large NATO military group is deployed within the framework of the Turkish military support program, represented by Patriot complexes, electronic warfare systems as well as their logistic support. The version officially announced by the French magazine Air & Cosmos says that the deployment of air defense systems in southern Turkey is necessary to repel possible missile strikes from ISIS, nevertheless, the transfer of the complexes began precisely after the deployment of the Russian contingent in the SAR, in particular the Iskander OTRK "And super-maneuverable multipurpose fighters of the" 4 ++ "generation Su-35S, and just think about why Ankara would ask to form a missile defense system from a terrorist organization, which it also sponsors.

The Patriot PAC-2 / 3 and SAMP / T complexes can intercept a decent range of ultra-small air-assisted maneuvering aids, aided by the gas-dynamic control system and ARGSN of the ERINT and Aster-30 missiles, but the OTBR 9М723-1 of the Iskander complex. M will obviously be too tough for the American and European air defense systems, since anti-aircraft maneuvers with overloads in 30 units. They do not allow either the US or the European anti-missile to reliably enter the Russian ballistic missile in the “hit-to-kill” mode. To efficiently intercept a maneuvering anti-missile target, it must have 2,5 - 3 times greater overloads than an attacking EAS. Aster-30 has overloads up to 65 units, which is higher than ERINT (45 units), but all Asters in service have another drawback that affects the accuracy and capabilities of the SAMP / T complex anti-stealth objects.

The ERINT interceptor missile is equipped with an ARGSN millimeter part of the Ka-band (more than 30 GHz), which makes it possible to more accurately point out small, inconspicuous targets, the Aster-30, with its best maneuverability, has a centimeter-wave ARGSN that slightly reduces the accuracy of the "hit-to-kill" mode. For this reason, the French and Italian divisions of the Eurosam consortium will soon be attracted to the deep modernization of the Aster-30 guidance system.

An agreement on the joint development of a new active radar homing head was signed between the Ministers of Defense of France and Italy on 14 June 2016. A full upgrade of the e-filling of the new Aster block 1 New Technology anti-aircraft guided missile is envisaged: the rocket will receive ARGSN of a millimeter Ka-band, which will bring the Aster-30 to a more perfect level than ERINT. With a greater target range (120 km compared to 80 km), the new Aster block 1 NT will be able to intercept any ballistic targets at distances more than 50 km, because the missile has ARGSN and can be launched on target designation in the direction of enemy ETS for anticipation (more prior to its entry into the affected area of ​​the SAMP / T complex or its shipboard analogue PAAMS). The ground infrastructure of SAMP / T is also planned to be improved. Apparently, it is planned to upgrade the processor units, as well as buses for data exchange between the new Aster missile system, the Arabel MRLS, and the command and control center of the complex. All modernization measures will help not only to more accurately capture small-size hypersonic elements of the WTO, but also to expand the maximum speed of the targeted target.

Over the next 10-15 years, it is planned to gradually develop several new versions of Aster-30, capable of intercepting even more modern and long-range ballistic missiles. So, if the “Aster block 1 NT” is capable of intercepting OTBR with a range of up to 1000 km, the Aster block 2 version will be able to hit medium-range ballistic missiles (up to 3000 km). Both the first and second modifications will already be a threat to the fire protection system of the Iskander-M family; The modernization of the transverse-control gas-dynamic engine unit, as well as the strengthening of the rocket body with the use of new high-strength materials, which may increase Aster overloads to 70-80 units, is not excluded. The deployment of SAMP / T complexes equipped with these missiles in the Baltic States, Poland, Georgia, Sweden or Finland can create serious inconvenience to Iskander, Polonaise and other missile systems on duty in the Western and Southern military districts.


And again the anti-ship Caliber comes to the aid of the Russian HVAC. In addition to the promising unobtrusive operational-tactical ballistic missile with non-detachable warheads, the 533-mm anti-ship missiles of the Caliber-A / NK can be the prototype for the new versions of the Patriot and SAMP / T. 3М-51 Alpha and 3М54А versions. The three-stage anti-ship missiles have a range of up to 250 km and a supersonic 3P52 combat stage, which develops ground / water speeds up to 3050 km / h. Like all promising "Calibrov", including strategic 3М14Т, Alpha and 3М54АE have a large part of the structural units represented by composite materials, and the combat stage has several times smaller physical dimensions than the Iskander-M missiles, respectively, 3 EPR -wheel stage does not exceed 0,05 m2 and it is very difficult to intercept it in low-altitude mode, considering that today Arabel MRLS is not being built on universal towers. The development of an air-to-ground / ground-to-ground missile can occur by analogy with a land modification of the BrahMos tactical missile being tested in the Indian Armed Forces


To counter the upgraded “SAMP / T”, it will be necessary to develop an even more modern hypersonic OTBR, the characteristics of which will advance in comparison with the “Iskander”. The radar visibility of the new missile should be several times smaller than that of the 9М723. To do this, a two-stage design of an OTBR should be considered with a detachable warhead, equipped with a gas-dynamic maneuvering system and a module of the anti-missile defense system (KSPPRO), based on a software-controlled multi-frequency radio-electronic jammer and a device for shooting dummy targets and dipole reflectors, which are analogous to modern ones BB intercontinental ballistic missiles. ESR separated from 2, or 1, stage BB is much smaller than the radar signature of a single-stage rocket with an inseparable warhead: even with maximum use of radio-absorbing composite materials, a large number of units and units of the 9XXUMUM solid propellant rocket engine 820XXNNXX of the solid-propellant composite materials and units of the engine compartment of the 9N solid-propellant rocket engine of the solid-propellant rocket engine use a large number of components and units of the engine compartment 723XNXX of the solid-propellant rocket engine of the OTB XNHMXMXHNXX solid-fuel rocket engine various metal alloys are also performed, which at different angles of approach to the interceptor missile may have a certain radio contrast, especially for millimeter ARGSN . However, for a GOS with similar frequencies of radiation-reception, any metal element on the target body or even inside it can become a completely visible target, which once again makes one think about detachable MS and new types of radio absorbing materials.

At the moment, specialists from the Kolomna design bureau of machine building have a few more years in stock to light up the sky over Kapustin Yar with the frightening West with the power of promising OTBR, which does not leave the Aster-30 units with a single chance.
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sergeyzzz
    sergeyzzz 28 June 2016 06: 43
    +3
    The conclusions are correct - the caliber must be pushed into the Iskander launcher. And put on a contract with the United States.
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 28 June 2016 17: 05
      +1
      Thanks for the info! Is it possible to learn more about ARGSN Ku - the range of centimeter waves with hit-to-kill accuracy? Although I am not from Cueva, but very curious! belay
  2. Leto
    Leto 28 June 2016 07: 55
    +1
    Another flogging Damantsev's nonsense.
  3. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 09: 14
    +8
    Quote: sergeyzzz
    The conclusions are correct - the caliber must be pushed into the Iskander launcher. And put on a contract with the United States.

    So what are the problems. Take a hacksaw, saw off about 2 meters from the "Caliber" and put it on the launcher of the "Iskander". Is it so difficult?

    Quote: Leto
    Another flogging Damantsev's nonsense.

    I agree. Moreover, for 10 years this complex did not pose a threat, but now it suddenly began to do. The destruction range of 120 km "Asterom-30" (promising) is the range of destruction aerodynamic goals. Ballistic - at least 3-4 times less... A scary story about what "Aster" will be like in 10-15 years ???

    The author is silent about what can really pose a threat in terms of missile defense, and even then not to us - the Exogard complex. By the way, the phrase "within 10-15 years" misspelled - not during, for... If it goes on like this, horror stories will appear that a complex similar to the Pantsir complex poses a threat to tactical missile weapons and MLRS ... One gets the impression that this is a discovery for the author. You can ask the author a question, but what for in general then anti-aircraft systems are made? Article - MINUS
    1. Leto
      Leto 28 June 2016 13: 34
      +4
      Quote: Old26
      By the way, the phrase "within 10-15 years" was written with an error - not during, but during.

      This is not the main thing, for the Aster air defense system the “hit-to-kill” principle is not implemented, therefore, as a missile defense system it is ineffective. This is a standard Damantsev’s technique, to pull the fact by the ears and then ride near it. The Aster air defense system is undoubtedly good, it can be put on a par with the latest S-300 modifications and even with the S-400 with some reservations, but it will not pull the missile defense, as if Damantsev did not want to portray it.
    2. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 28 June 2016 13: 39
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      So what are the problems. Take a hacksaw, saw off about 2 meters from the "Caliber" and put it on the launcher of the "Iskander". Is it so difficult?

      There is Iskander-K with a R-500 missile, for the defense of the coast from ships there is a Bastion complex with Onyxes.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 28 June 2016 19: 13
      +3
      From an old joke: After numerous attempts on Brezhnev in all sorts of mental and unbelievable ways, Semyon Budyonny asked the conspirators - did you try with a saber? laughing All that is simple is ingenious!
    4. sergeyzzz
      sergeyzzz 29 June 2016 07: 56
      0
      Just the problems, in my opinion, are purely political. Who is stopping the tractor to take a couple of meters longer ?? MZKT and BAZ have serial ones, KAMAZ already has prototypes running.
  4. Themi30
    Themi30 28 June 2016 09: 41
    +6
    The conclusions are correct - the caliber must be pushed into the Iskander launcher. And put on a contract with the United States.

    So shove already, and do not need to put, this is not a ballistic missile but a cruise missile, it does not fall under the INF

    So what are the problems. Take a hacksaw, saw off about 2 meters from the "Caliber" and put it on the launcher of the "Iskander". Is it so difficult?


    So you don’t need to cut anything, and so it fits
  5. Mels
    Mels 28 June 2016 10: 04
    0
    Need to work.
  6. Urri
    Urri 28 June 2016 10: 11
    +5
    The article is very specific. Published also for the sake of mentioning "Polonezes". They do not allow someone to sleep peacefully. And nothing that "Polonaise" is a MLRS, the range of which exceeds the range of the Astera rocket, and the ammunition load of one Polonaise launcher is enough to guarantee the destruction of the radar and the Sampa launcher from one salvo from a position outside the zone of the Sump's defense systems the composition of the warheads of the Polonaise missiles of a mass unpleasant for a potential enemy of Copperfield.
    NATO is simply invited to place the Sampts in Suwalkia, Narva, and Šalčininkai. And for this you need this same Sumpt BUY. And it’s not for sale at all, lousy ...
  7. Operator
    Operator 28 June 2016 10: 25
    0
    With all the flaws, this is a very correct article.

    Anti-aircraft missile defense systems smoothly move into the class of air defense. Therefore, it is time to equip the Russian MLRS and OTR with warheads coated with radar absorbing materials (in the atmospheric section) and actively maneuvering (in the atmospheric section).

    And it is time for the S-350 air defense system to equip a dome-based AFAR with electronic scanning of the entire upper hemisphere in azimuth and elevation, as well as anti-ballistic missiles with control units for mini-solid propellant rocket engines (because after fuel is generated in the main engine, the anti-missile flies by inertia and the effectiveness of the aerodynamic rudders does not allow highly maneuverable goal).
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 28 June 2016 13: 42
      +1
      Quote: Operator
      (since after the fuel is exhausted in the marching engine, the anti-missile flies by inertia and the efficiency of the aerodynamic rudders does not allow it to hit the highly maneuverable target)

      And why didn’t the rockets be equipped with a marching ramjet? In this case, the anti-aircraft missile could maintain a high speed throughout the flight.
      1. Operator
        Operator 28 June 2016 14: 38
        +4
        The ramjet engine operates without surging only in a straight flight with large bends.

        When maneuvering with acceleration from 10 g and higher, the ramjet stalls.
    2. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 28 June 2016 14: 57
      -3
      Hello everyone! Here you are absolutely right. But to achieve this requires considerable resources.


      Э


      Э
      Э











      In principle, we are now on the verge of new solutions and means.
  8. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 13: 37
    +8
    Quote: TheMi30
    So shove already, and do not need to put, this is not a ballistic missile but a cruise missile, it does not fall under the INF

    Damn VO not only turns yellow, but also becomes a resource where Ignorance, but then URA-PATRIOTISM becomes the main thing.
    You are our expert. Have you ever read the INF Treaty yourself to write this? And he, what, has nothing to do with ballistic missiles ??? LEARN% MATCH
    Where did you get that nonsense that Caliber is already being shoved into Iskander? Or does the fact that both the Caliber and the R-500 are cruise missiles means that they are one and the same? No, dear expert. 928 -th missile and "Caliber" are two different missiles.

    Quote: TheMi30
    So you don’t need to cut anything, and so it fits

    Well, go ahead ...

    Quote: Operator
    Anti-aircraft missile defense systems smoothly move into the class of air defense. Therefore, it is time to equip the Russian MLRS and OTR with warheads coated with radar absorbing materials (in the atmospheric section) and actively maneuvering (in the atmospheric section).

    Andrew! The heads, and not only the heads of our OTRKs, are equipped with radio-absorbing materials. And for MLRS they are not necessary. The MLRS does not have a transatmospheric section. If we talk about BG "Iskander". so she is already maneuvering, since homing in the last section
    1. Operator
      Operator 28 June 2016 14: 31
      -1
      The Tornado-S rockets already have an extra-atmospheric section.

      In addition, in the short term, to reduce the total area of ​​the reflecting surface, it is extremely useful to shoot the head of missiles and rockets from the body of the solid propellant marching engine after completion of its work.
  9. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 14: 05
    +5
    Quote: Lt. air force reserve
    There is Iskander-K with a R-500 missile, for the defense of the coast from ships there is a Bastion complex with Onyxes.

    Do not repeat all the nonsense that journalists come up with. Iskander-K is their exclusive invention. There is the Iskander-M complex, which, in contrast to the Iskander complex, is equipped with two types of missiles: the 9M923-1 ballistic missile (sometimes even its name R-900 is mentioned) and the 9M928 (R-500) cruise missile. They are one and the same complex. But depending on the tasks assigned, either two ballistic missiles or two cruise missiles (in TPK) are installed on the launcher.
    Yes, the coastal defense really is "Bastion" with supersonic "Onikas". At one of the exhibitions, they even demonstrated a coastal anti-ship complex with "Calibers". True, he is not in the series
  10. Hammer
    Hammer 28 June 2016 15: 08
    +1
    The INF Treaty works for our defense; those who wish to withdraw from this treaty doom our country to a constant threat of destruction.
    1. serverny
      serverny 28 June 2016 17: 25
      +1
      Only now NATO in fact leaves the INF Treaty with the installation under the guise of "missile defense systems" UVP Mk41 along the borders of the Russian Federation.
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 28 June 2016 19: 17
        +1
        Quote: serverny
        Only now NATO in fact leaves the INF Treaty with the installation under the guise of "missile defense systems" UVP Mk41 along the borders of the Russian Federation.

        On a western site dedicated to armaments, at one time he took an interest in Westerners with the dual purpose of the PU Mk-41. They said that the United States, in principle, does not need land PUs to launch the Tomahawks, they can do this with destroyers or cruisers.
        1. Operator
          Operator 28 June 2016 20: 01
          +1
          It is absolutely violent for us that the United States can place Tomahawks on board ships - if they signed a bilateral agreement to ban land-based RS RS launchers, that means no way.
    2. Operator
      Operator 28 June 2016 18: 09
      0
      The first step of the Russian Federation after withdrawing from the INF Treaty will be the deployment of ballistic missiles with a range of 5500 km at the Anadyr missile base am
  11. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 18: 24
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    The Tornado-S rockets already have an extra-atmospheric section.

    I have not heard that the maximum height of the "Tornado-S" shells goes beyond the atmosphere

    Quote: serverny
    Only now NATO in fact leaves the INF Treaty with the installation under the guise of "missile defense systems" UVP Mk41 along the borders of the Russian Federation.

    Not everything that is said on the TV screens and in the media should be trusted. Even if it is said by the President. If it is profitable for him, he will juggle and escalate the situation, if this is beneficial to the course that he pursues. And cultivate the image of the enemy. And it makes no difference what the president’s last name is: Obama or Putin
    With regard to violations of the NATO INF Treaty. But NATO has nothing to do with it. It does not participate in this agreement.
    As for the launchers. They are not prohibited under the INF Treaty. And our "thoughts" that the Americans are violating something are just as pointless a bazaar as their statements that Russia is violating the Treaty. None of the parties have FACTS of violation.
    "Tomahawks" do not stand there, and even if they did, they are now harmless to us. How harmless are the missile defense missiles that are or will be in these launchers
    1. Operator
      Operator 28 June 2016 18: 36
      0
      The maximum range of Tornado-U rockets is announced at 200 km. The angle of inclination of the trajectory at launching the RS to the maximum range is 45 degrees, hence the apogee of the flight trajectory is at an altitude of 100 km - the formal boundary of the atmosphere.

      But from the altitude of 30-40 km, the so-called upper layers of the atmosphere begin with extremely thin air, which reduces the aerodynamic heating of the RS and makes it advisable to use a radio-absorbing coating (in the form of special ceramics), since the glow of the RS surface in the infrared range is not as intense as during flight Below 30-40 km.

      The distance flown by the Tornado-U RS above this border under the protection of the RPM can be estimated at 50 percent of the total. The detection line of the RS using the OLS is shifted up to 50 km from the target, which is significant.
  12. Vadim237
    Vadim237 28 June 2016 19: 13
    +1
    For our PTRC Iskander, only THAAD missiles are dangerous.
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 28 June 2016 19: 43
      +3
      Quote: Vadim237
      For our PTRC Iskander, only THAAD missiles are dangerous.


      The number of our Iskanders is so small that in terms of military danger - they can be neglected as a statistical error ...
      Enough to "exalt" what the units and, accordingly, in such quantities are not a force to be reckoned with.
      See how many adversaries PU and ATACMS missiles ...
      That's when we will have no less, then we can talk about Iskander. how about something really formidable.
      Now this is zilch ...

      For those who do not want to scratch their own brain write:
      1. OVER 800 PU.
      2. Over 5000 missiles.
      3. range to 300km.
      4. 5M flight speed.
  13. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 28 June 2016 19: 14
    0
    SAMP / T is no different from the same MEADS complex. In range all the same 100 kilometers (for aerodynamic targets)
  14. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 19: 20
    +1
    Quote: Operator
    The first step of the Russian Federation after withdrawing from the INF Treaty will be the deployment of ballistic missiles with a range of 5500 km at the Anadyr missile base

    Money nowhere to go? Is it necessary to swell billions into a project that was recognized as unpromising in the 80s?

    Quote: Operator
    The maximum range of Tornado-U rockets is announced at 200 km. The angle of inclination of the trajectory at launching the RS to the maximum range is 45 degrees, hence the apogee of the flight trajectory is at an altitude of 100 km - the formal boundary of the atmosphere.

    Andrew! The maximum range of shells at the "Tornado-S" MLRS reaches 90-120 km. 200 km is a Wishlist. On the Alloy website, the maximum range of the 9M528 projectile is 90 km, although information about the range of 120 was passed through. So the "tornado" does not have an extra-atmospheric section. Especially at "Tornado-U"
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 28 June 2016 19: 28
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Andrew! The maximum range of shells at the "Tornado-S" MLRS reaches 90-120 km. 200 km is a Wishlist. On the Alloy website, the maximum range of the 9M528 projectile is 90 km, although information about the range of 120 was passed through. So the "tornado" does not have an extra-atmospheric section. Especially at "Tornado-U"

      200 kilometers is kind of in the long run, who knows maybe over time guided cruise missiles can be launched from the MLRS. And as for the Tornado-S, the Military Acceptance program said that the shells are adjustable, due to this, high accuracy is achieved when firing at a range of 120 kilometers.
    2. Operator
      Operator 28 June 2016 19: 37
      +1
      You simply cannot evaluate the depth of the plan ( laughing ) withdrawal from the RMND treaty - under the conditions of the strategic arms ceiling, it is possible to practically unlimitedly increase the number of cheaper medium-range carriers with the reach of the potential enemy’s territory (Alaska and the northwestern United States, not to mention Canada) and short flight time.
      And what will be the psychological effect - remember what happened in the 1962 year: the entire motorized population of the south of the USA spontaneously evacuated to the north as soon as American newspapers and television published the range of the Soviet R-14 infantry fighting systems deployed in Cuba.

      Sorry, "Tornado-U" got attached - read "Tornado-S" correctly. According to the experience of the Chinese, firing MLRS at a distance of 200 km is not difficult - we reduce the weight of the warhead by three times, by saving weight and volume we form the second stage and, voila, we reach the cherished 200 km.
  15. Banderas
    Banderas 28 June 2016 19: 42
    0
    France proposed the SAMP-T complex to Azerbaijan a year ago, but it preferred Russian air defense systems.
  16. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 21: 18
    +1
    Quote: Operator
    You simply cannot evaluate the depth of the plan () for withdrawing from the agreement of the RMND

    laughing There was a Soviet musical "The Taming of the Shrew". And there was a similar phrase:
    - You cannot appreciate the whole depth of my thought
    - But how to evaluate it, if it is so deep that it is not visible laughing

    And if without jokes, then the withdrawal from the agreement will spill over to us sideways. The psychological effect was real in the 60s, but not now.
    Quote: Operator
    Under the conditions of the strategic arms ceiling, one can practically unlimitedly increase the number of cheaper medium-range carriers with the reach of the potential enemy’s territory (Alaska and the north-west of the USA, not to mention Canada) and short flight time.

    They are unlikely to be so cheap that they can be increased indefinitely. In addition, one should not forget that Russia is not the USSR, where there were several missile factories and at one of them we could "rivet" MRBMs in dozens a year. This plant, in principle, is now the only one. Productivity - about 60 ICBMs of all types per year. If you start to make an MRBM on it, the entire program of rearmament of the Strategic Missile Forces and the Navy will be covered with a copper basin.
    In addition, the Americans already have spent missile targets, we discussed this with you. To expand their production is not difficult. And with us this will be a problem. Well, the fact that everyone is discussing in VO. Namely cruise missiles in MK.41. So far this is only a theoretical possibility. Or maybe not theoretical

    Quote: Operator
    the range of the Soviet R-14 BRDS, located in Cuba.

    R-14 never deployed in Cuba. Just planned
    1. Operator
      Operator 28 June 2016 22: 27
      -1
      Increasing missile production capacity is easy:
      - the available plant is likely to work in one shift, so its capacity will triple after switching to three-shift operation;
      - medium-range missile less intercontinental, respectively, less material and labor for its manufacture.
      For example, the American three-stage ICBM Midgetman had a range of 11000 km, a starting weight of 13,7 tons and a warhead capacity of 475 kt (260 weight kg).
      To throw a 100-kt warhead weighing 100 kg at a range of 5500 km, a three-stage missile with a launch weight of 2 tons or 20 times lighter than the Sineva or Yars is required.
      Those. rocket production can be increased 3x20 times or up to 3600 units per year.

      If in the 1962 year, American citizens darted from south to north only from 24 R-12 missiles with a range of 2000 km (deployed in Cuba and fell under the blockade), we can imagine how they will rush from north to south from 3000 missiles with a range of 5500 km (located in Chukotka and not subject to blockade) am
  17. Old26
    Old26 28 June 2016 23: 40
    +2
    Quote: Operator
    Increasing missile production capacity is easy:
    - the available plant is likely to work in one shift, so its capacity will triple after switching to three-shift operation;

    Not in one, but this is not the main thing. Counterparties who depend on a dozen other counterparties themselves cannot deliver more individual devices

    Quote: Operator
    Increasing missile production capacity is easy:
    - medium-range missile less intercontinental, respectively, less material and labor for its manufacture.

    Not much. The Pioneers were essentially Temp-2S missiles without one stage. So it is not much less laborious than when creating an ICBM

    Quote: Operator
    For example, the American three-stage ICBM Midgetman had a range of 11000 km, a starting weight of 13,7 tons and a warhead capacity of 475 kt (260 weight kg).

    The maximum distance that this rocket flew is 7300 km. She would have flown 11000 km - it is impossible to say. The W-87 mod.1 warhead was not created. Therefore, the maximum that could be put on the "Dwarf" was 300 kt W-87 mod.0

    Quote: Operator
    To throw a 100-kt warhead weighing 100 kg at a range of 5500 km, a three-stage missile with a launch weight of 2 tons or 20 times lighter than the Sineva or Yars is required.
    Those. rocket production can be increased 3x20 times or up to 3600 units per year.

    You shouldn't take the weight of American warheads and extrapolate them to our missiles. Our "Courier" had an initial launch weight of 15 tons, then increased to 17. The warhead with a capacity of 150 kt weighed 500 kg. Your calculations, sorry it is not clear where they were taken. Even if we count on the principle of "coefficient of technical excellence" all the same, starting at 2 tons will not work.

    Well, your calculations, that since it is easier by 20 times, then production can be increased by 20 times, plus your stubborn desire to believe that the plant must work in 1 shift does not stand up to criticism at all. Even in Soviet times, when this plant worked in a planned economy mode and in three shifts, it never produced so many products at the output.
    And I repeat again. The plant is an assembly plant. He physically cannot do more than his components. And it turns out that in a year with 24 hourly mode plus seven days a week the plant will make 3600 missiles, that is, on 1 rocket in 2 hours 25 minutes. Himself not funny ?????

    Quote: Operator
    If in the 1962 year, American citizens darted from south to north only from 24 R-12 missiles with a range of 2000 km (deployed in Cuba and fell under the blockade), we can imagine how they will rush from north to south from 3000 missiles with a range of 5500 km (located in Chukotka and not subject to blockade)

    Even in the midst of the Cold War, the number of missiles (ICBMs) was not more than 1000. You are talking about the mythical 3000.
    1. Operator
      Operator 29 June 2016 01: 11
      -1
      The calculation is approximate, but fundamental - it shows the possibility of increasing the production of missiles at the parent enterprise by an order of magnitude due only to organizational decisions. An increase in the production of components at other enterprises can be provided with exactly the same solutions - with the help of three-shift work.

      At the height of the Cold War, 10 Soviet medium-range missiles (they are what we are talking about) RSD-728 "Pioneer" were produced. The weight of the "Pioneer" was 37 tons, the weight of the warhead was 1,7 tons, the power of the three warheads was 3x0,15 kt, the range was 4600 km, the number of stages was 2 (in contrast to the three-stage Midgetman ICBM).

      In the case of delivery of one BB with a capacity of 100 kt at the same range, the weight of the new missile will be about 8 tons (one-fifth of the weight of the Sineva or Yars). From which it is also possible to estimate the labor intensity and material consumption of a two-stage medium-range missile.
    2. mav1971
      mav1971 29 June 2016 10: 40
      +1
      Quote: Old26

      Well, your calculations, that since it is easier by 20 times, then production can be increased by 20 times, plus your stubborn desire to believe that the plant must work in 1 shift does not stand up to criticism at all. Even in Soviet times, when this plant worked in a planned economy mode and in three shifts, it never produced so many products at the output.
      And I repeat again. The plant is an assembly plant. He physically cannot do more than his components. And it turns out that in a year with 24 hourly mode plus seven days a week the plant will make 3600 missiles, that is, on 1 rocket in 2 hours 25 minutes. Himself not funny ?????


      People are just somehow divorced from reality.
      Not only that, with a flight of thought, they are ready to immediately introduce the 3's shift.
      Putting an 3 shift at a rocket enterprise without loss of product quality is a minimum of 10-15 years of preparatory work !!!

      For we must suddenly find in our society qualified personnel about 8-10 times more than there is now.
      Why not 3 times (as it may seem) - but because one of 3-3 will work in 4 shifts. The rest of such a schedule - nafig is not needed.
      Accordingly, in order to have staff - it needs to be raised.
      In vocational schools and technical schools (lyceums, colleges) - people need to be lured, this requires the creation of really high salaries in the industry. Time for awareness among the masses of society that parents would send their children there.
      Time to develop experience and qualifications after graduation from an educational institution.
      Another 3-4 of the year.
      And only then can we talk about the fact that there are enough manpower to create 3's shift mode.
      Here in the end, and 10-15 years.

      Who does not understand this - full projectors.
      Living in a world divorced from reality.
  18. Old26
    Old26 30 June 2016 09: 06
    0
    You know, Andrey! You are so famously juggling with numbers and making such fantastic assumptions that I honestly find it difficult to argue. To prove to you something completely hopeless business. You just do not hear the interlocutor. Be on your own wave and absolutely do not perceive the arguments of the other side. You think that everything is exactly as you say and not otherwise. Take your calculation, which you say is approximate, but fundamental

    Quote: Operator
    The calculation is approximate, but fundamental - it shows the possibility of increasing the production of missiles at the parent enterprise by an order of magnitude due only to organizational decisions. An increase in the production of components at other enterprises can be provided with exactly the same solutions - with the help of three-shift work.

    You believed that the plant works in one shift and that’s it. From this, you make your own construction, so that you can increase output three times. You have an exceptionally linear relationship. But you absolutely do not take into account the same technological process. For example, that the creation of fiberglass or carbon fiber casings is time. And that this process is continuous. Like the continuous process of "filling" fuel charges. Do you think that all this is done in one shift and the number of fuel charges can be tripled by doing three-shift work. And she is already three-dimensional. As well as the winding, for example, of the head housing. But you drove yourself that the work goes in one shift - and that's it
    Well, your passage, that once a rocket is 20 times lighter, that it can be produced 20 times more - this is generally a masterpiece.

    Quote: Operator
    At the height of the Cold War, 10 Soviet medium-range missiles (they are what we are talking about) RSD-728 "Pioneer" were produced. The weight of the "Pioneer" was 37 tons, the weight of the warhead was 1,7 tons, the power of the three warheads was 3x0,15 kt, the range was 4600 km, the number of stages was 2 (in contrast to the three-stage Midgetman ICBM).

    Then you started juggling numbers again. And in this case it is completely unnecessary. TTX "Pioneer" and so it is known. And what's the point in giving the total number of Pioneers issued, if there are no layouts by year and the issue of Topol is also not taken into account. The numbers will be about nothing.

    Yes, of course, you are saying everything correctly. And the fact that the “Dwarf” has three steps, and the “Pioneer" - 2.

    But at the same time, you forget (or simply do not know) that during the Cold War, "the plant, even at the" peak "times of its activity, did not produce more than 70-80 pieces. per month. The only year was when 99 items were produced. But this was an excess of 30%, and not in the proportion that you indicate. And this is in a planned economy. And also, about the fact that it is possible faster, since they are smaller and lighter. In principle, the creation of Pioneer-type missiles based on the Tempa-2S stages, although it made it possible to have a lower launch mass, but at the same time, the creation of an MRBM is about 75% in terms of labor costs from ICBMs, and about 75-80% in terms of material costs. It is not possible to talk about labor costs and material costs for MRBMs of the "Courier" type. there are no performance characteristics of this product. But even what is said that the dimensions were in the dimensions of the "Pioneer"
  19. Old26
    Old26 30 June 2016 09: 18
    0
    Quote: Operator
    In the case of delivery of one BB with a capacity of 100 kt at the same range, the weight of the new missile will be about 8 tons (one-fifth of the weight of the Sineva or Yars). From which it is also possible to estimate the labor intensity and material consumption of a two-stage medium-range missile.

    The new BR will not weigh 8 tons. Again you have a linear relationship. Since the range is half as much, it means that the starting range is half as much. Moreover, a fantastic assumption of the weight of 100 kt BB. Even our "Courier" had a launch weight of 17 tons. And at the same time, unlike the American "Dwarf", it carried not 300 kt (in the future 475 kt) warheads, but only 150 kt. Moreover, the weight of this warhead was about 450-500 kilograms. Dreaming of an 8-ton MRBM is certainly not harmful, but you have to be realistic. Nobody in the near future, and I think in the distant future, will go to the creation of a small-sized MRBM with such a starting weight (8 tons). Moreover, no one will go to the creation of such an MRBM with a monoblock of this power class. This is unprofitable both economically and tactically. And we cannot wish for an MRBM with a range of 5500 km with a launch weight of a tactical missile. Even American products with a range of 1500-2000 km have a launch order of 13-18 tons, and they, you must agree, are ahead of us in terms of solid propellant rocket engines and the mass and size characteristics of solid-propellant missiles.
    What is being done now is ICBMs with ranges that still exceed the minimum intercontinental range, albeit only slightly. But with a MIRV, moreover, with a MIRV of a new type. And her starting line will again be within the starting "Pioneer"