Military Review

Complex "Point U": an old horse, still capable of spoiling any furrow

133



Strange sensations are caused by this, calmly making their way through the forest, without particularly bothering to choose a route. Such a calm and unhurried creation of the Soviet military-industrial complex. And when you think about how many years the “Point” has been in service, the same feelings arise when you look at the old AK-47, such as with a faded crowning, gray but no less deadly.



And then about the same. "Point" is in service with the 1975 of the year, an upgraded version of the "Point U" - with 1989. The main difference is its long range, up to 120 km, and shooting accuracy. The complex is armed with the 9М79 rocket, which has versions 9М79Ф, 9М79К, etc., depending on the type of warhead. The head part can be nuclear AA-60, high-explosive 9НХNUMXФ, cassette 123НХNUMXК and others. The cassette warhead contains a cassette with fifty submunition fragmentation. And there are 9H123G and 9H123Г9-123, special warheads capable of carrying “Soman” P-2 and P-1 in 65 cassettes from 50 to 60.

The engine is a solid-fuel single-mode rocket. The rocket's head is inseparable. The missile is controlled on the entire trajectory, which ensures high accuracy of impact. The launch of the rocket is carried out with an inclined guide, and after launch, the rocket makes a turn toward the target. The launch direction of the launcher at the target for the “Point” is + –15 degrees, which, when tracking the trajectory, reduces the probability of determining the launch point. At the end of the trajectory, the missile is turned around and a vertical dive is set on the target. To achieve the maximum damage area, an air blast of the warhead over the target is provided.

The main combat vehicles of the complex (9P129М-1 launcher and 9Т218-1 transport and charging vehicle) are mounted on the 5921 and 5922 wheeled chassis. The six-cylinder diesel engine 5Д20Б-300 is installed on both chassis. All-wheel drive chassis, tires with adjustable air pressure.



Water jet propeller-type propellers are provided for movement on water. On water, the chassis is controlled by water jet valves and channels built into the hull. Both cars are able to move on roads of all categories and beyond. No topographic, geodetic and engineering preparation of launching sites and meteorological support during rocket launches is required. The equipment of the launcher itself solves all the tasks of binding the starting point, calculating the flight task and aiming the rocket.

If necessary, the 15-20 minutes after the completion of the march and the arrival at the position of the rocket can launch to the target, and after 1,5 minutes the launcher is already able to leave this point to eliminate the likelihood of its defeat by retaliation. During aiming, combat duty, and also when performing most of the operations of the launch cycle, the rocket is in a horizontal position, and its rise begins only 15 seconds before launch. This ensures a high stealth preparation of the strike from the enemy tracking devices.









Transport-loading machine. In its sealed compartment can be stored and transported in the combat area two fully ready to launch missiles. Special equipment of the machine, including the hydraulic actuator, jib crane and some other systems, allow loading the launcher for approximately 19 minutes. This operation can be performed on any unprepared engineering site, the dimensions of which allow to put a number of sides of the launcher and transport-loading machine.









How much of what was created in the USSR was made simply and with taste. Therefore, apparently, it is still in service.

However, times are changing, and changing in some way is not for the better. In terms of the general state of affairs around our borders. And, according to available information, a full stop will be put in the career of these combat vehicles. In the very near future, the 448 Brigade will receive Iskanders.

"Iskander" - the same creation of the Soviet and Russian genius Sergei Pavlovich Invincible, as well as "Point U". Only the predecessor was different, OTRK "Oka", destroyed by the betrayal of Gorbachev.

27 years of service "Points" gradually come to an end. But to say that the complex is outdated, the language does not turn.

Author:
133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Herman
    Herman 25 July 2016 06: 19
    +17
    It’s a good article, but it’s a pity that they cut the Oka detachment with a range of 400 km, then caved in before the Yankees.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 July 2016 06: 48
      +17
      Quote: Herman
      Good article,

      I agree and join.
      Quote: Herman
      but it’s a pity that they cut the Oka detachment with a range of 400 km, then caved in front of the Yankees.

      Well, how much you can "moan" about the lost, you can't turn back time, it's time to go forward, otherwise we will remain in the past. It is necessary to create something new, relying on experience and knowledge, and most importantly, no longer scatter what we have.
      1. Herman
        Herman 25 July 2016 07: 02
        +4
        Yes, here you are right, why regret the Oka when it is already Iskander in a noticeable amount.
        1. WKS
          WKS 25 July 2016 11: 07
          0
          Point "Wow, how I hit, if I don't miss!"
      2. Mik13
        Mik13 25 July 2016 08: 47
        +16
        Quote: svp67
        Well, how much you can "moan" about the lost, you can't turn back time, it's time to go forward, otherwise we will remain in the past.

        Well, still in the past, you should not leave unfinished business.

        A traitor must be called a traitor in life. I believe that Gorbachev M.S. must die not in his bed, free and dear a man, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and all that, but at least in a prison bed ... At least. Because no one has ever done more damage to Russia.
        1. Megatron
          Megatron 25 July 2016 13: 25
          +4
          Still red there.
    2. Monarchist
      Monarchist 25 July 2016 14: 31
      +4
      M. S. is a bit out of this world: he was fired up with the idea of ​​disarmament and, like a little boy, let’s break and throw away the slingshots so that the courtyard punks would praise.
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 4 July 2017 09: 35
        0
        Maybe enough about poor, poor Mikhail Sergeyich? Like, I wanted the best, naive. We must not forget the whole background and outline of the period of its activity, namely: 1) a gang of Westerners in the Politburo - "Gorbachev - Yakovlev - Shevarnadze - and everyone else who joined" plus a part of the party elite with a rank a little lower, who wanted to become "businessmen", - this is ONCE. 2) Systematic, phased delivery of the ATS unit, and in particular the betrayal of the GDR. —The most devoted leadership from the countries of the ATS. 3) Systematic, sophisticated breaking of the country's defense potential. 4) A litmus test of the behavior of the HEAD OF STATE during the collapse of the USSR - "washed his hands", such as "ok, then without me." All this together suggests that Gorbi is a conscious or semi-conscious AGENT of a geopolitical adversary, including looped around for insurance by surrounding agents of influence, including the "first lady". If in the language of modern youth the same corn-borer can be described as a “rare halter”, then Mikhal Sergeyevich had “everything in his mind”, that is, the plan was implemented, including the economic component - starting from the vineyards, and ending with artificial paralysis of the supply and distribution of goods stocks. Judah is little said (besides, there are now great reasons in the base of Judas IsCariot, therefore it is of little use). History Russia has not yet known such a personified betrayal of national interests and such consequences. The Kerensky Februaryists are resting, the "Germans" Anna Ionannovna turn green with envy.
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 4 July 2017 09: 37
          0
          I forgot to mention the condescending loyalty to EBN during party reviews. What is significant is that the thief’s right hand cuts off his left hand, even if it bows.
    3. dvaposto
      dvaposto 25 July 2016 22: 11
      0
      repeat, do not invent again. will need to be done.
      question. and what fuel does rocket have an expiration date? indefinitely, at storage rates?
      1. Parsec
        Parsec 25 July 2016 22: 37
        +1
        Quote: dvaposto
        question. and what fuel does rocket have an expiration date? indefinitely, at storage rates?


        Twenty-twenty-five years under normal.

        Normal is the exclusion of temperature extremes and shock loads. Fracturing of the motion block appears, as a result of a sharp increase in the combustion surface at startup and a pressure jump. The rocket smashes to smithereens at the start or a few meters from the launch.

        There is a video - launches Buk Armed Forces of Ukraine with such a firework.
        1. venik
          venik 27 July 2016 22: 03
          0
          Quote: Parsec
          There is a video - launches Buk Armed Forces of Ukraine with such a firework.


          And a few years earlier (in my opinion in 1995 or so.) From the territory of the unit in the south of the Chernigov region, a training launch was conducted at a training ground near Kiev. The rocket deviated from the trajectory and collapsed to the city of Brovary (satellite city of Kiev), directly to the residential panel 9th ​​floor. Then 3 people died (it’s good that the matter was during the day and there were few residents in the house ...
          The reasons, as usual, were not found out, but on the launch video it was noticeable that on the side of the hull, in the area of ​​the engine compartment, a small torch of flame appeared. Apparently, what you were talking about happened (cracking of the fuel blocks and burnout of the engine housing and rockets due to local overheating). The rocket was very old, completely choosing a shelf life.
    4. andr327
      andr327 30 July 2016 12: 15
      0
      cool car, but to the Strategic Missile Forces (Strategic Missile Forces) has nothing to do.
  2. Hunt
    Hunt 25 July 2016 06: 29
    +20
    Eternal memory, Sergei Pavlovich the Invincible, the great Russian designer and scientist. Creator of great weapons.
  3. svp67
    svp67 25 July 2016 06: 45
    +4
    Thanks to the authors for the interesting report. Rarely do you see a photo of how heat traps are installed, and the rocket scientists are great, that they do not reduce outings to the field simply to "pokatushki". Here are just "Points" already of course require at least good modernization, since judging by the attempts to use them in the Donbass of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, there are already means leading them away from their goal.
  4. lazy
    lazy 25 July 2016 06: 45
    -1
    off topic, but who follows the links to the information in the media, what's on the side? for example, now there was a link to the resource "Russian Jew" from where I find out that "Russia has lost 4 helicopters in Syria, knocked out Russian tanks with dead crews inside are brought to Voronezh from Donbas", "Armata cardboard tank". about the site editorial office
    Editor-in-chief - Vitaliy Rozhdaev
    Head of Journalism Department - Viktor Shevchuk

    Editorial e-mail: vita73 [at] bigmir.net ""
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 July 2016 07: 03
      +13
      Quote: lazy
      off-topic, but who follows the links to the information in the media that side?

      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 25 July 2016 14: 19
        0
        Torn off the tongue! +
      2. dvaposto
        dvaposto 25 July 2016 22: 16
        0
        look better transmission Solovyov and in. Leontyev, news 1 RTR.))))
    2. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 25 July 2016 08: 36
      +1
      Quote: lazy
      "Russia has lost 4 helicopters in Syria, wrecked Russian tanks with dead crews inside are brought to Voronezh from Donbas", "Armata cardboard tank". about the site editorial office


      Well, 4 helicopters - this has long been known, about 2 months ago, burned down on the ground - during the shelling of the jump airfield near Palmyra.
      1. Forest
        Forest 25 July 2016 09: 55
        +3
        Burnt turntables are Syrian, moreover in 2014 or the beginning of 2015. ISIS for the sake of change posted a couple of pictures from Google maps of different times.
      2. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 25 July 2016 12: 26
        +5
        Quote: DimerVladimer
        Well, 4 helicopters - this has long been known, about 2 months ago, burned down on the ground - during the shelling of the jump airfield near Palmyra.

        This fake was launched by Nesmiyan (El = -Murid), almost immediately everyone laughed at him. Not only are the images of different times, but there is also 1 turntable copied. Petrol tankers are also copied, and by the way are safe and have worked hard on the traces of fires, just almost everyone has been blacked out with black.
    3. KCA
      KCA 25 July 2016 17: 07
      0
      I personally admit that the bulwarks of the uninhabited Armata tower can also be made of plywood, beauty requires sacrifice
  5. avaks111
    avaks111 25 July 2016 06: 49
    0
    Unfortunately, such a "charm" is in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Donbass ...
    1. baudolino
      baudolino 25 July 2016 07: 09
      +2
      Yes, after several blows to Donetsk with these toys, our reaction to the name "point U" is sharply negative.
      1. g1v2
        g1v2 25 July 2016 08: 45
        +2
        But the Hussites in Yemen, our points advertise only the way. In my opinion, no one so competently applied the point to them.
        1. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 25 July 2016 14: 49
          +5
          They used it in Chechnya. They showed how, after unblocking the encircled group of soldiers, they were used against the accumulation of militants in the square. There, for greater propaganda hype, the local field commander held a rally on the square with his "fighters for the independence of Ichkeria." Our soldiers had to live for several hours. The problem was that there were no electronic maps of the terrain on the territory of the USSR to send a missile along the route. Who thought that they would have to shoot at the enemy on their territory. I don't remember how the problem was solved. But "baksheesh" flew to the right place - there were about a hundred of the 200s alone. The news showed how the remains of a knitted hat with a text from the Koran and the remains of the owner's brain hung on a tree.
  6. D-Master
    D-Master 25 July 2016 06: 49
    +10
    Great article, and the complex is very suitable. And I really like honest phrases like this: destroyed by the betrayal of Gorbachev. . Probably IN the only publication that is not afraid to call a spade a spade and calls a traitor Judas. For which VO and its leading authors bow low
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 25 July 2016 11: 50
      +8
      Quote: D-Master
      Great article, and the complex is very suitable.

      I read it with interest, looked at the photographs with even greater interest. Unfortunately, there are a number of inaccuracies in the publication, for example:
      there are 9N123G and 9N123G2-1, special warheads capable of carrying from 65 to 50 kg of such cute things as R-60 and R-33 "Soman" in 55 of their cassettes.
      No longer. No. In accordance with the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, signed by Russia, in the near future we must complete the complete elimination of CW stockpiles. In addition, there is not a word in the publication that the "ancestor" of OTR "Tochka" was the B-611 missile defense system of the M-11 "Storm" complex (pictured). This medium-range air defense system, developed at the Fakel ICB under the leadership of P.D. Grushin, was used only in the USSR Navy. Since 1967, they have been armed with large warships pr. 1123, pr. 1143, pr. 1134B.
    2. Zefr
      Zefr 25 July 2016 19: 14
      +4
      It is necessary to add "someone M. S. Gorbachev (banned on the territory of Russia) ..."
  7. avia12005
    avia12005 25 July 2016 07: 06
    +5
    "Point-U" in August 1991, according to Foros ... And how many problems there would be.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 July 2016 07: 11
      +2
      Quote: avia12005
      "Point-U" in August 1991, according to Foros ... And how many problems there would be.

      Well, why is it so cruel ... it could have been easier, to throw fungi for the "mother-in-law" dinner.
    2. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 25 July 2016 14: 51
      +1
      It was too late on Foros. It was necessary much earlier - when he announced "an unrelenting fight against drunkenness" am
  8. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 25 July 2016 07: 40
    +1
    At present, Russia is actively arming missile and ground forces with Iskander M complexes, which are replacing the Tochka-U complexes that are in service. Putting the Iskander into service began at the end of 2010, when the military received six such complexes. In 2011, a long-term state contract was signed with the Kolomna KBM for the supply of the Ministry of Defense with 10 Iskander-M. The first deliveries took place in June and November 2013, the contract provides for the annual delivery of two brigade kits. Until 2020, the Ministry of Defense will invest about 40 billion rubles in serial production of Iskander-M systems.

    http://expert.ru/2014/02/11/rossiya-moderniziruet-iskander/
  9. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 25 July 2016 07: 41
    +7
    Shucher in Yemen brought quite a few, unlike the Pukers, the Hussites used much more competently, in an effect comparable to an air strike. And against her, the Western Uberwunderwaffles didn’t help much. lol

  10. realist
    realist 25 July 2016 08: 11
    0
    the platform is quite level, but the armament needs to be modernized, and most likely, according to the American model, make 2 types of transport and launch containers to increase the product range and use different platforms ...
  11. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 25 July 2016 08: 26
    +2
    Good weapons ... the legacy of the Great Country ... there is a sense of legitimate pride for our fathers and grandfathers ... thanks to them, such weapons were developed and a huge technological reserve was made ... helping Russia so far ...
  12. desyatka
    desyatka 25 July 2016 08: 35
    +1
    I saw the launch of this toy - a spectacle - rubble 50m from under the rockets as the bullets fly apart, and a funnel 10m in diameter and 50m everything is burned out
  13. UVB
    UVB 25 July 2016 08: 59
    +2
    Ukrainian "Tochka" at the exhibition in the center of Lugansk
  14. wasps
    wasps 25 July 2016 09: 15
    +2
    Thanks to the authors of the article, both Romanov, and a big request to publish an article on the combat use of Tochka-U in the Chechen company of the 90s, when about a hundred militants were destroyed with one blow (if I am not mistaken ...). There is little information on this topic, maybe there is something in more detail. By the way, this episode is mentioned in the book "My War. The Chechen Diary of the Trench General" G. Troshev (reign heavenly to him ...)
  15. Professor
    Professor 25 July 2016 09: 28
    +7
    Here is a great article about the Point.
    9K79 Point - SS-21 SCARAB
    There is nothing to add to it. good No snot about Gorbachev, but a solid match with a description of the experience of combat use.
  16. runway
    runway 25 July 2016 10: 35
    +8
    "Tochka" is a reliable and proven tactical missile system of the divisional level. It occupies its own niche in the system of fire destruction of enemy targets at a range of 15 - 120 km.
    "Iskander" is an operational-tactical missile system of the army level with a range of destruction of enemy targets from 50 to 500 km.
    The idea of ​​transferring all missile brigades to Iskander has many questions. The main thing is the ratio of price and reliability of the task. Ultimately, you won't be firing a cannon at the sparrows ...
    And finally, why did those who managed to become closely acquainted with the Oka missile operational-tactical complex literally fall in love with it? For its time, it was a technical breakthrough in engineering when creating a rocket complex. I will not list all the innovations that were introduced under the leadership of Sergei Pavlovich Invincible into this complex, it will take a long time. But the main thing was that, like on the Tochka, everything that was necessary for combat work was assembled in the launcher.
    1. Operator
      Operator 25 July 2016 12: 41
      +2
      120 km is now the Tornado-S's combat radius.

      All PTRCs are initially imprisoned under NSC.

      Conventional military units of the OTRK makes sense to use in local military conflicts for striking at significant targets - the bases for producing and injuring ammunition, command posts, headquarters, etc. This is facilitated by equipping GOS missiles with radar and infrared digital terrain maps.

      The Russian OTRK clearly does not have an optimized complex with an 600 mm ballistic missile with a launch weight of 3 tons, in a single-stage version capable of throwing 500-kg conventional warheads at a distance of 500 km (limited by the agreement on the RMND), and in the two-stage version 100- kg nuclear warhead with a capacity of 100 kt at a distance of 1000 km (in case of withdrawal from the agreement on INF).
      1. Lyubopyatov
        Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 22: 56
        +2
        The approach of the NATO military to our borders is a sufficient reason for Russia to withdraw from the INF Treaty.
  17. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 July 2016 10: 52
    -9
    The military effect of such missiles is negligible. And the psychological one is big.
    Especially when they fall on cities.
    Cassette BG are ineffective. And if the warhead is high-explosive, then it is comparable to a gap
    one bomb.
    Only remaking the control of such missiles on GPS (or Glonass), or
    installation of a seeker in combination with an armor-piercing high-explosive warhead can
    make such a missile an effective armor.
    1. apro
      apro 25 July 2016 12: 40
      +2
      Actually, this unit was invented as a yak, and high-explosive high-explosive cassettes could be sold, with the military effect, the main striking power of the Soviet divisions would be sufficient.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 July 2016 15: 59
        -5
        "Actually, this unit was invented for yaba" ///

        Well, if under the yaku, then, of course, power.
        And without a yabu, the weapon is doubtful. In addition, strikes in the cities, I repeat.
        1. apro
          apro 25 July 2016 16: 32
          +2
          And what is the little thing? The weapon is commensurate with the threat to the USSR and why immediately in the cities? Concentration areas, control points of the delivery system, if only crossing areas. If it were doubtful, it would hardly have turned out to be such a proliferation.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Mik13
      Mik13 25 July 2016 14: 14
      +7
      Quote: voyaka uh
      The military effect of such missiles is negligible. And the psychological one is big.
      Especially when they fall on cities.
      Cassette BG are ineffective. And if the warhead is high-explosive, then it is comparable to a gap
      one bomb.
      Only remaking the control of such missiles on GPS (or Glonass), or
      installation of a seeker in combination with an armor-piercing high-explosive warhead can
      make such a missile an effective armor.

      And you, excuse me, in what area is the specialist? It's not that I went over to the personality, but when they start raving so actively in the comments ...

      QUO PointsU - 50 meters. With the characteristics of the warhead (Cassette 3,5 — 7 ha. Designed to defeat manpower and unarmored equipment in an open area, PF 2 — 3 ha, detonation at an altitude of 20 m.) this is quite enough. Besides bunkers, there are many areal targets. For example, a field park, a field warehouse BP, field fuel storage, etc. - Up to the field camp of the brigade / battalion. More positions of air defense systems, airfields, ...
      In fact, almost all goals (even in modern warfare) are areal. And against them, this product is very effective.

      As for the possibility of hitting point targets - on the elemental base of the 70-s this was impossible in principle. Modern classmates (Iskander and others) can do this.
      1. Professor
        Professor 25 July 2016 14: 19
        +1
        Quote: Mik13
        QUO PointsU - 50 meters.

        Seriously?
        KVO:
        - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")

        - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
        - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
        * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m


        Quote: Mik13
        In fact, almost all goals (even in modern warfare) are areal. And against them, this product is very effective.

        Give carpet bombing.

        Quote: Mik13
        As for the possibility of hitting point targets - on the elemental base of the 70-s this was impossible in principle. Modern classmates (Iskander and others) can do this.

        Nevertheless, it is the Point that is discussed here, and not "classmates" and with its KVO it is not such a formidable weapon (although it is in service) as some are trying to present it here.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 25 July 2016 14: 49
          +2
          To hit a target of the "Aerodrom" type, a cluster warhead is quite enough accuracy.
        2. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 25 July 2016 14: 49
          +2
          To hit a target of the "Aerodrom" type, a cluster warhead is quite enough accuracy.
        3. The comment was deleted.
          1. atalef
            atalef 25 July 2016 16: 24
            -4
            Quote: Mik13
            The product is in service because the performance characteristics of the product allow to hit almost all targets, except for point ones.

            i.e. moving?
            Fortified bunkers?
            Armored vehicles (if this is not a column in 200)?
            And everything else with its CVO are areal goals.
            although of course if you take the submarine typhoon or something like that comparable in size to it. then in general it can cover a single goal.
            With her QUO in 200. if this is not the base of fuels and lubricants. it won’t even hit the runway.
            1. Mik13
              Mik13 25 July 2016 16: 54
              +1
              Quote: atalef
              Quote: Mik13
              The product is in service because the performance characteristics of the product allow to hit almost all targets, except for point ones.

              i.e. moving?
              Fortified bunkers?
              Armored vehicles (if this is not a column in 200)?
              And everything else with its CVO are areal goals.
              although of course if you take the submarine typhoon or something like that comparable in size to it. then in general it can cover a single goal.
              With her QUO in 200. if this is not the base of fuels and lubricants. it won’t even hit the runway.


              Sorry, but there is a need to hit a single moving armored vehicles at distances under 100 km? I cannot imagine a situation in which the commander of the army / division would have such a need ... Even now.

              As for airfields ... And why kill the strip, if the aircraft and infrastructure will be disabled? It is much cheaper. or more expensive - depends on the point of view ...

              By the way, if it doesn't bother you, please give an example of a typical point target "fortified bunker" behind enemy lines, the need to destroy it, as well as how to detect it at the range of the complex.

              Yes, and just at least one example of an important point target at such ranges that it is necessary to hit the OTRK ...
              1. atalef
                atalef 25 July 2016 17: 12
                -3
                Quote: Mik13
                As for airfields ... And why kill the strip, if the aircraft and infrastructure will be disabled? It is much cheaper. or more expensive - depends on the point of view ...

                with the quo 200m? how many rockets are you planning to launch?
                Quote: Mik13
                By the way, if it doesn't bother you, please give an example of a typical point target "fortified bunker" behind enemy lines

                Headquarters. for starters, aircraft hangars. weapons depots - continue?

                Quote: Mik13
                Yes, and just at least one example of an important point target at such ranges that it is necessary to hit the OTRK ...

                Please give me an example
                Quote: Mik13
                TTX products allow you to hit almost all targets

                the target (any) that a missile with a QUO 200m + is capable of hitting
                1. Mik13
                  Mik13 25 July 2016 17: 53
                  +3
                  Quote: atalef
                  Quote: Mik13
                  As for airfields ... And why kill the strip, if the aircraft and infrastructure will be disabled? It is much cheaper. or more expensive - depends on the point of view ...

                  with the quo 200m? how many rockets are you planning to launch?

                  The cluster warhead has a lesion area of ​​7 ha. This is a circle with a radius of 150 meters. Even if you pretend that your KVO value in 200 meters is correct (and not 50, which I think is correct), you will need 2 - 3 rockets. For the airfield - more than enough.

                  Quote: atalef
                  Quote: Mik13
                  By the way, if it doesn't bother you, please give an example of a typical point target "fortified bunker" behind enemy lines

                  Headquarters. for starters, aircraft hangars. weapons depots - continue?
                  You can not continue, and so everything is clear. I was not in vain interested in how competent the interlocutors were in this matter.

                  Firstly, the headquarters of the division, and although the brigade, this nifiga is not a point target. And just very areal. And the amount of forces and means of the division headquarters is a larger company, but a smaller battalion.
                  And secondly, if you believe that all this stuff is buried in concrete bunkers - I have bad news for you. In the real world, they don’t always dig dugouts for them, and they don’t even bury equipment in the dugout. Well, in any case, in real life. So, the submunition of a cassette warhead warns a hole to dig ...
                  Third, warehouses are also not point targets.

                  Quote: atalef
                  Quote: Mik13
                  Yes, and just at least one example of an important point target at such ranges that it is necessary to hit the OTRK ...

                  Please give me an example
                  Quote: Mik13
                  TTX products allow you to hit almost all targets

                  the target (any) that a missile with a QUO 200m + is capable of hitting

                  I have already cited this list with two comments above. Take the trouble to read it yourself if you wish to communicate on this topic.
                  1. Phoenix_L'vov
                    Phoenix_L'vov 25 July 2016 21: 08
                    +2
                    Mik13, I read your correspondence with pleasure. Do not feed the trolls.
              2. Professor
                Professor 25 July 2016 20: 07
                -3
                Quote: Mik13
                As for airfields ... And why kill the strip, if the aircraft and infrastructure will be disabled? It is much cheaper. or more expensive - depends on the point of view ...

                Yeah. Here is a real-life example of the Point's inability to hit an airfield. They sent bombers who also "worked on the squares." We teach materiel:


                But 9 years before the bourgeoisie "work on the area."


                Two years earlier, the Zionists were "working across the squares."


                Gardabia, Libya. "Tochka" with KVO 200 m nervously smokes on the sidelines.
          2. Professor
            Professor 25 July 2016 19: 59
            +1
            Quote: Mik13
            But the characteristics of the warheads make it possible to hit with a miss of the order of 200 meters.

            Rave. Will you shoot a nuclear warhead?

            Quote: Mik13
            Using the means of the 70's, the accuracy of determining the coordinates of 25 meters is quite accessible - both yours and your goals.

            Learn the materiel. I posted it to you above. Then we turn to the discussion of weather conditions.

            Quote: Mik13
            As I understand it, this chilling humor is your most constructive argument on this point?

            Okay. The bombing of Grozny is certainly the top of the art of war, but in all other conflicts of the last 40 years they worked mostly precisely and the later the conflict took place the more precisely. Be it Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan. Show photos?

            Quote: Mik13
            Is her hatches of sufficient thickness? The product is in service because the performance characteristics of the product allow to hit almost all targets, except for point ones.

            What are all the goals? A land mine with a QUO in 200 meters who are you going to hit?

            Quote: Mik13
            I do not know by what grounds you define it as formidable, or not so.

            Warhead weight, firing range and CEP. The old Su-24 is several orders of magnitude more formidable than the Tochka. The same "Laura" hits for 300 km with a warhead weighing half a ton at a KVO of 10 meters, and even this is not the height of engineering thought.

            Quote: Mik13
            But I wonder if you have at least some knowledge of military affairs just to understand whether it makes sense to continue the dialogue with you, or if you need to stop feeding the troll. Especially if the troll is categorically incompetent in the subject of discussion.

            Immediately call your opponent Petrosyan, as you have already done, and this is the end. wassat
            1. Operator
              Operator 25 July 2016 20: 52
              +1
              Israeli PTRC LORA (copy of ATACMS):
              single-stage rocket with a starting weight of 1,7 tons, warhead 0,5 tons, range 250 km, GPS guidance ( wassat ), KVO 10 meters, launcher with four TPK
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 25 July 2016 22: 49
                +1
                "range 250 km, GPS guidance (wassat), KVO 10 meters," ////

                All is correct. If you teach Point to point on Glonass, there will be sense.
                So I wrote.
                Until GPS appeared, missiles like Laura weren’t accepted by us.
                It makes no sense to fence a large missile that misses 100-200 m
                1. Operator
                  Operator 25 July 2016 23: 13
                  0
                  "Iskander-M" is guided by digital maps of the terrain, since the radio signals of satellite global positioning systems are jammed with the help of electronic warfare.

                  Plus, in a nuclear conflict (a must for the RF Armed Forces), the areas of ionized air that arise as a result of air explosions of nuclear munitions shield all radio signals.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 26 July 2016 07: 11
                    +1
                    Quote: Operator
                    "Iskander-M" is guided by digital maps of the terrain, since the radio signals of satellite global positioning systems are jammed with the help of electronic warfare.

                    For instance? Where, when and how were they drowned? Tell us a laugh together as you jam the satellite signal at an altitude of 20-40 km. lol
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 26 July 2016 12: 41
                      0
                      EW aircraft fly at an altitude of 12 km (suddenly), which is quite enough to jam GPS.

                      It’s hard for you in Israel to understand, because the IDF has been participating in a continuous ATO for 34 years already. The recent shooting with as many as three rockets at a naked UAV into white light as if a penny once again confirmed this.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 26 July 2016 13: 16
                        +2
                        Quote: Operator
                        EW aircraft fly at an altitude of 12 km (suddenly), which is quite enough to jam GPS.

                        How is it drowned out if the rocket flies even higher than the plane? wink
                      2. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 13: 47
                        0
                        GPS satellites are in radio visibility in the sky, including at the horizon, and not only at an altitude of 12-30-40 km.

                        GPS is muffled elegantly - sending an echo signal with a small time shift, but more power. The GPS receiver picks up the echo and directs the guided ammunition past the target.

                        So digital terrain maps rule.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 26 July 2016 13: 55
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        GPS satellites are in radio visibility in the sky, including at the horizon, and not only at an altitude of 12-30-40 km.

                        GPS is muffled elegantly - sending an echo signal with a small time shift, but more power. The GPS receiver picks up the echo and directs the guided ammunition past the target.

                        So digital terrain maps rule.

                        I sincerely apologize for the offer to ban you. I was wrong. Such as you need to cherish and cherish. Seriously. On your example, you need to teach students what technical cretinism is.

                        The highlight is that the rocket is between the satellite and the EW station. Do you understand? It’s the same if I’m looking at the moon with binoculars and you are going to blind me at the back of my head as a fanatic.

                        About the "time shift". You are aware that the signal is encrypted. wink
                      4. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 14: 08
                        0
                        Read carefully - not a signal, but an echo (a copy of the signal).

                        Due to the natural time delays of the satellite’s own signals (due to atmospheric interference), GPS has not absolute accuracy, but relative. And no signal encoding can eliminate this.

                        It is the delay effect of the signal that is enhanced by the advanced GPS jammers.

                        By the way, do you know that the antenna of GPS receivers is omnidirectional due to the impossibility at the moment of maintaining the GPS radio-visibility database of GPS satellites in any geographic location and at any height above it as part of the guided munition?
                      5. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 14: 35
                        0
                        GPS home jammer within 300 meters for 1100 $
                        http://www.podavitel.ru/terminator-300.php

                        PS Professor, what do you smoke? laughing
                      6. Professor
                        Professor 26 July 2016 14: 42
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        By the way, do you know that the antenna of GPS receivers is omnidirectional due to the impossibility at the moment of maintaining the GPS radio-visibility database of GPS satellites in any geographic location and at any height above it as part of the guided munition?

                        Yes? And I thought that directional. Who is lying? wink
                        http://www.novatel.com/products/gnss-antennas/gajt-anti-jam-antennas/gajt-ae-n/
                      7. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 15: 02
                        +1
                        Actually, you know that for positioning in the GPS system you need to be in touch with several satellites at the same time? Are satellites in complex orbital motion all the time? And their visibility depends on the geographical point of measurement of coordinates, time of day, month and year?

                        What, then, is the "directivity" of the GPS antenna? And how to maintain it in flight of a guided munition, and even taking into account its rotation around the axis (artillery shell, rocket shell)?

                        The device by your link only works against sources of barrage (noise) interference at the GPS signal frequency, determining the approximate direction to it and ignoring the noise signal.
                        Since there is no AFAR in the set of the device (and even with an all-azimatal orientation), its effectiveness is very low. In this case, the AFAR will cost one to two orders of magnitude more expensive than the device.
                        But against the substitution of the satellite’s own signal with an echo signal, of which I spoke, even AFAR will not help.
                      8. Professor
                        Professor 26 July 2016 15: 11
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        Actually, you know that for positioning in the GPS system you need to be in touch with several satellites at the same time? Are satellites in complex orbital motion all the time? And their visibility depends on the geographical point of measurement of coordinates, time of day, month and year?

                        Do not believe it, but I already have the third Garmin watch.

                        Quote: Operator
                        What, then, is the "directivity" of the GPS antenna? And how to maintain it in flight of a guided munition, and even taking into account its rotation around the axis (artillery shell, rocket shell)?

                        So teach materiel. I gave you a link.

                        Quote: Operator
                        The device on your link only works against sources of obstruction (noise) interference at GPS frequency, determining the approximate direction to it and ignoring the noise signal.
                        Since there is no AFAR in the device kit (and even with an all-azimuthal focus), its effectiveness is very low. In this case, the AFAR will cost one order more than the device.
                        But against the substitution of the satellite’s own signal with an echo signal, of which I spoke, even AFAR will not help.

                        Let us show you how low the efficiency is, and then I will show you graphs claiming the opposite? By the way, at what frequency will you jam GPS?
                      9. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 17: 03
                        +1
                        Your link has no taxes - to the anti-jamming device for cars laughing
                        I gave you a link to the GPS jammer - the noise interference range is indicated there. But, as already mentioned, we are talking about something else - about replacing a satellite signal with an echo signal (of course, without changing the frequency).
                      10. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 08: 40
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        Your link has no taxes - to the anti-jamming device for cars

                        If you want to discuss household appliances, go to the appropriate site, but for now: EW troops lose GPS fight


                        Let us show you how low the efficiency is, and then I will show you graphs claiming the opposite? By the way, at what frequency will you jam GPS?
                      11. Operator
                        Operator 27 July 2016 09: 34
                        +1
                        By your last link:
                        "The best way to block GPS navigation is to give false coordinates on this frequency."

                        It is possible and necessary to generate false coordinates at the GPS frequency by replacing the satellite signal with the echo signal of the REB station. To eliminate the possibility of echo signal selection by the location of its source (at ground level), it is advisable to place an electronic warfare station on board the aircraft.

                        What I have repeatedly told you in comments.

                        An echo is an absolute copy of a satellite signal. The difference is only in the generation time (hundred thousandths of a second), which is quite enough for the incorrect determination of the coordinates by the GPS receiver installed on the guided munition.
                      12. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 09: 44
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        From your last link: "The failure in the exercise showed the main problem of the Russian electronic warfare system - an outdated jamming algorithm.

                        Why did the General Staff not consult with you?

                        Quote: Operator
                        The best way to block GPS navigation is to give false coordinates on this frequency. This will disorient the missiles. But we do not yet have such systems, but the Americans do. Therefore, now we are working on the appearance of such systems in order to order their development from the industry. "

                        Have you already learned how to crack a GPS signal?

                        Quote: Operator
                        What I told you many times.

                        Yes Yes. You have repeatedly repeated this stupidity.

                        Quote: Operator
                        An echo is an absolute copy of a satellite signal, including frequency. The difference is only in the generation time (hundred thousandths of a second), which is quite enough for the incorrect determination of the coordinates by the GPS receiver installed on the guided munition.

                        Insanity grew stronger. fool
                        Let's take the burgeoning Tomahawk rocket to measure. The cruising speed is 247 m / s. That is, in "hundred thousandths of a second" the rocket will pass only 12.3 centimeters. Isn't it funny yourself? request
                      13. The comment was deleted.
                      14. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 13: 04
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        The positioning algorithm based on satellite signals includes determining the travel time of signals from two or more satellites, which is then recalculated to the distances to the satellites and, according to the rules of geometry, to the coordinates of the GPS receiver.

                        I can do copy-paste too.

                        Quote: Operator
                        An echo signal of greater power than a satellite one shifts the time of the actual reception of the signal (already an echo signal) and the algorithm calculates the incorrect coordinates of the ammunition, after which it is redirected to the wrong coordinates of the target. A miss is estimated at hundreds of meters due to the great distance to the satellites (thousands of kilometers).

                        How in the hundreds of measures if according to your data it turns out 12 cm? wink Show us the calculations pliz. bully
                      15. Operator
                        Operator 27 July 2016 13: 21
                        +1
                        Fear God, professor, where did you see an unquoted quote from me?

                        12 cm is your "data" calculated based on the speed of the ammunition. And this indicator in the satellite positioning algorithm is not in the business of the word at all.
                      16. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 13: 23
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        Fear God, professor, where did you see an unquoted quote from me?

                        12 cm is your "data" calculated based on the speed of the ammunition. And this indicator in the satellite positioning algorithm is not in the business of the word at all.

                        Waiting for your calculations with thousandths of a second, hundreds of meters and thousands of kilometers.
                      17. Operator
                        Operator 27 July 2016 13: 39
                        +1
                        Only for you:
                        signal path distance = 1000 km
                        signal speed = 300000 km / s
                        signal travel time 1000 / 300000 = 1 / 300 s

                        Those. when the echo is delayed for 1 / 1000 seconds, the calculated positioning position of the GPS receiver will shift one-thirtieth from the distance to the satellite or 33 km.

                        This is a simplified example for illustrative purposes. If the echo is delayed for 1 / 10000 seconds and taking into account some correction based on genuine signals from other satellites, you can only count on 300-600 meters of displacement.

                        Which, however, is quite enough for missing the target with ammunition with GPS guidance.
                      18. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 16: 45
                        -1
                        Quote: Operator
                        Those. when the echo is delayed for 1 / 1000 seconds, the calculated positioning position of the GPS receiver will shift one-thirtieth from the distance to the satellite or 33 km.

                        During corrected from 333 km to 33, but this is nonsense. In your opinion, if there is a delay in the signal from the satellite, say for a whole second, then the positioning error will be 33 km? Do you even know how satellite navigation works? wink To conduct educational program?
                      19. Operator
                        Operator 27 July 2016 21: 07
                        +1
                        If the satellite signal is delayed (echoed) for one second, it is ignored by the GPS receiver.

                        Therefore, for plausibility, the delay time should be no more than one ten thousandth of a second (as far as the relay path of the REB station allows).

                        PS Thank you for the suggestion, but you have already "explained" the principle of GPS operation using the example of the speed of a cruise missile laughing
                      20. Professor
                        Professor 27 July 2016 21: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Operator
                        PS Thanks for the offer, but you have already "explained the principle of GPS operation by the example of the speed of a cruise missile

                        The master is the master.
  • Mik13
    Mik13 25 July 2016 21: 25
    +2
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Mik13
    But the characteristics of the warheads make it possible to hit with a miss of the order of 200 meters.

    Rave. Will you shoot a nuclear warhead?

    I already wrote. At a cluster warhead, the affected area is 7 Ha. This is a circle with a radius of 150 m. The field fuel and lubricants warehouse at 5000 m. Cube - 250x200 meters - these are only tanks ...

    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Mik13
    Using the means of the 70's, the accuracy of determining the coordinates of 25 meters is quite accessible - both yours and your goals.

    Learn the materiel. I posted it to you above. Then we turn to the discussion of weather conditions.
    Do you doubt that with such accuracy using 70's means you can determine the coordinates in SK-42? In vain. With the help of DAC or DM, nothing complicated.

    By the way, I already pointed out to you what exactly you posted. Forgot? In vain:
    Quote: Mik13
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Mik13
    QUO PointsU - 50 meters.

    Seriously?
    KVO:
    - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")

    - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
    - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
    - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
    - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
    * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m
    Seriously. In the data that you have given, the permissible miss of 180 meters is already laid. And 50 meters is a technical characteristic of the rocket itself. But the characteristics of the warheads make it possible to hit with a miss of the order of 200 meters. Therefore, such standards. Therefore, there are no requirements for the determination of coordinates. Using the means of the 70's, the accuracy of determining the coordinates of 25 meters is quite accessible - both yours and your goals.
    1. Mik13
      Mik13 25 July 2016 21: 26
      +1
      Quote: Professor
      Quote: Mik13
      As I understand it, this chilling humor is your most constructive argument on this point?

      Okay. The bombing of Grozny is certainly the top of the art of war, but in all other conflicts of the last 40 years they worked mostly precisely and the later the conflict took place the more precisely. Be it Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya or Afghanistan. Show photos?
      You have some elven ideas about modern warfare. And besides, you took my cue out of context, which distorts its meaning. This is a non-constructive way of conducting a discussion, in other words, trolling. In the original it was like this:
      Quote: Mik13
      Quote: Professor
      Quote: Mik13
      In fact, almost all goals (even in modern warfare) are areal. And against them, this product is very effective.

      Give carpet bombing.
      As I understand it, this chilling humor is your most constructive argument on this point? OK. Put Petrosyan on the profile picture - they deserve it.
      We remember: the Israeli team of 2 amateur players (professor and voyaka uh) could not refute the argument about areal goals.


      Quote: Professor
      Quote: Mik13
      Is her hatches of sufficient thickness? The product is in service because the performance characteristics of the product allow to hit almost all targets, except for point ones.

      What are all the goals? A land mine with a QUO in 200 meters who are you going to hit?
      This is areal. They are abundant in the military and operational rear areas. I repeat the fucking time. By the way, this is you talking about KVO 200 meters. I talked about 50 meters. And yes, if only, I did not read the TTX of this product in pedivikki. By the way, in the high explosive warhead the affected area is 3 Ha. And an air blast.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Professor
      Professor 26 July 2016 07: 05
      +1
      Quote: Mik13

      I already wrote. At a cluster warhead, the affected area is 7 Ha. This is a circle with a radius of 150 m. The field fuel and lubricants warehouse at 5000 m. Cube - 250x200 meters - these are only tanks ...

      Yes, at least 700. The airfield is monopensual. Here is a photo of how to hit the airfield.
      http://s00.yaplakal.com/pics/pics_original/4/6/2/526264.jpg

      Quote: Mik13
      Do you doubt that with such accuracy using 70's means you can determine the coordinates in SK-42? In vain. With the help of DAC or DM, nothing complicated.

      Again. Do not gag and learn materiel on the link I posted to sensible people.
      KVO:
      - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")


      Quote: Mik13
      In the original it was like this:

      I'm not going to switch to personality. Trying in vain. What about Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, or Afghanistan?

      Quote: Mik13
      This is areal. They are abundant in the military and operational rear areas. I repeat the fucking time. By the way, this is you talking about KVO 200 meters. I talked about 50 meters. And yes, if only, I did not read the TTX of this product in pedivikki. By the way, in the high explosive warhead the affected area is 3 Ha. And an air blast.

      What are the specific goals with the QUO in 200? Area in Gori?

      You can talk about 5 m, but this is not true. Link to the materiel see above.

      Quote: Mik13
      Something somehow boring in the third round was the same ... Dear, you are incompetent in the matter of discussion. Maybe you should talk to someone about politics? There, incompetence does not gush so vividly with a rapid jack ...

      Again, the transition to the individual? Is this due to an excess of knowledge on the topic? Do you still have to show the materiel and the results of its use?

      Quote: Mik13
      But at 19:59 a MIRACLE happened, and the professor decided to compare the Tochka complex, which was put into service in 1975, with the 2004 Wunderwaffle of the Israeli military-industrial complex LORA.

      You asked what a "formidable" weapon was and I gave you an example of the same Su-24 and LORA. You read more carefully and, most importantly, learn the materiel.


      Quote: Mik13
      In short, professor, change your profile picture to Petrosyan. They deserve it. Yes, and burned for the record.

      On the topic have something to say? Maybe you want to discuss how the Point corrects the flight path and provides a CWS of 50m? wink
      1. Mik13
        Mik13 26 July 2016 10: 27
        +4
        Quote: Professor
        Quote: Mik13
        Do you doubt that with such accuracy using 70's means you can determine the coordinates in SK-42? In vain. With the help of DAC or DM, nothing complicated.

        Again. Do not gag and learn materiel on the link I posted to sensible people.
        KVO:
        - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")

        OK, let's see what exactly you posted, if you yourself do not understand this:
        Quote: Professor
        KVO:
        - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
        - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
        - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
        * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m
        The total error in determining the coordinates (it is also a miss) is 180 meters. With the accuracy of determining the coordinates of 25 meters, the miss laid down in the standard will be 50 meters (130 meters less).

        Further - in the place where you took your data, ( http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html ) You, as always, cut off the quote, which distorted its meaning. This part of the text looks like this:

        Range:
        - 15-70 km ("Tochka" / "Tochka-R" according to the project and actually)
        - 20-120 km ("Tochka-U" / 9M79-1)
        - 185 km (SS-21C)
        Airspeed - 1036 m / s (9М79-1)
        Maximum trajectory height - 26000 m (9М79-1)
        Minimum path height - 6000 m (9М79-1)
        QUO:
        - 50-200-250 m ("Point")
        - 45 m ("Point-R")
        - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
        - from several to 50 m - on average 15 m ("Tochka-U" during the IDEX-93 exhibition, 5 launches)
        - 10 m at a distance of 56 km ("Tochka-U")
        - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
        - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
        - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
        * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m


        By the way, in the same article the word CVO occurs twice. And the second time the quote looks like this:
        - 1993 - during the IDEX-93 arms exhibition, 5 demonstration launches of Tochka-U missiles (KVO from several to 50 m) were carried out.


        Professor, pulling quotes from a text with a distortion of their meaning is a hoax. I draw your attention to the fact that at present you are burying your reputation. To make mistakes is not scary, but to consciously try to deceive others ...
        1. Professor
          Professor 26 July 2016 10: 33
          -2
          Quote: Mik13
          The total error in determining the coordinates (it is also a miss) is 180 meters. With the accuracy of determining the coordinates of 25 meters, the miss laid down in the standard will be 50 meters (130 meters less).

          Simplify the task for you. Your goal is to hit the enemy CP. What will be the CVO in this case? wink

          Quote: Mik13
          By the way, in the same article the word CVO occurs twice. And the second time the quote looks like this:
          - 1993 - during the IDEX-93 arms exhibition, 5 demonstration launches of Tochka-U missiles were carried out (KVO from more up to 50 m).

          From a few of what? Km?

          Quote: Mik13
          Professor, pulling quotes from a text with a distortion of their meaning is a hoax. I draw your attention to the fact that at present you are burying your reputation. To make mistakes is not scary, but to consciously try to deceive others ..

          Am I no longer Petrosyan? Progress on the face. good

          Do you ignore my questions because of personal hostility or because of a lack of knowledge?
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 11: 13
              0
              Quote: Mik13
              If the accuracy of determining the coordinates of the target is 50 meters, the ammunition consumption will be 1 missile with a cluster warhead or 2 with a high explosive. Do you understand the answer?

              I did not ask you about consumption. We will return to him. I asked you about the CVO.

              Quote: Mik13
              C'mon, why cling to punctuation here ... Did you drag a piece of quotation from this article here? Enjoy it. Lying is not good...

              QUO from a few to 50 m. The question is valid. From a few of what? From a few rockets?

              Quote: Mik13
              And you are a liar.

              General rules on the site

              Quote: Mik13
              You are ignoring the answers. Such a dull trolling ... do you even get paid? Or is it that you prove to yourself that you were not in vain from Russia?

              I can repeat the questions. And about Libya and about the airfields. Your wagging and personalization does not honor you. You could have simply answered, "I have no answers." This is normal. No one knows everything. It is a pity that it will not be possible to discuss how the missile correction is carried out in flight. sad
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. The comment was deleted.
            4. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 13: 04
              -1
              Quote: Mik13
              I already wrote you - KVO - 50 meters.

              The ice has broken. Continue:
              1. In your opinion. So be it. KVO allegedly 50 m? 160-300 m ("Point-U") in the article, we would not notice.
              2. How can such a air traffic control system destroy an airfield or the same fortified command post?

              Quote: Mik13
              In my opinion, it is clear what is meant "from a few meters"

              In your. So be it. How is a near-direct hit provided?


              Quote: Mik13
              And the word "liar" doesn't break the rules. This is not an insult, this is the definition of a person who is lying. You were caught by the hand in this thread on a deliberate lie.

              It's strange. It was for this word that I got a warning. As for the "caught" - and do not dream. I do not lie and therefore I cannot be caught in a lie.

              Quote: Mik13
              The product is not able to hit the runway of a non-nuclear warhead, but at the same time it will disable aerodrome equipment, fuel and lubricant storage, aircraft and helicopters in parking lots, etc.

              In open parking lots. However, even in Georgia, not to mention Libya and Iraq, the planes are covered with concrete, and the fuel and lubricant tanks on the warhead are buried in the ground. The question is valid. You claimed that
              Quote: Mik13
              As for airfields ... And why kill the strip, if the aircraft and infrastructure will be disabled?

              How?

              Quote: Mik13
              As for the correction and everything else - those who know what and how it works in this rocket do not write about it on the Internet. They press the subscription.

              Which subscription? Why fantasize? Point-U has long been exported and disassembled into atoms once 1000. However, satellite corrections, astro correction, a digital correlation system with the terrain, and correlations between the display of an object and its reference digital image were not found there. Miracles.
            5. Mik13
              Mik13 26 July 2016 13: 33
              +1
              Quote: Professor
              1. In your opinion. So be it. KVO allegedly 50 m? 160-300 m ("Point-U") in the article, we would not notice.
              2. How can such a air traffic control system destroy an airfield or the same fortified command post?

              1. The same article states that 160-300 m was obtained with a total error in determining the coordinates of 180 meters. In addition to the fact that the same article explicitly indicates the KVO 50 meters. Just in case, proof on the article again: (//militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html)

              2. I have already written several times that the product does not allow the destruction of point targets. Concrete bunker - definitely not. Fortified KP - what is this?
              Field KP of the division - capable, the required flow - 1 rocket with KBCH.

              Quote: Professor
              In open parking lots. However, even in Georgia, not to mention Libya and Iraq, the planes are covered with concrete, and the fuel and lubricant tanks on the warhead are buried in the ground. The question is valid.
              If all will be covered with concrete, the use of the complex against such a goal is ineffective. In this case, the airfield will be considered not one area target, but a complex of point ones.

              Quote: Professor
              Which subscription? Why fantasize? Point-U has long been exported and disassembled into atoms once 1000. However, satellite corrections, astro correction, a digital correlation system with the terrain, and correlations between the display of an object and its reference digital image were not found there. Miracles.
              You don’t understand how the complex has a KVO 50 meters on such an element base? It's your problems. I do not know the answer to this question. Write in KB. You will be sent there, where necessary.

              Quote: Professor
              It's strange. It was for this word that I got a warning. As for the "caught" - and do not dream. I do not lie and therefore I cannot be caught in a lie.
              No, you just lied when the part that confirms your statements was cut from the paragraph with the technical specifications at http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html. At the same time, they forgot to quote the part that refutes them. You could not help but notice this part, since this is one paragraph from 15 short lines, and you cut off the quote exactly on the line in which you talk about the CVO 50 meters. I brought him completely. This is called forgery.
              Forgery is the process of creating, fitting, or simulating objects, statistics, or documents with the intention of being misleading.

              and you were caught by the hand in this act. I understand the piquancy of the situation, but I will not sympathize. "All moves are recorded" (s)
            6. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 13: 45
              -1
              Quote: Mik13
              If everything is covered with concrete, the use of the complex against such a goal is ineffective. In this case, the airfield will be considered not one area target, but a complex of point ones.

              Have you been replaced?
              Quote: Mik13
              In fact, almost all goals (even in modern warfare) are areal. And against them, this product is very effective.


              Quote: Mik13
              2. I have already written several times that the product does not allow the destruction of point targets.

              By area, by area. The area in Gori suffered as a "namesake".

              Quote: Mik13
              You don’t understand how the complex has a KVO 50 meters on such an element base? It's your problems. I do not know the answer to this question. Write in KB. You will be sent there, where necessary.

              Not only I do not understand, and not only you, but also those who used this complex, as well as all those stupid developers who create their own expensive Iskander missiles.

              Quote: Mik13
              I do not know the answer to this question

              The ice has broken.

              Quote: Mik13
              This is called a forgery.

              No forgery. Materiel: KVO 160-300 m.
            7. Mik13
              Mik13 26 July 2016 14: 23
              +1
              Very sad. If you think that I do not remember what and where I wrote - you are mistaken. So do not pull quotes out of context. You are burying the remains of your reputation with this, and she has suffered damage in this thread ...

              Quote: Professor
              No forgery. Materiel: KVO 160-300 m.

              Yes, forgery. See, here is your quote:
              Quote: Professor
              Seriously?
              KVO:
              - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
              - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
              - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
              - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
              - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
              * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m
              Didn't you take it out of context? The meaning is not distorted? That is how you quoted.

              And here is how this paragraph looked in the original source at the link http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html:
              Range:
              - 15-70 km ("Tochka" / "Tochka-R" according to the project and actually)
              - 20-120 km ("Tochka-U" / 9M79-1)
              - 185 km (SS-21C)
              Airspeed - 1036 m / s (9М79-1)
              Maximum trajectory height - 26000 m (9М79-1)
              Minimum path height - 6000 m (9М79-1)
              QUO:
              - 50-200-250 m ("Point")
              - 45 m ("Point-R")
              - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
              - from several to 50 m - on average 15 m ("Tochka-U" during the IDEX-93 exhibition, 5 launches)
              - 10 m at a distance of 56 km ("Tochka-U")
              - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
              - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
              - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
              - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
              * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m


              Color Highlighted what you took in the quote.
              You not only pulled the quote out of context, you also edited it, removing the data that refutes your statements and confirms mine.

              And you say that this is not a forgery? Yes, this is just a reference sample of deceiving the interlocutors through falsification of quotes!
            8. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 14: 45
              -2
              Quote: Mik13
              I highlighted with color what you took in the quote.

              The fact that you are not color blind is obvious.

              QUO:
              - 50-200-250 m ("Point")
              - 45 m ("Point-R")
              - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
              You want to say that the KVO Point-U is not 160-300m? wink
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Mik13
    Mik13 26 July 2016 10: 34
    +1
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Mik13
    This is areal. They are abundant in the military and operational rear areas. I repeat the fucking time. By the way, this is you talking about KVO 200 meters. I talked about 50 meters. And yes, if only, I did not read the TTX of this product in pedivikki. By the way, in the high explosive warhead the affected area is 3 Ha. And an air blast.

    What are the specific goals with the QUO in 200? Area in Gori?

    And there, (http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html) where did you bring the list of TTX from, while incorrectly quoting distorting its meaning, there is a plate that shows what the targets and missile consumption are for. Have you seen her? I do not believe in this - you have already been caught on a conscious lie in this very subject. (http://militaryrussia.ru/i/284/191/Y22pL.gif)
    1. Professor
      Professor 26 July 2016 10: 37
      0
      Quote: Mik13
      And there, (//militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-191.html) where did you drag the TTX list from, while incorrectly quoting distorting its meaning, there is a tablet that shows what are the goals and missile consumption for defeat. Have you seen her? I do not believe in this - you have already been caught on a conscious lie in this very subject.

      I am patient today. Again: What are the specific goals with the QUO in 200? Area in Gori?

      How are you going to destroy the airfield at such a CWO?
      Air blast? Cluster munitions? lol


      http://s00.yaplakal.com/pics/pics_preview/4/6/2/526264.jpg
  • atalef
    atalef 26 July 2016 07: 38
    0
    Quote: Professor
    IN:
    - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
    - 165 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 35 km, standard *)
    - 210 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 35 km, standard *)
    - 200 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123F, range 70 km, standard *)
    - 235 m ("Tochka-U", warhead 9N123K, range 70 km, standard *)
    * - standard = taking into account the error in the coordinates of the target not more than 100 m and the launch point not more than 80 m

    I'm certainly not special. but what is the point 9 in the view of many having no analogues in the world - better than an ordinary tornado?
    MLRS 9K58 "Smerch" on the MAZ-543M chassis
    Firing range increased from 70 to 90 km, the combat crew decreased from four to three people, the automation of the system increased, in particular, the topographic location began to be carried out automatically through satellite systems. Adopted in 1989. The area of ​​damage is 67,2 ha [29]. Preparation for a volley 3 minutes, reload 13 minutes. [37
    1. Professor
      Professor 26 July 2016 07: 55
      0
      Quote: atalef

      I'm certainly not special. but what is the point 9 in the view of many having no analogues in the world - better than an ordinary tornado?

      The fact that it can be used with a special warhead. In conventional design with such a CVO, it is little dangerous.
  • Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 22: 58
    0
    ... combined with ... (it will be in Russian).
    And for your opinion - thanks.
  • gigiperfetto
    gigiperfetto 25 July 2016 23: 42
    +1
    I am one of the gurus for Saudi officers, here in Yemen, not everything is so simple!
  • Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 11: 00
    +1
    It's time to round off the former "Ukraine" and put an end to it.
  • kim. 230752
    kim. 230752 25 July 2016 11: 37
    +5
    After graduating from the institute in 1973, I happened to work on the production of the first samples of these PUs. And even solve some fundamental issues with military acceptance. It was difficult, but very interesting. The machine is fast and reliable. Yes, and a school for life. And the Chief Designer of the PU (not the complex as a whole) was Sergeyev George Ivanovich.
  • AGENT.51
    AGENT.51 25 July 2016 11: 40
    +2
    Yes. For a long time we will disentangle Gorbachev’s affairs.
  • Tektor
    Tektor 25 July 2016 12: 36
    +1
    There is one specific point in Point-U: it has the ability to swim. I don’t know if she can launch a rocket while in a floating state, but with a certain share of ingenuity - anything is possible. Now imagine that in tow a thread from a longboat is dragging a thread from one, two, three or six pelvis from the Tochka-U structure. And it’s not noticeable that they sneak up to a thread on an important port or missile defense point ...
    1. Professor
      Professor 25 July 2016 12: 59
      +3
      Quote: Tektor
      There is one specific point in Point-U: it has the ability to swim. I don’t know if she can launch a rocket while in a floating state, but with a certain share of ingenuity - anything is possible. Now imagine that in tow a thread from a longboat is dragging a thread from one, two, three or six pelvis from the Tochka-U structure. And it’s not noticeable that they sneak up to a thread on an important port or missile defense point ...

      And if you add more ingenuity, it will be possible to launch a rocket from an underwater position. Well, just a submarine. wassat
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 25 July 2016 19: 36
        0
        Yes, there’s no need for ingenuity here either: make floats, just like on Kurganets-25 ... And Barkas can also replace an unmanned mini-towboat with a decent cable length, 100 meters, so as not to shine too much on radars ... Or several water bikes like a troika of horses ...
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 July 2016 13: 34
    0
    Timely become. I think it’s too early to write off the Point. Upgrade using technology from Iskander (guidance heads, target designation). And the export potential is not bad and the price is good. You can not even increase the range.
  • lelyk72
    lelyk72 25 July 2016 13: 41
    +3
    Quote: Mik13
    Mik13 (2) Today, 08:47 ↑
    Quote: svp67
    I believe that Gorbachev M.S. .... Because no one has ever done more damage to Russia.


    You forgot about the horsetail. They can argue with each other about the magnitude of the damage done. And it’s not a fact that Gorbi will win, because without Khrushchev there would be no hunchback.
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 25 July 2016 17: 05
      0
      Gorbachev would not have been without Suslov and Andropov.))
      1. Lyubopyatov
        Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 23: 31
        0
        Without Kuusinen and Andropov, there would have been neither Gorbachev, nor Ambassador Academician Yakovlev, KGB defector Kalugin, nor any Arbat-Bakatin. And Suslov has nothing to do with it. At least there is no such evidence.
  • kombat729
    kombat729 25 July 2016 14: 23
    +2
    I saw how the installation launches (shot). The impression is very strong. And for the enemy the result was deplorable. It is a pity that they will be removed from service.
  • wow
    wow 25 July 2016 14: 34
    +1
    The death of the "hunchback" will be terrible. They can't just pass by millions of curses not on his bald turnip !!!
    1. Lyubopyatov
      Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 23: 34
      0
      He secured himself an eternal residence permit after death - in the underworld.
  • certero
    certero 25 July 2016 16: 41
    +1
    Quote: Mik13
    Because no one has ever done more damage to Russia.

    Without Gorbachev and his perestroika, you would, quite possibly, have now studied the materials of the next Congress of the CPSU, would not have surfed the Internet. Yes, and the Internet would be on special standards. How quickly everything is forgotten ... exit visas, information restrictions and the like. This led to the collapse, since the lack of a real picture of the world allowed the West to make another picture.
    Do not step on the same rake now.
    Gorbachev was an idealist, and idealists rarely make politics in a quality manner, since cynicism and practicality are lacking. But practical cynics pulled power out from under him and torn the Union into separate states to become sole rulers.
    1. Phoenix_L'vov
      Phoenix_L'vov 25 July 2016 21: 16
      +2
      And even without Gorbachev there would have been no Chechen wars, civil war in Ukraine, slaughter in Syria (the Americans would not have decided to go against the USSR’s ally), there would have been no collapse of Yugoslavia with all its victims, there would have been no two tens of millions of population reduction in Ukraine, Russia and CIS countries ...
      There would have been no hungry nineties, but we would have sorted out the deficit somehow. But there would be both your Internet and your PC computers - they were already then, for example, BK-Lviv, where I once learned to program, and my car industry - the same LAZs (now in the place of the Lviv bus ruin and empty looted shops ), and its own elemental base, which even then was only slightly inferior to the western one, and the military one also surpassed the US analogues. There would be many things without this bald traitor!
    2. Lyubopyatov
      Lyubopyatov 25 July 2016 23: 40
      +1
      Gorbachev from the rostrum of the congress of his deputies said that he didn’t tell the whole nation and would never tell everything. He is not an idealist, but the narcissistic dumbass with whom his wife turned, Margot Thatcher, Reagan and all foreign authorities. There were no authorities for him. Chernobyl, Mathias Rust ... What is he not guilty of! Marshal Akhromeev strangled ... with the wrong hands.
  • Algetxnumx
    Algetxnumx 25 July 2016 19: 56
    0
    Quote: Professor
    There is nothing to add to it. No snot about Gorbachev, but a solid match with a description of the experience of combat use.

    Damn, well, the "professor" of everything in the world will definitely come out and vulgarize everything, I'm wondering if you are like this in life or only here, on VO what
    1. Khariton
      Khariton 25 July 2016 20: 01
      +2
      Quote: Alget87
      Quote: Professor
      There is nothing to add to it. No snot about Gorbachev, but a solid match with a description of the experience of combat use.

      Damn, well, the "professor" of everything in the world will definitely come out and vulgarize everything, I'm wondering if you are like this in life, or only here, on VO what

      The genes are ... He would be glad to keep silent, but the toad presses from the inside! An interesting instance and very vindictive! So that you are more careful with the statements ... hi
      If you want to check, write to him that the tanks "merkava" torches (fireworks) for our ATGM and T-90 ...! And also "control shot" That their "iron dome" is a rusty barrel ..))) If our Hessbolu, Hamas learn a bit ..)))) I actually wrote a terrible comment ... Well, okay!
  • berezin1987
    berezin1987 25 July 2016 21: 05
    +1
    Point-U is a great weapon that will still serve. Upgrading existing complexes does not make sense, because missiles will expire soon. A good solution would be to use missiles with an expiring shelf life in Syria against terrorists. The main thing today is to increase the production of Iskander OTRK for the quickest replacement of Tochka-U.
    1. Operator
      Operator 25 July 2016 21: 35
      +1
      The latest versions of the Tochka-U missile are equipped with a drive to time-programmable radio beacons, which are previously dropped (using a UAV, as in Syria) or placed (with the help of agents, as in Yemen) at the target.

      KVO in this case is about several meters.

      Thus, it is possible to shoot with high precision the entire accumulated stock of Tochki-U during the transition to the Iskander-M OTRK.
      1. Professor
        Professor 26 July 2016 06: 49
        +1
        Quote: Operator
        The latest versions of the Tochka-U missile are equipped with a drive to time-programmable radio beacons, which are previously dropped (using a UAV, as in Syria) or placed (with the help of agents, as in Yemen) at the target.

        KVO in this case is about several meters.

        For instance? What versions?
        What are the beacons? Which drones?
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Bongo
              Bongo 26 July 2016 07: 35
              +1
              Quote: Professor
              I know who I’m dealing with and I’m writing not for him, but those who are interested in materiel.

              Sisyphean labor ... No. On Voenniy Obozreniye there are very good publications about equipment, weapons and military history. But how many people read them? It's not about Ukraine ... sad
              Quote: Professor
              Not everyone here is an aces like you.
              There is no aisle to perfection, no one can know everything. Another question is if if a person does not want to know and his brains are clogged with ideology ...
              Quote: Professor
              In general, we don’t go here to work - we have fun.

              One does not interfere with the other ... Yes, and I am comforting myself with the hope that my articles will clear my brain and raise my general education level to at least someone. hi But "Operator" is, alas, already clearly a hopeless case ... request
              1. Professor
                Professor 26 July 2016 07: 56
                +2
                Quote: Bongo
                One doesn’t interfere ... I have been paid for publications for some time, although not by much. Yes, and amuse myself with the hope that my articles will at least clear the brains of someone and increase the general educational level.

                Do not take an example from me. Do not give up and keep writing. I read you. hi
            2. sivuch
              sivuch 26 July 2016 09: 46
              +1
              And this individual, by the way, is right.
              And as provided, it is described in the same article by Dimmy.
              QUO:
              - 50-200-250 m ("Point")
              - 45 m ("Point-R")
              - 160-300 m ("Tochka-U")
              - from several to 50 m - on average 15 m ("Tochka-U" during the IDEX-93 exhibition, 5 launches)
              - 10 m at a distance of 56 km ("Tochka-U")
              The 9M79R Tochka-R missile is a 9N215 passive radar (developed by TsKBA) with a range of radio-emitting targets of at least 15 km. On the 9M79M missile part of the 9M79R missiles, the DAVU 9B65M is used with the possibility of course correction according to the data from the GOS
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. Operator
                Operator 26 July 2016 13: 02
                0
                Not a horse feed - Professor and Bongo on the VO website are engaged in paid agitation prop to lower the military-technical level of Russian weapons.

                Therefore, even looking in the book for the presence of "Point-R" with homing at the source of radio emission (the nature of which can be any from a radar to a radio beacon), these individuals see a fig.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 26 July 2016 13: 17
                  +2
                  Quote: Operator
                  Not a horse feed - Professor and Bongo on the VO website are engaged in paid agitation prop to lower the military-technical level of Russian weapons.

                  Ask, where can I get my share?
                  By the way, for insulting the author (Bongo) a life ban is supposed.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 26 July 2016 13: 42
                    0
                    Your choice - Rafael Armament Development Authority, Israel Aircraft Industries, Israel MoD laughing

                    So I seem to be the author of articles on VO, not?
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 26 July 2016 13: 48
                      -1
                      Quote: Operator
                      So I seem to be the author of articles on VO, not?

                      No, young man. You insult the author and you should be banned.
                      1. Operator
                        Operator 26 July 2016 13: 57
                        0
                        Thank you, old man, for explaining which authors can be insulted and which cannot.
              3. Bongo
                Bongo 26 July 2016 13: 58
                +1
                Quote: sivuch
                And this individual, by the way, is right.

                Igor, I don’t want to get involved in your discussion, but you read all his comments, for example, about how he offers to shoot down ICBM warheads using spirals. wassat
                Quote: Operator
                The professor and Bongo on the VO site are engaged in paid agitation prop to lower the military-technical level of Russian weapons.

                If the fact that there is no "hurray-patriotic" frenzy in publications is belittling - then yes, of course ...
        2. Operator
          Operator 26 July 2016 12: 35
          0
          I advise you to study the original source (see sivuch's comment) and recall the successful experience of the Houthis in Yemen in using the "Point" against the Saudis, and not use the opinion of the journalist Bongo bully

          PS "Terry anti-Semitism" performed by Bongo - it was sarcasm on my part (it will not be repeated again, since it is not clear to the addressee).
  • sivuch
    sivuch 26 July 2016 10: 13
    +2
    And the fact that at the IDEX-93 exhibition ordinary rockets (without any passive GOS) produced an average accuracy of 15 meters, aren't we reading it?
    In Soviet times, it was customary to give TTX for the most adverse conditions. For example, the Wasp reaction time is 25-26 seconds. This is true if the BM is alone, without any control unit and from where the adversary arrives, it is not known. And the fact that the BMs usually worked together and with TsU from PU-12 was not taken into account, although the reaction time was half that.
    In this case, it is assumed that both the accuracy of the target’s coordinates and the accuracy of the topographic location are slightly higher than the plinth. By the way, in the article you quoted there is a table with the number of missiles needed to destroy typical targets.
    By the way, on the Dima forum there are very competent comments of the Senior Citizen, in particular, on the errors of this article
    Well, a more general idea. I think that the Union developed missile technology, in particular tactical and operational ballistic missiles, simply because they did not count on air supremacy.
    1. Professor
      Professor 26 July 2016 10: 22
      0
      I understand that you wrote to me?

      Quote: sivuch
      And the fact that at the IDEX-93 exhibition ordinary rockets (without any passive GOS) produced an average accuracy of 15 meters, aren't we reading it?

      The exhibition is a window dressing. Nevertheless, it will not be difficult for you to describe due to what qualities you can achieve such impressive indicators as accuracy of 15m? Correction by satellites, astro correction, digital correlation system with terrain, correlation of the display of an object with its reference digital image?
  • sivuch
    sivuch 26 July 2016 10: 48
    +2
    And as soon as you guessed, you, of course.
    It’s difficult. I’m not a specialist in rocketry. If the Pensioner is still there, at the Dima’s forum, it makes sense to ask him. (Unless, of course, you are interested in technical details, and not proof of the undoubted facts that the Union made nobody useless weapons ). But the final results are evident. And the facts of the successful application of the Point were also given
    Of course, an exhibition is a window dressing by definition, where the coordinates of the target and the launch point are known to a centimeter, because after all the coordinates of the goals are also known, and the coordinates of possible launch points can be tied in advance.
    1. Professor
      Professor 26 July 2016 10: 57
      0
      Quote: sivuch
      And as soon as you guessed, you, of course.

      With difficulties. If they answer someone, they do it by clicking the "Reply" button.

      Quote: sivuch
      Unless, of course, you are interested in technical details, and not evidence of the undeniable facts that the Union made unnecessary weapons to anyone

      Why is it not necessary? Nuclear warhead and forth. It’s very effective even with such a QUO.

      Quote: sivuch
      But the final results are evident. And the facts of the successful application of the Point were also presented.

      Yeah. It would be better if they concealed these results. It would not be so offensive for the people's money. One such "successful" launch was seriously wounded in Gori by my friend. Before that we pedaled together. He was in Georgia on the instructions of the editorial board. Glory to Gd recovered. Now pedaling on the highway.



      1. sivuch
        sivuch 26 July 2016 11: 24
        +2
        I hope you have no friends at the Saudi bases? otherwise the Hussites didn’t end the points
        1. Professor
          Professor 26 July 2016 11: 28
          0
          Quote: sivuch
          I hope you have no friends at the Saudi bases? otherwise the Hussites didn’t end the points

          On campgrounds like Zikim the most. Airdromes, KP and other poorly poorly fortified targets are beyond her power. Syria is an extreme example of this. hi
          1. sivuch
            sivuch 26 July 2016 13: 19
            0
            Well, you see, some progress has been outlined - after all, sometimes they’re the very thing. Like here, for example
            http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1462115.html
            The UAE has reported the deaths of 22 of its military personnel in Yemen. The losses of other allies are still unknown, but these are already the largest one-time losses of the Saudi coalition in Yemen, at least officially announced. According to information from the Houthis, a missile launched by them hit an ammunition depot in a military camp in the province of Marib, where the coalition forces were gathering troops and equipment in recent days, which led to the death of dozens of military personnel from the UAE and their local allies, as well as the destruction of armored vehicles and helicopters "Apache"
            But I would like to deal with Syria. The points of the Syrian armed forces fired at the Igilov airfield and they didn’t succeed, or vice versa, the Igov points at the Syrian airfields?
            1. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 13: 33
              0
              Quote: sivuch
              Well, you see, some progress has been outlined - after all, sometimes they’re the very thing. Like here, for example

              Sometimes they fall. That's why it is KVO.

              Quote: sivuch
              But I would like to deal with Syria. The points of the Syrian armed forces fired at the Igilov airfield and they didn’t succeed, or vice versa, the Igov points at the Syrian airfields?

              The Syrians shot them anywhere. Yes, not so much. The rebels die with laughter. lol
              There and Skadami and Fatehami bullet.
              Syria launched dozens of ballistic missiles, so that they did not get the rebels
              1. sivuch
                sivuch 26 July 2016 13: 57
                0
                Quote: Professor
                The Syrians shot them anywhere. Yes, not so much. The rebels die with laughter.
                There and Skadami and Fatehami bullet.

                You see, they themselves answered-they shot anywhere, but you still need to aim
                But, most importantly, to continue to die
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Professor
          Professor 26 July 2016 13: 12
          0
          Quote: Mik13
          So, as soon as the professors were caught lying, he (she? Are they?) Immediately began to speak a lot to write too much ...

          You can’t catch on what is not. You do not expose your Wishlist for truth. It looks funny.

          Quote: Mik13
          Tell me, did your cycling friend accidentally pedal not on the Spyder-SR? Or is he a C4-CC NCW operations specialist?
          And the media, by any chance, is not called "Defensive Shield"? Or maybe "Global CST"? Very respected publications, very much. They are very famous not only in narrow, but also in wide circles.

          Not. My friend, a journalist, was in Georgia on the instructions of another edition of Yediot Hahoronot. My friend’s name is Zadok Yehizkeli.
          העיתונאי צדוק יחזקאלי נפצע קשה מירי בגאורגיה

          Quote: Mik13
          I can say that your friend pedaled along the highway from Gori quickly enough, and escaped, one might say, with a slight fright ...

          My friend was fulfilling his journalistic duty when a Russian rocket (there are even those who claim that it was Iskander) worked out over an area in the city of Gori. He did not pedal there. He and I share a hobby of cycling.

          Quote: Mik13
          Or maybe it was during your meeting in Gori with your former compatriots that they carried out the second control circumcision using a prescription for GDP (so that nothing would grow)? I sympathize, of course, but because nefig, as they say ... I would have killed after a detailed interrogation ...

          These words are not a boy, but a husband. fool

          Quote: Mik13
          PS Tell me, professor, are you definitely not a woman? It's just that for a man you have a very long language and a very short memory ... Or does a woman work on an account during the day, and a man in the evening?

          And it asks the person carrying nonsense including the opus about circumcision and calling for the murder of a journalist. A curtain. fellow
          1. Mik13
            Mik13 26 July 2016 14: 07
            +3
            Quote: Professor
            Quote: Mik13
            So, as soon as the professors were caught lying, he (she? Are they?) Immediately began to speak a lot to write too much ...

            You can’t catch on what is not. You do not expose your Wishlist for truth. It looks funny.
            Everything is there, and everything is already recorded. You got caught, professor. You decided that no one would come to check the source of the quote - and committed a forgery. That is a hoax. They lied. And now the comments on the site can’t be deleted, some kind of trouble ... It will remain an illustration of how easy it is for a troll to lose its reputation if the troll is dull, lazy and talentless.

            Quote: Professor
            Not. My friend, a journalist, was in Georgia on the instructions of another edition of Yediot Hahoronot. My friend’s name is Zadok Yehizkeli.

            I believe. I believe you. You haven’t lied today? But no, today it’s already ... But it’s not scary. I believe that your friend had a document that said about the assignment of the editorial office, and he was even a real one. I BELIEVE. Global CST employees never mow down for journalists. Holy people ...

            Quote: Professor
            My friend was fulfilling his journalistic duty when a Russian rocket (there are even those who claim that it was Iskander) worked out over an area in the city of Gori. He did not pedal there. He and I share a hobby of cycling.
            Yes? And I thought it was the Su-24 that supplemented the 2xFAB-250 ammunition depot in the middle of urban development pointwise. And hit. And all the rest is a consequence of the fact that he got hit very accurately and the ammunition was a little boom.
            By the way, if such objects are located in urban areas, the responsibility for the collateral damage is borne by the one who placed the object, and not the one who destroyed it.

            Quote: Professor
            And it asks the person carrying nonsense including the opus about circumcision and calling for the murder of a journalist. A curtain. fellow

            It asks the person who caught you red-handed on cheating when quoting. Get used to it, professor, now you will not get rid of the reputation of a liar.

            As for the murder - do not distort, I do not urged to kill journalist. I am a journalist myself laughing
            I wrote that in the 080808 situation, if I caught a muddy character involved in PMCs (even Israeli, Polish at least), and even more so - the exploitation of certain technical means, I would try to make the character go missing after a detailed interrogation forever and ever. Nothing personal - these are the rules.
            1. Professor
              Professor 26 July 2016 14: 39
              +1
              Quote: Mik13
              Everything is there, and everything is already recorded. You got caught, professor. You decided that no one would come to check the source of the quote - and committed a forgery. That is a hoax. They lied. And now the comments on the site can’t be deleted, some kind of trouble ... It will remain an illustration of how easy it is for a troll to lose its reputation if the troll is dull, lazy and talentless.

              You are smiling at me. I have repeatedly uploaded this link and sent it to the original source in the hope that the people will use it, and not vice versa.

              Quote: Mik13
              I believe.

              And believe me monopenosally or not. I posted a link to an article about him.

              Quote: Mik13
              Yes? And I thought it was the Su-24 that supplemented the 2xFAB-250 ammunition depot in the middle of urban development pointwise. And hit. And all the rest is a consequence of the fact that he got hit very accurately and the ammunition was a little boom.

              Do not think, you look at the photo with what they fired at the area in Gori. By the way, there were no Georgian "ammunition" there.

              Quote: Mik13
              It asks the person who caught you red-handed on cheating when quoting. Get used to it, professor, now you will not get rid of the reputation of a liar.

              You fantasize, but in moderation. KVO 160-300 m. This is what is indicated in the article.

              Quote: Mik13
              As for the murder - do not distort, I did not call for the murder of a journalist. I am a journalist myself

              Quote: Mik13
              I would have killed after a detailed interrogation ...

              Have you been replaced again?
  • certero
    certero 26 July 2016 19: 26
    -1
    Quote: Phoenix_Lvov
    And even without Gorbachev there would have been no Chechen wars, civil war in Ukraine, slaughter in Syria (the Americans would not have decided to go against the USSR’s ally), there would have been no collapse of Yugoslavia with all its victims, there would have been no two tens of millions of population reduction in Ukraine, Russia and CIS countries ...
    There would have been no hungry nineties, but we would have sorted out the deficit somehow. But there would be both your Internet and your PC computers - they were already then, for example, BK-Lviv,

    The scribe is full :) Gorbachev was not in power for 5 years, when the First Chechen War began. Sorry, Yugoslavia, I haven’t run anywhere, they have surrendered their president themselves, and fit in for them? And again, Gorbachev then what?
    Could not deal with the deficit for the entire Soviet time, computers were, yes, American clones. EC-1841 was cool, had a whole megabyte on the hard :)
    I really do not like the collapse of the USSR, since a big country always gives more opportunities, but blaming one person for all the troubles of 90's is like overkill.