Russia and other developments in Hypersonic Research

The main effort in the aircraft industry are aimed at creating a hypersonic airplane - expert
25/08/2009

Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (ITAM), Siberian Branch of RAS is involved in a project to develop Russia's reusable Clipper spacecraft, told reporters on Monday the director of IMPA Vasily Fomin.

"The Institute is involved in the blowing, and in the calculations," - he said at a meeting in preparation for the International Youth Forum innovative, Interra, which will be held in Novosibirsk from 10 to 12 September.

He also noted that the IMPA is conducting research in the field of hypersonic aircraft.

"At hypersonic wings are very small, and the fuselage will be an all-body, it will be so-called waveriders, but there is only a draft," - said V. Fomin.

He also said that in the spring of this year concluded an agreement between ITAM and NAPO im.Chkalova drafted replace riveted joints on the technology of laser welding.

"We need to get in VIAM (All-Russia Research Institute of Aircraft Materials - IF), they must take it to the test to itself, we now agree with them, and they will do it", - said V. Fomin.

According to him, the cooperation program with the SB RAS NAPO im. Chkalov provides several areas of cooperation, in particular - as a cold gas dynamic spraying anti-corrosion coating, the use of nanomaterials, etc.

Meanwhile, in an interview to the Information Agency "Interfax-Siberia" Fomin noted that developments in the aircraft industry is now the technology was developed several decades ago.

"The ideas were, and materials are not created. But after 40 years, there were composites, the strength better than steel and lighter, and the idea came back to life - for example, wings on the reverse sweep - to combat vehicles in general find it" - he said.

Also, he noted, has a long history and pattern "aircraft wing", but the first models were not very stable.

"There was electronics, which can keep track of it all, and again was this idea," - he said.

At the same time, notes Fomin, fundamentally new ideas in the aircraft industry in recent years did not appear.

"What a stunning yet was not. Now all the focus on the creation of a hypersonic aircraft - of course it will, first of all, the military, to" citizen "him away," - says a scientist.

Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics. Khristianovich Siberian Branch of RAS (ITAM SB RAS) was established in 1957.

The Institute has a hypersonic wind tunnel AT-303, the world's only able to recreate 100% flight conditions.

Main scientific interests: mathematical modeling in mechanics, Aerogasdynamics, physico-chemical mechanics, solid mechanics, deformation and fracture.

Права на данный материал принадлежат Интерфакс.

In Russia are hypersonic tactical missile
25/08/2009

Russia is close to the creation of military vehicles that can travel at hypersonic speeds, said CEO of Tactical Missiles "Boris Obnossov. "I do not want to reveal all the secrets, but we are in this area are working hard and I think in the near future, the results appear," - said Boris Obnosov reporters at the air show MAKS-2009. He noted that on this subject in Russia "there is some hurt, and do not have to waste time." B. Obnosov likened the subject of significance "with the launch of the first man in space and the conquest of the Moon. "The achievement of these goals was sent to all the power of the Soviet Union and the United States with all their allies," - said Boris Obnossov. According to him, hypersound - "is a topic that will help the technologically and technically to achieve new goals in creating new types of weapons, materials, engines, fuel and so on."

Права на данный материал принадлежат Время и Деньги (Казань).

This was taken from MAKS-2009

Thanks for the photos. Soon we will be able to kill Wahhabis in seconds.

well good at least i know Russian still make progress in the field... the GELA and Grom would still have a successor..

hey Viktor.. what's the name of those cuties on your photos

Dont know its name and can not see it from the picture but thiese are for sure relatively new projects revealed only now so will hear about them thats for sure.

Stealthflanker wrote:well good at least i know Russian still make progress in the field... the GELA and Grom would still have a successor..

hey Viktor.. what's the name of those cuties on your photos

That display is from the Central Institute of Aviation Motors. The prototype is called GLL "Igla" if IIRC. I didn't stick around in that pavilion too long.

That display is from the Central Institute of Aviation Motors. The prototype is called GLL "Igla" if IIRC. I didn't stick around in that pavilion too long.[/quote]

That Igla thing was severally tested throwout 90ies.

Viktor wrote:

That Igla thing was severally tested throwout 90ies.

Its still on the website...

http://www.ciam.ru/?SId=322&lang=RUS

CIAM builds Europe’s largest bench for testing hypersonic engines


DATELINE: MOSCOW April 22

The Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) started up Europe’s largest bench for testing hypersonic engines in late March, Institute First Deputy General Director Valentin Solonin told Interfax-AVN on Wednesday.

“The test bench is a part of the National Technological Modernization project. The construction started in 2007,” he said.

“We intend to increase the capacity of the test bench. It can test samples of up to three meters now, but our goal is to test full-size samples in the future,” he said.

The test bench can imitate Mach 6 conditions, Solonin said.

Source: Interfax-AVN

That should make testing a faster Brahmos much easier...

The French like the CIAM facility. They use it to test their supersonic designs.

Rogozin considers the development in the U.S. hypersonic weapon dangerous to the Russian Federation

"We understand that subjective decisions were taken (in the development of a hypersonic weapons), decision of the supreme political leadership of that time, the late 1980s, when the most advanced design of hypersonic were just artificially stopped. I can not, sorry to call another as a betrayal of national interests, "- he said during a visit to the state machine design bureau" Rainbow "name Bereznyak.

"Today, unfortunately, we see a substantial backlog of Russia in this area. And as we saw today, it's not just about the dramatic factors that, in general, the impact on the state of industry, defense, national security, the disintegration of the Soviet Union" - Rogozin added.

He said that the development of a long flight in the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds (5 to 6 times the speed of sound) - is a fundamental and qualitative leap in the air and rocket, which will create a highly efficient weapon, having a fundamentally new properties.

"Samples of hypersonic weapons will significantly increase the effectiveness of combat weapons by increasing the speed, invulnerability, providing modern and advanced systems capture, range expansion of the range and altitude, as well as increasing the kinetic energy of the destructive elements" - said the acting deputy prime minister.

The US has a global empire to scare with military force.

It makes sense for them to invest in such weapon technology.

I would be disappointed if Russia was way ahead in these technologies... because while useful in certain fields there are more practical and less destabilising things they can spend their money on.

Education and health are two important areas that would always benefit from investment and the results should be improved living standards and improved social situation in Russia... rather more beneficial than some high speed missiles that emulate ICBMs but don't follow ballistic paths.

Being at the leading edge of technology is expensive and often dangerous, and offers a very short window of an advantage. Sometimes those that follow can examine your experience and avoid your mistakes completely... a good example is the US Space Shuttle and the Soviet Buran.

The former was an example of how to make something that was supposed to save money really really expensive. In comparison the Buran was much simpler and cheaper and much more efficient. The only problem with Buran was that at the time they didn't actually need it.

In many ways the US space shuttle was a one week space station that they could do experiments on... the huge irony is that if the cold war had continued and the US had decided to go to mars the US crews would likely have died because one week in a space shuttle gives you a very false impression about the effects of the long term effects of zero gravity.

I remember seeing a US documentary where a US astronaut had been told by the Russians that after several months in space you are like a little baby and can't stand up on your own. In his words he suspected it was inferior Russian food and he also believed that superior US exercises would allow him to stand up and walk out of the capsule when it landed and he could show these Russians about US superiority in medicine and nutrition and their general superiority.

Anyway when it came time to land he felt fine and when the capsule came to a stop he went to open his belt and found he couldn't lift his hand.

It was then he realised that his cockyness, which was shared by fellow Americans, probably would have cost lives if they had sent astronauts to Mars because the period of zero gravity would have been much longer. In fact there is a good chance that the deceleration rockets probably would have broken bones...

Another aspect is that... isn't this the same guy that said Russian tanks were rubbish and basically T-34s?

BTW I think it is significant who the audience was... Rainbow... make cruise missiles, anti radiation missiles and anti ship missiles...

Specifically they make Kh-58 AS-11 missiles, Kh-59M AS-18 missiles, Kh-55 AS-15 Kent missiles, and Kh-22M AS-6 missiles...

I expect that after this pep talk suddenly a new product will be revealed that takes back the lead in hypersonic missiles... ie either a 1,000km range replacement for Onyx/Kh-22M/Granit, or something else.

GarryB wrote:Another aspect is that... isn't this the same guy that said Russian tanks were rubbish and basically T-34s?

That was the General Staff Makarov and the Russian Army Chief.

Infact Rogozin snubbed the General Staff when he said we dont need T-90 and Rogozin said that it was not just he who made such decisions and told him to shut up.

Hypersonic Weapons are needed , does not matter if US has it or not .....its just a logical step forward from supersonic weapon.

Lets hope when he says behind they are not far behind and have some thing in development individually or jointly with India which shows up soon.

I still see it as a bit of a pep talk, which if backed up with money will probably lead to a few new weapons being revealed.

Hypersonic weapons are hardly new... S-200, S-300, S-300V, S-400 and S-500 are all hypersonic weapons and are able to intercept targets flying at hypersonic speeds.

The next Russian bomber will not be hypersonic as that would be too expensive...

I rather suspect the only hypersonic things the Russians actually could use are long range anti ship and land attack missiles and ICBM/SLBM warheads... and we know they are already working on those.

The technology will need a decade or so to mature before we see practical manned hypersonic aircraft... if not more.

UAV and UCAVs might be interesting applications for hypersonic engine technology too... you can build a nuclear bomb the size of a 152mm artillery shell, so making an FAB-50 sized nuke should not be a big problem... a long sleek UCAV able to fly at mach 10 that can be filled with 1 ton of TN-50s (ie 20 nukes) that could be released as it flys along would be a very potent strategic weapon... Even in conventional warfare a 50kg bomb should be sufficient for most targets if accuracy is good enough and with Glonass guided weapons for the most part it should be.

Hypersonic Weapons are needed , does not matter if US has it or not .....its just a logical step forward from supersonic weapon.

The Soviets wasted a lot of money matching the US and then having to work out what to do with what they made...

Russia needs to look at what it needs and wants and then decide what to do. Development of scramjets will be useful for a range of applications and the potential for a space plane would make such development directions useful too, but a hypersonic strategic bomber is ridiculous... there is no point racing to your enemies territory so your bombers arrive at the same time as your ICBMs or SLBMs or perhaps even before they do to a fully operational air defence network.

Reducing the cost of getting to space on the other hand would be a very valuable goal.

Sivathanu Pillai, chief executive officer of the Russia-India joint venture BrahMos Aerospace said in Moscow yesterday that the BRAHMOS hypersonic missile would be ready for flight testing in 2017.The new missiles would be capable of flying at speeds of Mach 5-Mach 7.The new missile will be made in three variants — ground-launched, airborne, and sea-launched.

The real step forward for Brahmos II is the engines.

Going from Ramjet to Scramjet is like moving from propeller to turbojet engine.

The difference is that when going from propeller to jet engine the barrier was the speed of sound that required quite a few design changes to aircraft to allow supersonic flight... further development of jet engines improved power and fuel efficiency to the point where supersonic speed became possible.

With Scramjets the barrier is the heat barrier.

Most jet engines choke on supersonic airflow... the fire goes out and a jet engine with no fire is no longer an engine... it is dead weight.

A Scramjet engine or supersonic combustion jet engine can burn fuel supersonically which means there is no practical upper limit to their potential flight speed up to and beyond speeds needed to leave the atmosphere.

On a conventional supersonic aircraft like the Mig-31 there is a complex air intake system that can open and close to change the air flow to the engine. On takeoff or during low speed flight the intake is opened wide to allow the maximum amount of air into the engine to produce thrust. At high speed however the intake is narrowed to reduce the amount of air going into the air intake so less air enters and as it enters it expands and slows down to subsonic speed before it hits the engine... even at mach 2.83.

The SR-71 uses a different trick to fly fast... very simply there are air tubes that go around the engine so when it is flying at very high speed only a tiny amount of air goes through the engines and the vast majority bypasses the engines but with fuel added it acts like a ramjet engine.

With a Mig-31 or Mig-25 the limit on top speed is the engines... if you replaced those big engines with smaller more efficient jet engines but had a scramjet down the aircraft centreline and used the turbojet engines to get airborne and to altitude and then closed off their intakes and opened the scramjet intake then your flight speed would become airframe limited... and that is mainly due to the heat barrier... the temperature at which you aircraft or scramjet engines components lose their structural integrity because of temperature.

Mindstorm , BTW how is Arclight program for USN different from Zircon-S for Russian Navy.

Both are hypersonic program so Russian Navy should have some form of Hypersonic Missile similar to Arc Light by end of decade isnt it ?

Mindstorm , BTW how is Arclight program for USN different from Zircon-S for Russian Navy.

Completely different concepts Austin.

I could respond by rewriting your question in this way :

" Dr. A.S. Pillai how is Arclight program for USN different from BrahMos II program for Indian Navy ?
Both are hypersonic program so Indian Navy should have some form of Hypersonic Missile similar to Arc Light by end of decade isnt it ?"

Mindstorm Brahmos 2 is a tactical system not having a range of more than 300 km.

And Zircon-S has been mentioned as having a range of ~ 1000 km.

If you mean Zircon-S would use a Scramjet Engine and would thus be Air Breathing Cruise Missile compared to Arclight which is Boost Glide Hypersonic Platform using Ballistic Flight then i understand the technical difference there.

But Zircon-S would do Mach 5 - 7 compared to Arclight Mach 12 reentry speed which may get reduced as it enters atmosphere but perhaps not much it would still remain hypersonic.

Bottom line is both are hypersonic platform although Arclight has a longer legs and uses different concept.

Hopefully the Russians are not sleeping and are working on similar Arc light like concept.

The head of tactical missile bureau once mentioned that the next goal with scramjet would be to hit Mach 12-13

Mindstorm Brahmos 2 is a tactical system not having a range of more than 300 km.

And Zircon-S has been mentioned as having a range of ~ 1000 km.

BrahMos II will have only theoretically a range within MTCR limits - an obstacle existing ,i remember to you, exclusively for the Russian side of the joint project.... - ,but we all say that the requirements dictated by Indian Department of Defence are for a missile with a range at least double in respect to actual land based BrahMos (and....not, here we don't talk of 290 km ).

I think that you vastly underestimate the simply jaw-dropping rate of scientific grow in this field of your Nation and theirs ambition not last the realization - in particular in the wills of Defence Research Development Organisation, just of that high-hypersonic strategic delivery system with planetary range on the necessity of which i have often talked here (and try to guess the collaboration and data exchange with what Institutes have persuaded them of the ultimate feasibility of a similar weapon system....).
I don't say nothing new recalling that less than a months ago some further details of the requirements for BrahMos II project has been revealed by Dr. A.S. Pillai

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/264206/india-have-hypersonic-brahmos-ii.html

"The mission was to develop a multi-target, anti-ship/anti-land targets missile which travelling at a hypersonic speed (at a speed of ‘Mach 7), can “deliver the warhead, assess the destruction of target, come back and get ready to go again,” Pillai said, adding that the “Brahmos-II project” was also a joint venture with the Russians like the Brahmos-I.......unique about ‘Brahmos-II’ was that India will have the lead in this hypersonic missile technologically with multiple versions"

Austin you can easily understand that this type of approach ,representing a "non plus ultra" under a scientific point of view at planetary level ,( and having, as its rational basis, exactly the same technical factors that i have called in question to explain the huge material and economic convenience of an hypersonic payload delivery system over a pure hypersonic missile ) is completely irreconcilable with a missile with 290 km of range.
But wanting to go even further ,i could add this question :
"Austin, do you truly believe that , if a major war would erupt between India and Pakistan or India and China ,Indian Army and Navy BrahMos will strike targets only within 290 km ? "

Those type of "soft limiters" work very well with smaller players in the international arms market ,but for a Nation with the Rocket Science knowledges of today India (moreover knowing anything, up to single components, of the missile in question ) them are practically not-existing.

If you mean Zircon-S would use a Scramjet Engine and would thus be Air Breathing Cruise Missile compared to Arclight which is Boost Glide Hypersonic Platform using Ballistic Flight then i understand the technical difference there.

But Zircon-S would do Mach 5 - 7 compared to Arclight Mach 12 re-entry speed which may get reduced as it enters atmosphere but perhaps not much it would still remain hypersonic.

Exactly Austin, right to the point ,but i want also to remark that this one not only represent a fundamental difference under a strict technical point of view but also under a more extensive concept of employment : balistic propelled hypersonic gliders ,such as Archlight, can be (if ever realized by USA) surely used for truly devastating stand off attacks against fixed high paying targets like Command centers, big radar stations, ammo depots, important communication relays etc....(the role now occupied in US Navy by BGM-109) but for ,by now, unavoidable aerodynamics limits similar hypersonic gliders cannot be used against moving targets like ships or mobile air defence elements.

You can easily realize that BrahMos 2 or Zircon-S will occupy a completely different role : them will ,primarily, be employed by ships to quickly and reliably destroy enemy naval surface unities ,not to attack from sea opponent's key C4 installations ; attempting a similar comparison would not be different than imaging to confront a BGM-109 "Tomahawk" with a P-1000 "Vulkan"...weapons with completely different CONOPS.

Hopefully the Russians are not sleeping and are working on similar Arc light like concept.

Sleeping ?
Arc light ,if ever relized ,will represent at best an extremely simplified and vastly scaled down version of a kind of top-end weaponry already completed and operative in Russia since several years ; the only true pros of Arc light would be ,instead, its not strategic dimension capable to increase the ductility of employment ,the modularity and the number of missiles carried by any platform and, naturally, to render possible its employment also in not full scale wars against primary enemies.

Mindstorm wrote:Those type of "soft limiters" work very well with smaller players in the international arms market ,but for a Nation with the Rocket Science knowledges of today India (moreover knowing anything, up to single components, of the missile in question ) them are practically not-existing.

There's a good "legal" argument to be made that India has the industrial base and the sci-tech know-how to be able to cooperate with Russia without the MTCR coming into play.

All of which has nothing to do with the third most amusing mobile missile system the Russians have come up with!

There's a good "legal" argument to be made that India has the industrial base and the sci-tech know-how to be able to cooperate with Russia without the MTCR coming into play.

In reality by part of a Nation signatory of MTCR, no strict legal basis exist at regulate export of weapons outside its established limits, simply because MTCR is not legally binding, that naturally don't cancel that the contravention of similar important agreement will generate repercussions ,under a diplomatic and military point of view, even greater and worse than those generated by the mere break of the legal terms of military equipment contract.

The terms of the question previously described are much more simple.
SOM try to image that tomorrow USA would start a joint project with India for the production of a new improved missile on the basis of JASSM ,ok ?
Its range become theoretically frozen at 290 km ,but Indian DRDO (i repeat India not Ghana, with the due respect for Ghana) know and master any single component and the scientific know-how behind the design and realization of each of them.
Now the simple question : How much chance ...if any ....would exist that the India-USA improved version of JASSM resulting will have effectively a range of 290 km and with limited payload ?
We talk here of a process hundreds of times more efficient and sure of mere retro-emgineering starting on the basis of a working sample.

I think that anyone can easily understand why Russia has ,up this time, attempted to persuade in any way its Indian friends to stall possible sale of BrahMos to any nation until a sure exportable version would be designed .

Those concerns become probably more clear in the words of Colonel-General Anatoly Mazurkevich

Mazurkevich, who heads international cooperation department of the Russian defence ministry, said that one of the reasons for Russia not keen to export this weapon, “Highly lethal for potential enemies”, is that its range could be easily extended from the current 300 km, allowed under Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).

"This is a very lethal and potent weapon system, which can upset balance of forces in any region where it may appear, be it in our neighbourhood, Indian Ocean or Latin America.
India is one thing, she is our strategic partnership and poses no military threat to Russia, but we are not keen on giving it to other countries, be it China or any other friendly nation.
We are not worried about it as we have nuclear weapons, but this (unauthorised) extension of range may pose threat not only to India but also to our other friends and allies."