Iskander-M/K (SS-26 Stone):

https://t.me/konkretnost/17919

that is why it is not a ballistic missile and also why it has jammers and decoys and other pen aids. LikeDislike wrote:

It is a ballistic missile, unless we are talking about the maneuvering subsonic version.

Arrow wrote:

It is a ballistic missile, unless we are talking about the maneuvering subsonic version.

Not really. It has a semi-ballistic trajectory to stay low (low compared to a ballistic trajectory) which allows to use earth curvature to reduce radar detection and stay where there is enough air to manoeuvre.

Change the soft to keep a ballistic trajectory and you have a 700-800km range ballistic missile.

Not really. It has a semi-ballistic trajectory to stay low (low compared to a ballistic trajectory) which allows to use earth curvature to reduce radar detection and stay where there is enough air to manoeuvre. wrote:

Yes, that's true. The apogee of the parabola is about 50 km. The question is whether there is enough air at that altitude to maneuver the aerodynamic controls. On the other hand, at an altitude of 50 km what did they intercept it? Too high for PAC 3 etc. Too low for exoatmospheric effectors.

Iskander M and Kinzhal, despite their aeroballistic trajectory, are still ballistic missiles, I don't know where any doubts arise from.

Arrow wrote:Iskander M and Kinzhal, despite their aeroballistic trajectory, are still ballistic missiles, I don't know where any doubts arise from.

Quick question - what is thrust vectoring?

Soon as you answer that it will become clear why Iskander and Kinzhal are not ballistic missiles...

Quick question - what is thrust vectoring? Soon as you answer that it will become clear why Iskander and Kinzhal are not ballistic missiles... wrote:

Thrust vectoring only works when the rocket engine is running. The Iskander engine does not work for a time, only for a few dozen seconds. Simple. In the initial phase of flight, the Iskander can maneuver on TVC, but not in the terminal phase.

Arrow wrote:
Thrust vectoring only works when the rocket engine is running. The Iskander engine does not work for a time, only for a few dozen seconds. Simple. In the initial phase of flight, the Iskander can maneuver on TVC, but not in the terminal phase.

This is why you shouldn`t run your mouth when you`re unsure...

Read what you said, and read it again.

Arrow wrote:

Yes, that's true. The apogee of the parabola is about 50 km. The question is whether there is enough air at that altitude to maneuver the aerodynamic controls. On the other hand, at an altitude of 50 km what did they intercept it? Too high for PAC 3 etc. Too low for exoatmospheric effectors.

Neither can those interceptor manouevre at such altitudes. And this is the difference with ballistic missile which have a trajectory that can be calculate by a radar and a missile launch very prrcisely toward an intercept point. Iskander would move that point few km away in the air.

Flying mach 5 or 6 and changing course by 3 or 4 degree would oblige the interceptor to hit few Gs to composente which is quite impossible when very high.

This is what an iskander can do.

Quick question - what is thrust vectoring? Soon as you answer that it will become clear why Iskander and Kinzhal are not ballistic missiles... wrote:

Once again. Thrust vectoring on ballistic missiles is called gas-dynamic control. It is on many ballistic missiles. For example, Topol. Iskander can maneuver throughout the entire flight, but on the part without the engine on, it does it with aerodynamic controls.

Topol gas dynamic control system.

Iskander also has similar blades to control the direction of TVC thrust as well as aerodynamic rudders. The aerodynamic controls are marked.
Most missiles have TVC control. This can be done through this type of control blades in the simplest way or in other ways. Additional small engines like you have on PBV, or the entire nozzle of the rocket engine deflected in different directions. However, it is important for this control that there is engine thrust. The engine must work.
Perhaps the Iskander has some additional small gas generators that are activated for powerful maneuvers when the main engine is turned off. For example, the 9M96 have side gas generators for performing powerful maneuvers before hitting the target.

As for the tail stabilizers shown in the photo, some claim that they cannot move, which allows the missile to perform aerodynamic maneuvers on a quasi-ballistic trajectory. They claim that they are an integral part of the missile. It is hard to tell from the photo. But they are definitely moving,
Since many ballistic missile warheads were already able to perform the maneuver in the terminal phase without propulsion. For example Pershing II etc orr Iranian missiles.
? Perhaps this is done by some smaller jets that turn on in the final or middle phase of flight?  The photo shows what appear to be smaller nozzles around the main engine nozzle?

Ok thanks Mir it's great to see that they can be tilted. I'm just wondering what those little round like little jets are near the main engine?

Decoy dispensers.
The flat disruptors attached to the round base are the thrust controllers being used at the active phase of acceleration.
This missile can maneuver both at active and descending phase, using different tools.
I guess you have a good lesson from lyle6.
Fools know they know best. Wiseman knows he can learn.

Arrow wrote:
Iskander can maneuver throughout the entire flight, but on the part without the engine on, it does it with aerodynamic controls.

No it can't.
It can maneuver at active phase, and at descent - when the atmosphere is thick enough.
With an usual ballistic missile, the highest point is about 1/4th of the range.
This little fellow can use a different patterns, so it can go so much up that there is no air to maneuver, after the engine is gone.
Oka manouvered only at descending phase. Still it was good enough, as it raised so fast/hing that no western AD system can catch it even those days. It arrived at target vertically with Mach10 speed.



Tochka had the same.

The flat disruptors attached to the round base are the thrust controllers being used at the active phase of acceleration. This missile can maneuver both at active and descending phase, using different tools. I guess you have a good lesson from lyle6. Fools know they know best. Wiseman knows he can learn. wrote:

Ok thanks. I didn't deny that Iskander maneuvers throughout the entire flight section. Lyle claimed that Iskander is not a ballistic missile because it has TVC etc. I only stated that most ballistic missiles do, especially since they always maneuver during the active flight section. This is of course not ballistic flight. However, even though Iskander maneuvers, it is described as quasi-ballistic, and by the Russians themselves. Here the terminology is a bit blurred. You could say that it is some kind of hybrid of ballistic and maneuvering. Similarly, for example, SS-19 with the Avangard warhead. Where the missile and warhead maneuver throughout the entire flight section.

They're ballistic missiles because they follow a ballistic trajectory. i.e. they're not powered throughout their flight

But nowhere does it say that they can't correct their ballistic trajectory

Arrow wrote:
Lyle claimed that Iskander is not a ballistic missile

Because it is not, and leave it at the point.
He teaches you a good lesson worth remembering.
It is not a ballistic missile, because it can maneuver at both active and passive phases.
It still uses a ballistic trajectory, that can be changed/adjusted if needed.
Point.

Period.

Kiko wrote:Period.

Who has one?
...my wife ... shit ... I have some free time ...