Russian Tactical Air-to-Surface Missiles (ASM):

GarryB wrote:More important is that it wont just be scanning the horizon all the time because that would give away its location and identity to enemy forces in an enormous radius.

They have no chance other than that, otherwise they would be trivially bombed, WWII style

Would be interesting to see how they engineered the missile though... does it release the rocket section that fires up and accelerates madly towards the target in a frantic race to the finish... destroying the subsonic section in the process... or does it separate cleanly allowing the subsonic portion to continue... perhaps with a jammer or chaff and flares that might distract the air defences... or even just continue flying and fractions of a minute after the mach 3 rocket hits the ship the subsonic section smacks into the ship at 850km/h spreading its remaining fuel all over the deck and starting a fire just to rub salt into the wound...

The way it is build, the subsonic section holds the supersonic one and does not appear to have any possibility to fly further, due to shape and CoG issues...

The 3M54 should be lighter and longer ranged... the problem is that it does not seem to be.

Funny, it was the best thing available few years ago and now it seems outdated... but I see the concept specially useful for an air launched AShM. The plane could carry it very close to the ship, and if they could manage more speed to make the terminal approach even faster and with very good precision, they could reduce the size of the warhead. For instance attack the superstructure where search radars are placed and which are very delicate equipment, the ship would be rendered essentially defenceless and could be finished off on the cheap.

To be clear though having it air launched at high speed wont effect its range as much as if it was a solid rocket powered only weapon.

Yeah, it has a cruise engine, but it has also a booster that needs to take it high in the atmosphere and > 5 M, there is a lot of energy involved in placing the missile at the right altitude and flight speed.

Being flown up to altitude and reasonable speed means it its initial rocket motor boost will take it higher and faster so the scramjet motor can be used less saving rather a lot of fuel... it could gradually accelerate as it loses fuel weight using the fuel more efficiently and extend range a bit.

In less dense atmosphere at such speeds, that would mean maybe hundreds of km more.

Not really clear is it... what I am trying to say is a solid rocket motor missile is like a gun... fire it from the ground and you will get x distance for range. Take the gun up 20,000m and fire it and the same round will launch the projectile to much higher speed because of less drag and the projectile will travel much further.

Yes it is clear, I have seen the calculations and it is like that. Nevertheless, there are fast and slow burn rocket engines, slow burn is better for range because less energy is spent defeating high drag. On the other hand, in launches from sea level, you actually want the missile to be very fast very soon so it reaches less dense air asap. This is a problem a Kinzhal does not have...

It is not the same for a jet powered aircraft.... you will get a boost in range just based on how far the plane carrying you can fly, and the speed you are travelling at together with the speeds you can achieve with your solid rocket booster and scramjet, but you wont dramatically increase the actual distance the missile moves by three times like you would with a solid rocket missile.

Probably not, but we would need to see numbers and we may be surprised... drag at low altitudes and high speeds is a terrible handicap

Well the thing is that the VLS systems are currently the size they are... and where the missiles are much smaller than that means empty space that is not being used. For aircraft keeping them small is useful, but for ships and subs then you might as well make the missiles bigger to fill out the available width and length and get better performance from them. They will still fit 8 to a UKSK launcher, but having 4,500km range land attack missiles is more useful than 2,500km range land attack missiles... or 2,500km range land attack missiles with three warheads that can be dropped enroute to primary targets... perhaps delayed fuse warheads that explode 10 minutes after the missile has passed...

I still need to see whether USKS-M will be the same size than now. There is the possibility that Kalibr-M just maxes the available cell diameter and depth, there is some margin. We still don't have details on the 4500 km range missiles. Still, I am focusing in naval strike and subsonic CMs are not the best weapon for that. Maybe I have not yet figured out the real difficultly of detecting and stoping low flying missiles in reality, but what I don't doubt is that they are substantially easier for the ship's AD than high supersonic ones.

Yes, I am getting it confused... I thought Kh-50 was GZUR, but it seems to me based on its specs that Kh-50 is actually Kh-SD... a 6m long stealthy land attack cruise missile for Bears and Backfires to carry internally with a range of 1,500km or so...

Yes, Kh-SD is how Butowsky referred it

S-8L

Two different rockets on your pics ?

So a laser guided 80mm unguided rocket... nice....

Anything that can carry an 80mm rocket pod in the Russian military has the capacity to mark a target with a laser beam so effectively they are already able to carry and use this weapon...

Nice.

Wonder how cheap they can make them for...

Wonder if the nose ring is enough for manouvering or if it needs fin deflection too... if the nose ring is enough it could be fitted to the nose fuse pocket of any 80mm rocket with any warhead type to make them laser homing... this is perhaps similar to the 152mm artillery shell guidance system and fuse, though it uses GLONASS and this is laser homing... it could be fitted to any weapon that uses a nose mounted fuse...

This means you still have to aim the weapons towards their targets but it should make precise hits much easier to achieve and ballistic launches with lofted rockets much more accurate and effective... increasing standoff range and making the launch aircraft much safer.

Isos wrote:Two different rockets on your pics ?

Third pic is a bomb. It´s a comparison of the "laser window" to that of the rocket.

Hole wrote:

Isos wrote:Two different rockets on your pics ?

Third pic is a bomb. It´s a comparison of the "laser window" to that of the rocket.

The colours are the same so I thought it was two rockets. The first with in-build guidance and the bellow with a modification kit to an old rocket.

I was reading about the most recent KH-31 PD missiles. When launched at 15000m alt. they have a top speed of M4.5 and range of 250 km. Is there any antimissile system that can defend against this? I was thinking about how Russia actually sold drone versions of this missile to the USA and I was thinking "why in gods name..." but then I think its actually quite findishly clever. Firstly, the USA has the bulk of high value targets to protect, secondly, knowing for sure that the Russians will sell them this weapon to pick apart makes them think OMG what on EARTH do they have that they WON'T sell us So in typical USA fashion, this sets up a multibillion dollar expenditure on ways to protect the fleet. Just in time for Russia to showcase the even more scary weapons. They must have such fun in the Kremlin yanking the Americans around. lol

The competition the American Navy ran was intended to allow them to cheaply get their hands on Moskit... is SS-N-22 Sunburn.

The Russians wanted money... it was the 1990s... so they entered an very early model Kh-31... it wasn't very good... it was the anti radiation version and was intended for high altitude flight to then dive steeply on the target radar so that the radar would likely not see it coming... it was never intended for low altitude flight to hit a ship... that was a different version optimised for flying low and fast.

The Russians got some money and the Americans got an old obsolete late 1970s version of a Russian missile.

I remember at the time pro america fanboys whining and asking why American entries for the competition didn't win and they kept showing drawings of paper projects and claiming America had had such systems for decades... obviously without ever putting them in to service or anything.

Anyway, as barely acceptable as the M-31 was they quickly realised that high speed low flying missiles made Phalanx a joke, so they hurriedly put SEA RAM into development and production... it is a mishmash of Sidewinder, Stinger, and Hellfire missiles.

At the time they were selling the Kh-31A missiles to the Americans they were ready to put Onyx into service... a very different sort of beast...

Note the Kh-31 being a tactical fighterbomber weapon rather than a naval anti ship missile means it does not have the wolf pack hunting datalinks and sophisticated guidance systems...

It is a cheap simple fast anti ship and anti radiation missile that compliments the Kh-35 Uran rather well.

They have no chance other than that, otherwise they would be trivially bombed, WWII style

That is what makes AWACS aircraft so critical... they can search without giving away the precise location of any ship.

New kh-59mkm. In the back there is also the mini kh-35 with an electro-optical homing head.

Isos wrote:New kh-59mkm. In the back there is also the mini kh-35 with an electro-optical homing head.

Not as advanced as Armement Air-Sol Modulaire/Hammer

Armement Air-Sol Modulaire/Hammer is a gliding bomb kit, they have plenty of those already... GROM for instance...


It comes in two versions, one with a solid rocket motor to deliver the 250kg HE weapon 100km to target at mach 2, or you can replace the solid rocket motor with 130kgs more HE but no rocket motor.

It is based on the Kh-38 which is a guided weapon delivering a 250kg bomb too..

owais.usmani wrote:

https://twitter.com/ndos_ru/status/1417403440469270565

What is this fantastic light diorama on the ceiling.
It feature both Su-30SM than Su-57 or just the latter?

GarryB wrote:Armement Air-Sol Modulaire/Hammer is a gliding bomb kit, they have plenty of those already... GROM for instance...


It comes in  two versions, one with a solid rocket motor to deliver the 250kg HE weapon 100km to target at mach 2, or you can replace the solid rocket motor with 130kgs more HE but no rocket motor.

It is based on the Kh-38 which is a guided weapon delivering a 250kg bomb too..

I'll explain why the Hammer is far more cutting edge than any Russian analogue.


The Hammer missile is equipped with INS/GPS/Laser Guidance. SBU-54 version of Hammer is equipped with INS/GPS/IR (infrared) guidance. It also has a powerful automatic target recognition technology which enables HAMMER to hit the target with utmost precision.

HAMMER has an unmatched capability of targeting locations that are even at 90 degrees to the direction of aircraft as it can approach its target in pure geographical coordinates which give it surgical precision wherein enemy location behind a cliff can also be targeted with ease.

It is also expensive. They quickly run out of those ammos in Libya.

Kh-59 isn't an analogue to gliding bombs but to scalp and other taurus missiles with >300km range. And it comes with differznt warheads so it can be used against ground but also naval targets contrary to nato missiles.

USSR/Russia aren't that much interested by gliding bombs since you need to fly very high to reach 100km range thus putting you in range of AD missiles or easy target for air to air missiles.

They are interested in it mainly as a weapon for drones.
Given that those class of planes have a limited payload, the possibility of increase their standoff range with a modest weight increase is worth the effort.
We are however talking about 50-100kg class ordnances.
For heaviest ones they would go toward missiles.
Note that they already have specific a Kh-59 version for use on 5th gen bomb bays.

The Hammer missile is equipped with INS/GPS/Laser Guidance. SBU-54 version of Hammer is equipped with INS/GPS/IR (infrared) guidance. It also has a powerful automatic target recognition technology which enables HAMMER to hit the target with utmost precision.

GPS.... so you need US permission/cooperation to use it?

GROM uses INS/GLONASS guidance, it is based on the Kh-38 guided air to ground missile which has Thermal imaging, Laser homing, and active radar terminal guidance options. As a glide bomb its range is rather less, but obviously the heavier warhead choices makes it more effective against most targets.

They also have a very wide range of guided glide bombs with Thermal and TV and laser homing guidance options too.

RTN wrote:

GarryB wrote:Armement Air-Sol Modulaire/Hammer is a gliding bomb kit, they have plenty of those already... GROM for instance...


It comes in  two versions, one with a solid rocket motor to deliver the 250kg HE weapon 100km to target at mach 2, or you can replace the solid rocket motor with 130kgs more HE but no rocket motor.

It is based on the Kh-38 which is a guided weapon delivering a 250kg bomb too..

I'll explain why the Hammer is far more cutting edge than any Russian analogue.


The Hammer missile is equipped with INS/GPS/Laser Guidance. SBU-54 version of Hammer is equipped with INS/GPS/IR (infrared) guidance. It also has a powerful automatic target recognition technology which enables HAMMER to hit the target with utmost precision.

HAMMER has an unmatched capability of targeting locations that are even at 90 degrees to the direction of aircraft as it can approach its target in pure geographical coordinates which give it surgical precision wherein enemy location behind a cliff can also be targeted with ease.

The real problem with glide bombs in general is how slow they are compared to conventional missiles, most western aircraft would struggle to reach Mach 2, and the height those bombs have to be released to reach 100km+ would put both the weapon and launch platform at risk of being shot down by any country with decent A2/AD. So these expensive glide bombs are effective against only 3rd world militaries and insurgents, not too useful.

I assumed that was some sort of passive radar active radar array design.... the warhead is not normally located in the tip of the nose.

The real problem with glide bombs in general is how slow they are compared to conventional missiles, most western aircraft would struggle to reach Mach 2, and the height those bombs have to be released to reach 100km+ would put both the weapon and launch platform at risk of being shot down by any country with decent A2/AD. So these expensive glide bombs are effective against only 3rd world militaries and insurgents, not too useful.

And a serious factor for France is that the solution to the threat of glide bombs was invented in the mid 1980s in the form of TOR... SA-15, and it has been upgraded and improved repeatedly since it entered service then...

In comparison a Russian equivalent has a much easier time... in the glide versions not a huge IR signature, and the powered model would be quite fast too...

According to some sources this are shaped charge warheads.

RTN wrote:

Isos wrote:New kh-59mkm. In the back there is also the mini kh-35 with an electro-optical homing head.

Not as advanced as Armement Air-Sol Modulaire/Hammer

Back in the day (1960's) the US thought that there was a missile gap in favour of the Soviets. It turned out there was a gap but it favoured the US.
Today there is a missile gap again - but this time it is in Russia's favour and it will probably stay that way for a long time.

The reason for that is because the US keeps poking it's nose in places where it shouldn't - wasting a lot of valuable R&D resources.

According to some sources this are shaped charge warheads.

Warheads are normally located between the radar/sensor/guidance system in the nose and the propulsion system in the rear.

It could also be an EMP warhead, but it is still located in a very odd place... under a radar transparent nose cone...

You are talking to a troll, who is copying&pasts the other people's materials as his own statements, you realized that, don't you?

Lots of people read this sort of claim in western publications and wonder how true they are, so they go to places like this and offer this big juicy chunk of meat for the lions to rip up and shred... as long as they don't get the feeling they are being used it is a good way of finding a balanced view on many things you might otherwise not be sure about.

Sometimes also English is not their first language so often they don't completely understand the original quote to start with which can make things interesting because sadly words are so often misused and distorted by marketing departments...