Russian Cruise Missiles Thread

It says two missiles, one with a conventional warhead and one with a nuke, and both with a flight range of 5,000km will be used on the ship. The Kh-101 and Kh-102 are the only missiles that fit that description... unless they dropped them and developed from scratch two new missiles with the same general performance as the two missiles they dropped.

I would expect what really happened was that they did the testing and found they did what was expected of them and then there were no further reports about them simply because testing was done but there were no platforms ready for them to be operational yet till the backlog of Kh-55s were turned into Kh-555s and they could start making the larger longer ranged Kh-10x missiles to replace them.

AFAIK the Russian navy withdrew its nuclear weapons from operational vessels, but that due to their current reduced presence at sea that they are changing that policy to add nuclear weapons to redress the current imbalance between the Russian fleet and NATOs fleet.
Therefore it makes sense that they would be deployed to sea on ships and subs first.

I understand that the USUK vertical launch system the Russian navy has introduced for its ships from corvette size and larger has the option of firing Kh-101/102s in addition to Brahmos/Oniks, and the Club family of subsonic and supersonic land attack and anti ship missiles plus the the ship launched anti sub missile the 91RE2 which is a ballistic missile with a torpedo payload.

Of course, you have the Vulkan.

The Vulkan is an antiship missile with no land attack version and its range is considerably less than 5,000km.... more like 1,000km.

Nice Interview , Talks about new Hypersonic Missile , Kondor-E and many others

Interview: Director-General of the Military Industrialization Corporation 'NPO Mashinostroyenia' Alexander Leonov

Just came across an old but very interesting news on Kh-555

Strategic Missile Carriers Reequipped

Kh-555 cruise missile is much more accurate than its predecessor

To fly through the window and hit the target from the distance of over two thousand km is the mission that may be completed by Kh-555 - Russia’s newest airborne cruise missile, developed by Tactical Missiles Corporation. It may take place of the cruise missiles with nuclear warheads, which are in service with the Russian strategic air forces today.

Held in mid-August, the tests of a new missile were attended by President Vladimir Putin. According to the military men, the event has put an end to the U.S. monopoly in the field of high-precision long-range missiles. From now on, Russia’s Air Force will be able to use such weapons to solve any tasks, including destruction of international terrorists’ camps.

The way Kh-555 missile came on the scene was a sort of sensation. Russian defence enterprises have not come up with new strategic weapon systems for a long time. As the experts say, it is both expensive and useless. The prospects of the armed conflict between Moscow and Washington, which made the states constantly perfect their offensive weapons, have faded away, and nuclear weapons cannot be used against terrorists.

All this could make useless the most advanced domestic bomber aircraft Tu-160 with Kh-55 long-range nuclear missiles. The operating range of a nuclear warhead weapon compensates on inaccurate firing. Equipped with non-nuclear warhead, the missile will be no good.

“It took us little time to make a new non-strategic cruise missile on the old platform, - general designer of Raduga JSC Igor Seleznev said to Izvesiya correspondent. – By using Kh-55 as a basis for a new missile we have spent half of what we could if we started from scratch”.

Kh-555 and its predecessor have only formal resemblance. According to Seleznev, Kh-555 is equipped with a different engine, homing head and warhead. Thanks to additional fuel tanks the missile range is increased to approximately 3.5 thousand km. It may fly at different altitudes and even skim above the ground surface. Its homing head receives the data both from its own optic-electronic navigation system and the GLONASS multichannel satellite navigation system. Instead of compact nuclear charge (130 kg) it may be equipped with armor-piercing, shaped-charge, fragmentation or high-explosive warhead with the weight of over 350 kg.

Air mission data is fed into the Kh-555 missile and autopilot of the bomber aircraft before the flight. After missile launch the crew only controls the way the mission is being carried out. In August all four Kh-555 missiles launched from Tu-160 hit the target during the tests. The military men say that two of them flew through the window and the other two – through the door of a deserted house at the Pemboy test site near Vorkuta, where according to scenario the terrorists were hiding.

Kh-55 is the second adopted for service missile system, developed at a well-shaped domestic defence holding - Tactical Missiles Corporation. Not so long ago the Black Sea Fleet was armed with the Bal-E mobile coastal anti-ship missile system with the Kh-35 cruise missiles. The latter development is unique. It is proved by the fact that its homing head may be purchased by the U.S. for the Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

A photo:




The idea behind the Kh-65 was pretty much the same idea behind the Kh-555... they were both conventional alternative uses for former strategic cruise missiles.

The kh-65 was an anti ship missile and the Kh-555 was a conventionally armed land attack missile.

Of course now the Navy seems to have decided on the Klub family of anti ship and land attack missiles (along with the Oniks), and I would think with their new conventional theatre and strategic attack roles the Bears and Blackjacks will likely have lots of Kh-555s to fill their storage caches... the anti ship Kh-65 probably never got fully developed, though it was offered for export at airshows... its 500-600km range would mean it could not be for export anyway.

Considering the new model of the Uran (i believe it is called Uranium now) has twice the flight range at about 240km in a 650kg missile that would likely be much better than a 500-600km range ex-cruise missile.

I think this conversion option will not be adopted as the kh-555 has longer range in the land attack configuration, and so does the land attack and presumably domestic anti ship missiles too.

Interesting.

The Kh-55, which the Kh-555 is based on had saddle fuel tanks added to boost its range from 2,000km to 3,000km, it is interesting that the Kh-555 can achieve 3,500km.

I suspect it has a newer motor that is rather more fuel efficient.

The purpose of the Kh-555 is to make use of all the Kh-55 missiles now that they are introducing the Kh-101/102 missiles which are larger and heavier but have a range of over 5,000km.

With new conventional roles it makes sense to develop the Kh-555 as it creates a ready supply of weapons and solves the problem of what to do with the old missiles in one go.

The original Kh-55 has a range of 2500 km , now the new Kh-555 has a range of 3500 Km with jetissable CFT.

If you read the news it says the only thing common between the two is the external shape remains the same else every thing is changed from within.

The increase in range is likely to be achieved by a combination of factors , more effecient turbofan engine , additonal fuel tanks which means more fuel , perhaps better fuel with more energy , much lighter electronics compared to the one used in 80' , low electricity requirement for more modern electronics , better packaging density which means more space for larger warhead which is ~ 400 kg for KH-555.

They managed to double the range of original Kh-35 Antiship missile in the modernised Kh-35UE without increasing its dimension or weight and using the same warhead size.

The original Kh-55 has a range of 2500 km , now the new Kh-555 has a range of 3500 Km with jetissable CFT.

Where did you get that info?

My information is that the original Kh-55, which was round, was tested and had a range of 2,000km. The goal, however was to match US missiles which had ranges of 2,500km or more with different flight profile options. The solution was saddle tanks... which are not jettisonable, that changed the external shape of the missile to roughly triangular in cross section. This extended the new missiles range to 3,000km. The new missile was called Kh-55S or something.

ie:



The triangular shape improved body lift and aerodynamic shaping... in addition to carrying a lot more fuel.

The small jet engines were made in the Ukraine at Motor Sich, but the new motors for the Kh-555 and the Kh-101/102 and now other missiles are now made by Saturn, and the new more powerful helicopter engines formerly made at Motor Sich, will begin production at Klimov in 2014.

Saw it on Yefim Gordon book , the KH-55 AFAIK has a range of 2500 km , i think those ranges also depends a lot of profile , if it flies low for most part of its flight then range might just get reduces to half or less of that.

The CFT is Jettisable that what Yefim Gordon mentions , I think it makes sense instead of carrying the dead weight along.

The CFT is Jettisable that what Yefim Gordon mentions , I think it makes sense instead of carrying the dead weight along.

A conformal fuel tank that can be jettisoned would weigh more than one that wouldn't.

The enlarged tanks would not be very heavy at all, in fact the fuel they carry would be much heavier than the extra structure used.

The added complication of making the conformal tanks jettisonable would be hard to justify, and as you can see above, they are not huge bulky tanks.

It is hard to find decent info on Russian and Soviet cruise missiles... it wasn't that long ago that some western publications stated that the land and sea launched long range cruise missiles were based on the Kh-55.

Conformal tanks are a drastic measure to gain a mere 500km in range.

Garry I just told you what is there in Yefim Gordon Book , You can buy the latest Russian Air Power or even Russian Strategic Aviation and you will find it , the later is a good book for a Russian Aviation fan like you.

I dont think adding a jetisable CFT is something hard or complicated or adds weight , specially if the cruise missile is designed to use fuel from CFT first and then its internal fuel , carrying the dead weight of CFT is a PITA for the remaining flight adds weight and drag better to jettision it.

I really dont know if the red missile shown there is a Kh-555 or some Kh-55 variant refered to as Kh-55SM , KH-555 is a deep modernisation and is virtually a new missile in old cover.

Jet engines are not efficient at low altitudes, so any cruise missile with a range of over 1,000km will fly quite a lot of the first few legs of its flight at medium altitude.

Former nuclear armed cruise missiles converted to conventional warheads either gain a lot of weight, or more commonly lose a lot of range... just the difference between having to tote a 400kg conventional warhead compared to a nuke warhead that might weigh 100kgs or so, makes a huge difference in fuel efficiency.

Add to that the extra guidance seekers and systems needed for the greatly increased accuracy requirements and you are carrying a lot more dead weight.

The idea of using conformal fuel tanks is to minimise drag.

Properly designed they could actually improve performance in generating some body lift.

The Kh-55 is the original round missile, the Kh-55SM has external fuel tanks added as conformal tanks to extend range. For a long time the Kh-555 was credited with the same range as the Kh-55SM it was based on, but because of the article above we now know it has the longer range of 3,500km.

The Kh-55 and Kh-55SM are Soviet missiles with motors designed and built in the Ukraine. The Kh-555 is a post soviet breakup development with a new Russian engine that is more powerful and more fuel efficient than the older missiles, which probably explains the range increase. I doubt they completely redesigned the internal structure of the missile as the idea of the Kh-555 is that of a conventional weapon that is cheaper because it is a modification of a missile they have large stocks of so the idea is to use up existing air frames, so it would have to be significant increases in performance of the electronics that likely freed up a lot of internal space that was likely used for more fuel.

Whether the Kh-55 had a range of 2,000km or 2,500km is not really important so I think it is best to agree to disagree on that, what is important is that which ever range it was, it was deemed necessary to add conformal fuel tanks to extend the flight range of the missile to the agreed upon distance of 3,000km.

Its really difficult to say what was the warhead weight of Kh-55 Nuclear version since it remains a very classified subject. It could easily be 400 kg with the warhead and all its fail safe electronics etc etc. And it simply got replaced by conventional warhead of 400 kg.

Comparing electronics to dead weight of CFT is not right , Electronics is like an essential dead weight cant do without it

While CFT dead weight is non-essential after fuel is used , it will reduce drag and make the whole thing lighter so jettsioning it makes sense.

Any ways a range of 3500 km with the ability to hit a window or door is really good , nothing to joke about. I read in Yefim Book that Kh-555 electronics is similar to Kh-101 , so wont be surprised both have idential electronics in most respect and both certainly have idential warhead weight of 400 kg.

With Precision GLONASS now available , one can only imagine these missile will now be as accurate as any thing the best west has there in any part of globe.

Its really difficult to say what was the warhead weight of Kh-55 Nuclear version since it remains a very classified subject. It could easily be 400 kg with the warhead and all its fail safe electronics etc etc. And it simply got replaced by conventional warhead of 400 kg.

It says in the article I posted above...

Instead of compact nuclear charge (130 kg) it may be equipped with armor-piercing, shaped-charge, fragmentation or high-explosive warhead with the weight of over 350 kg.

Comparing electronics to dead weight of CFT is not right , Electronics is like an essential dead weight cant do without it Laughing

While CFT dead weight is non-essential after fuel is used , it will reduce drag and make the whole thing lighter so jettsioning it makes sense.

The whole point about making the conformal tanks conformal is to make them low drag in the first place... what happens if one side of tanks fails to jettison properly? Or both sides jettison, but take a wing with them?

I read in Yefim Book that Kh-555 electronics is similar to Kh-101 , so wont be surprised both have idential electronics in most respect and both certainly have idential warhead weight of 400 kg.

That is to be expected as they were pretty much both developed at about the same time, so commonality would make sense, however the Kh-101/-102 is a much larger missile with more fuel and a much longer range.

With Precision GLONASS now available , one can only imagine these missile will now be as accurate as any thing the best west has there in any part of globe.

Will certainly help, but I believe the terminal homing is optical so it can target a specific window or building.

GarryB wrote:Instead of compact nuclear charge (130 kg) it may be equipped with armor-piercing, shaped-charge, fragmentation or high-explosive warhead with the weight of over 350 kg.

All Russian Nuclear Warhead Weight Dimension yeald figures are very highly classified , so take that with a pinch or bangful of salt.

The whole point about making the conformal tanks conformal is to make them low drag in the first place... what happens if one side of tanks fails to jettison properly? Or both sides jettison, but take a wing with them?

The primary purpose of CFT is to carry additional fuel at lowest possible drag and in case of aircraft free a payload station. Still CFT can add to significant drag for aerodynamic reason but its better then a drop tank.

I am sure they must have figured out a way to Jettison it , else why would they attach a CFT , they would have simply designed a Kh-555 with fix ( not detchable ) cft type dimension , if it was aerodynamically useful.

The Kh-55 is no longer an in service weapon, and there is no obvious reason to keep the warhead weight secret.

Remember this is a weapon from the 1980s... they had 152mm artillery shells weighing 40kgs that had a nuclear yield of 10Kts.

I am sure they must have figured out a way to Jettison it , else why would they attach a CFT , they would have simply designed a Kh-555 with fix ( not detchable ) cft type dimension , if it was aerodynamically useful.

The original missile was circular and generated no lift at all.

The conformal tanks added to the Kh-55SM actually improved aerodynamics.

BTW conformal tanks on aircraft are never jettisoned in flight either.

Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on this too.

BTW Happy New Year... 2012 is here already ... here.

GarryB wrote:The Kh-55 is no longer an in service weapon, and there is no obvious reason to keep the warhead weight secret.

Says who ? The Kh-55 is the nuclear warhead cruise missile that is carried by Tu-160 and Tu-95 bomber

Try to get me any official warhead weight and yeald of weapons in use and I will owe you a beer

BTW Happy New Year... 2012 is here already ... here.

Happy New Year 2012 to you and your Family

Try to get me any official warhead weight and yeald of weapons in use and I will owe you a beer

Actually START documents require information of weapons and yields to be released... not sure about warhead weights as such though.

Says who ? The Kh-55 is the nuclear warhead cruise missile that is carried by Tu-160 and Tu-95 bomber

That is likely rapidly being replaced with Kh-101/102 missiles that are relatively cheap and easy to build.

The Kh-55 stocks will largely be replaced by Kh-555 upgrades, while the Kh-55SM might be kept in stock for Tu-95 use, as the larger Kh-101/102 are too big to fit in the rotary launcher on the Tu-95MS, but its days will be numbered too.

Except that AGM-158 JASSMs development started in 1995 and there were brochures advertising the Kh-65 at the 1992 Moscow Airshow...

If they are copied, then I guess the AGM-158 JASSM is a copy of Kh-65.

Of course Kh-65 is, as I mentioned a concept weapon designed to use up Kh-55 and Kh-55SM strategic missiles in nonstrategic roles.

I would rather suspect that the Kh-555 was found to be more useful and with a much greater range much more likely a use for the old missiles.

There were reports of a Kh-SD that was supposedly a smaller, and reduced range Kh-101/-102 that could be carried internally by the Tu-95MS and Tu-22M3, but there is not a lot of information floating around about it.
Note the Kh-101 and 102 are already stealthy long range cruise missiles with conventional and nuclear warhead options, so they are the equivalent of the Kh-55SM and Kh-555 already, but with longer range... stealthy design... and more accurate guidance.

The photo clearly shows it was developed to at least mockup form, and considering it was shown in pamphlets in 1992 suggests they probably developed it in the 1980s, however who was the user?

The Tu-160s and Bears didn't have a conventional role till after 2000, so the missile was clearly developed for the Tu-22M3 as an anti ship missile... so its likely competition was the upgraded Kh-22M.

Now the Kh-22M is a potent missile, but also very unpopular in service as its liquid fuel is really bad stuff to work with.

The reported replacement is the Kh-32 with increased speed and double the range of the older missile, but it looks externally the same as the Kh-22M.

I have recent photos of Tu-22M3s flying around with what look externally like Kh-22Ms though if the above is correct they might actually be Kh-32s.

The Kh-22M could fly at very low level or very high altitudes to fly over or under defences and had a fairly high speed of about mach 2-3. The new Kh-32 is supposed to be able to manage mach 4-5 in the diving profile.

I rather suspect the idea behind the Kh-65 was to kill two birds with one stone... to go for an alternative attack method of low, slow but stealthy and long range, while using up existing missile airframes as replacement strategic cruise missiles were already on the drawing boards at that time (Kh-101/102).

I rather suspect the Kh-65 was developed in competition with the Kh-32 and I suspect the Kh-32 won that competition... perhaps it uses safer to handle fuels and more powerful but more efficient rocket motors. (The original Kh-22M has two rocket motors with a high energy climb and acceleration rocket motor and a lower thrust sustainer motor that uses less fuel to extend operational range.)

I rather doubt the Kh-65 was fully developed in 1992, but its design parameters had clearly been defined and they were likely looking for foreign partners to help fund development like many ex-Soviet projects did at that time.

The Kh-555 probably did most to finally bury the Kh-65 as the Kh-555 uses old Kh-55 and Kh-55SM missile bodies and has a land attack capability, whereas the Kh-65 would be rather too similar to the Klub subsonic anti ship missile... which in the domestic version has a range of 2,000km.
The idea of the Kh-65 will likely live on in the mysterious Kh-SD which is supposed to be a reduced range and lighter model of the Kh-101/102, though that could in fact actually be the Kh-555 as it likely has the guidance and conventional warhead package developed for the Kh-101. (the Kh-102 has the same guidance but a nuclear warhead).