Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    PAK-DA: News

    Share
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:52 am

    LMFS wrote:

    Ok... are you submitting that the weapons presented on March 1st are fake? Just asking...
    [/quote]

    They were tesed. Even if they don't work, the fact that they showed them means they have worked enough on them to have the technologies full capable in the next 10 years.

    The nuclear engine runing for 20 min means they achieved to make it fly, something the west can only dream of.

    The fact is that russian can build weapons to counter US forces pretty easily and that's something many hate to acknowledge. They prefere to point issues instead.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 2753
    Points : 2735
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Aug 05, 2018 2:22 am

    Even the americans admitted that various systems were tested with success, including Avangard.

    Just because a missile was launched 1,000km doesn't mean it cant go further.  Just because we are not informed of all tests, doesn't mean squat.

    I cant believe I have to be the one to explain this.

    Edit: Let me put into clarity to what I am saying.

    Last use of Kh-101 was at roughly 1,000km range on Bears. It was stated it was 6th time it was used in combat mission.

    So, what ranges were the previous ones? If you say its 1,000km, can you prove that they were done at 1,000km as well and not at shorter or longer ranges?
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1151
    Points : 1151
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Hole on Sun Aug 05, 2018 10:47 am

    So all are lying? Amis. Russians. French.

    AGM-86 and Kh-55 are roughly the same size and weight. Both can reach a range 0f 2.500 km. This has been tested. By both countries. Feel free to provide data that prove otherwise.

    Kh-55SM has more fuel so the range could to 3.000km. Again, this has been tested according to every expert out there.

    The greater range of the Kh-101 (this is the conventional one, not the cruise Missile with nuclear Propulsion) is do to the fact that it is longer and heavier than the Kh-55 or AGM-86. It carries much more fuel. Scalp/Storm Shadow is smaller, carries less fuel = less range. All their turbofans got roughly the same performance/fuel consumption. Its the amount of fuel which makes their range differ. Like with planes. B-1B and Tu-160 loke almost the same, but the Tu-160 is larger, carries much more fuel and therefore got a greater range.
    avatar
    bantugbro

    Posts : 19
    Points : 19
    Join date : 2013-01-20

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  bantugbro on Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:51 pm

    This thread is getting silly, so if a weapon system has been demonstrated at X km range while specs stated that it is capable of achieving even greater range of Y km, what is the fuss about that.

    For Gods sake, why would any serious military reveal each and everything regarding the performance capability of their weapon system? the intrigues shall continue, for non believers, the best place to feel the wrath of such weapon systems is to be on the receiving end prefarably somewhere in Daraa or Allepo Very Happy
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:39 pm

    Hole wrote:So all are lying? Amis. Russians. French.

    AGM-86 and Kh-55 are roughly the same size and weight. Both can reach a range 0f 2.500 km. This has been tested. By both countries. Feel free to provide data that prove otherwise.

    Kh-55SM has more fuel so the range could to 3.000km. Again, this has been tested according to every expert out there.

    Test of a Kh-555 cruise missile

    Russia conducted a new test of a Kh-555 air-launched cruise missile - a conventional version of the Kh-55, which has been in service with the strategic aviation since 1981. The first test of Kh-555 was conducted in 1999 and, according to a representative of the Ministry of Defense, was accepted for service in 2004. Development of the new missile is apparently part of a plan to convert some of the strategic bombers for conventional missions. The range demonstrated by the missile in the last test is about 2000 km.

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2005/05/test_of_a_kh555_cruise_missile.shtml

    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:46 pm

    Even 2500-3000km in range is enough for tu-95 to attack any country. Most of europe can be attacked since their home bases and US can be attacked on their east coast by flying low when it is at 3500km from the coast.

    I would imprive missiles instead of making pak da.

    A stealth su-34 would have been better because it needs to go in enemy air space.

    Strategic aviation won't be used against tanks with fab-500 bombs ...
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 4:17 pm

    Isos wrote:Even 2500-3000km in range is enough for tu-95 to attack any country. Most of europe can be attacked since their home bases and US can be attacked on their east coast by flying low when it is at 3500km from the coast.

    I would imprive missiles instead of making pak da.

    A stealth su-34 would have been better because it needs to go in enemy air space.

    Strategic aviation won't be used against tanks with fab-500 bombs ...

    They would launch that missile at 2000km as that is the limit it has been tested. No one will rest their nuclear deterrent on untested capabilities. At that range a Tu-95 will be spotted and likely intercepted before it can launch at the mainland US. It is too slow and has a massive RCS. A Tu-160 can do it thanks to its speed, get in and out before they can intercept you. An Su-34 can be used against Europe but is still not as survivable as it cannot supercruise like a Tu-160. We need three more squadrons of Tu-160 to replace Tu-95 and four squadrons of Su-57 to replace Tu-22M3. If we get this PAK-DA can be delayed for a long time but still maintain a regional and global nuclear triad. As you saw from the resent test of Su-57, they are placing it in the nuclear deterrent role. It is not so strange as Rafale is also used in this way by France.

    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 05, 2018 5:05 pm

    Tu-22M can launched kh-22. They are there to counter us carrier in a conventional way. You can't replace them by su-57 and kh-35.

    For nuclear deterence missiles should be improved instead of their carriers.

    Supercruising is good when you leave the area. When you go on the target protected by air force, supersonic speed isn't a help. You need either stand off missiles or capacities to attack the other fighters. Su-34 has both. Tu-160 has long range missiles only but too expensive to use it every day during war as non strategic tool.

    They would launch that missile at 2000km as that is the limit it has been tested. No one will rest their nuclear deterrent on untested capabilities.

    Nuclear tests are forbiden so most of nuclear warehead would be used untested. Russia has 5000 wareheads so they can launch them from even mig-29A if needed.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 5:28 pm

    Isos wrote:Tu-22M can launched kh-22. They are there to counter us carrier in a conventional way. You can't replace them by su-57 and kh-35.

    For nuclear deterence missiles should be improved instead of their carriers.

    Supercruising is good when you leave the area. When you go on the target protected by air force, supersonic speed isn't a help. You need either stand off missiles or capacities to attack the other fighters. Su-34 has both. Tu-160 has long range missiles only but too expensive to use it every day during war as non strategic tool.

    Nuclear tests are forbiden so most of nuclear warehead would be used untested. Russia has 5000 wareheads so they can launch them from even mig-29A if needed.

    To integrate and test missiles on a new carrier costs tens of millions of dollars.  It is not plug and play like a USB.  It is like a USB device with no supported drivers.

    Supercruise is important to extend range and limit the exposure at the point of launch.  The primary mission of strategic aviation is to get their nuclear payloads launched, after that is just a test of survival, the mission is complete.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 823
    Points : 817
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  LMFS on Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:32 pm

    Without wanting to get deep this in this controversy, I would very much doubt any state would reveal the exact range of their strategic CM, either by statements or by publishing test information. So this is an issue we cannot clarify here I'm afraid. And if any of you actually can, then you should not say absolutely anything I guess... angel

    @Vladimir79:

    - How and why should the Su-57 replace the Tu-22M3? The later is much bigger, longer ranged and still survivable due to stand-off weapons + speed. In fact I see it as one of the unique and highest value assets in RuAF. It is in fact going to be modernized for many more years of service apparently
    - Care pointing out where the nuclear role of Su-57 has been declared? I missed that one, thanks
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1444
    Points : 1605
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:24 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:Feel free to issue the test of a Kh-55 at 3000km.  Just because it was accepted as fact doesn't make it so.  I have monitored these tests for years and the launch platform is never more than 2000km away from the target range.  I will tell you why I am going off on this now, the China thread about cruise missiles based on obsolete French turbojets going 1500km is rather insulting to my intelligence.  This is less so as our turbofans are far more advanced than China but they do not exceed the French in fuel efficient turbofan ratios.  We have to partner with Safran just to get the SaM146 efficient enough to make the SSJ100 competitive.  If we have a 2400kg cruise missile that can fly 5000km where is our leap in technology that makes it possible?  

    Give me your engineering rationale explaining how:
    1) civilian turbofans are analogous to cruise missile engines
    2)Russia, which has been a world leader in long range cruise missiles since at least the 70s(with the Granat, Granit, and P-500), is more primitive than whatever the puny french MIC can make.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:22 pm

    China thread about cruise missiles based on obsolete French turbojets

    Didn't they got kh-55 from ukraine just like iran did in the 90s ?
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:24 pm

    LMFS wrote:Without wanting to get deep this in this controversy, I would very much doubt any state would reveal the exact range of their strategic CM, either by statements or by publishing test information. So this is an issue we cannot clarify here I'm afraid. And if any of you actually can, then you should not say absolutely anything I guess... angel

    @Vladimir79:

    - How and why should the Su-57 replace the Tu-22M3? The later is much bigger, longer ranged and still survivable due to stand-off weapons + speed. In fact I see it as one of the unique and highest value assets in RuAF. It is in fact going to be modernized for many more years of service apparently
    - Care pointing out where the nuclear role of Su-57 has been declared? I missed that one, thanks


    They don't make the engines anymore and they aren't developing new ones. You can only overhaul and rebuild engines so many times. By 2030 the last should be removed from service and be replaced by the full fleet of Tu-160M2s. Of course the timetable of the Tu-160 has been pushed back several years and to expect 50 new aircraft in 12 years is highly unlikely. There is evidence the Su-57 is being converted to the nuclear strike role.

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-su-57-pak-fa-stealth-fighter-nuclear-strike-aircraft-24368





    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:27 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:

    Give me your engineering rationale explaining how:
    1) civilian turbofans are analogous to cruise missile engines
    2)Russia, which has been a world leader in long range cruise missiles since at least the 70s(with the Granat, Granit, and P-500), is more primitive than whatever the puny french MIC can make.

    It was more about French expertise on the matter of compression ratios which is why we teamed up with Safran. They are also home of Microturbo, the largest cruise missile engine manufacturer in the world.

    If you can call Mach 2 missiles cruise missiles, they are not built for range.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:30 pm

    Isos wrote:

    Didn't they got kh-55 from ukraine just like iran did in the 90s ?

    Probably, but they didn't get the know how to build it. If they can't reverse engineer the big turbofans it is even harder to do micro turbofans.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:49 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    Isos wrote:

    Didn't they got kh-55 from ukraine just like iran did in the 90s ?

    Probably, but they didn't get the know how to build it.  If they can't reverse engineer the big turbofans it is even harder to do micro turbofans.  

    They also have engineers working on that field. Copying is not what they only can do. They can look how it is made, what material is used and then try something by their own. Well it won't be as good as wesern or russian but if it is good enough and with lot of fuel it can go far. They manage to build subs, ships, ICBM ... why not a motor.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 9:55 pm

    Isos wrote:

    They also have engineers working on that field. Copying is not what they only can do. They can look how it is made, what material is used and then try something by their own. Well it won't be as good as wesern or russian but if it is good enough and with lot of fuel it can go far. They manage to build subs, ships, ICBM ... why not a motor.

    It has to do with the blades. The smaller the blade the harder it is to dissipate heat. China has not been very successful in this material science.
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1444
    Points : 1605
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 21
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sun Aug 05, 2018 11:06 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:



    If you can call Mach 2 missiles cruise missiles, they are not built for range.  

    Yes a cruise missile is any long range ground attack missile. Not built for range? Logic is not your strong point. AShMs are by definition built for range, and the P-700/P-500 are some of the best/if not the best in that department. If they can make a mach 2.5 missile go 600km, there sure as F can make a mach 0.8 one go 5 times as far today.

    Also you left out the Granat in your comment.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun Aug 05, 2018 11:18 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Yes a cruise missile is any long range ground attack missile. Not built for range? Logic is not your strong point. AShMs are by definition built for range, and the P-700/P-500 are some of the best/if not the best in that department. If they can make a mach 2.5 missile go 600km, there sure as F can make a mach 0.8 one go 5 times as far today.  

    Also you left out the Granat in your comment.

    The definition of a cruise missile is a guided missile that flies at moderate speed and low altitude, hence none of your missiles meet the criterion. Logic dictates you know the definition first.
    avatar
    LMFS

    Posts : 823
    Points : 817
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  LMFS on Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:07 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:They don't make the engines anymore and they aren't developing new ones.  You can only overhaul and rebuild engines so many times.  By 2030 the last should be removed from service and be replaced by the full fleet of Tu-160M2s.  Of course the timetable of the Tu-160 has been pushed back several years and to expect 50 new aircraft in 12 years is highly unlikely.  There is evidence the Su-57 is being converted to the nuclear strike role.

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-su-57-pak-fa-stealth-fighter-nuclear-strike-aircraft-24368
    Thanks,

    the Tu-22M3M will apparently receive the modernized engines from the Tu-160 (some sources say it wont be re-engined though)

    https://rg.ru/2018/04/25/reg-pfo/rossiia-podnimet-v-nebo-novyj-raketonosec.html
    https://rg.ru/2018/04/28/reg-pfo/obnovlennyj-raketonosec-tu-22m3m-poluchit-osnastku-tu-160.html

    Sources also mention this update will push their operative life several decades to the right, which only makes sense once only the modernization work alone will take many years to update the entire fleet.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2340
    Points : 2357
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  eehnie on Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:00 pm

    It has been published multiple times that modernized Tu-22, modernized Tu-160 and Tu-PAK-DA will share engines. LMFS is right the life of the Tu-22 will be exctended long time.

    In the refered to the Strategic bombers Il-38 and Tu-95/142 will be replaced before, very likely also with the Tu-PAK-DA.

    I do not agree with this approach about testing public data used to decrease the range data for some models of missiles. It is not right to infer from the public testing data that a weapon can not surpass the range reached in a test (most of the tests are not tests of range), as consequence it is not right to say that the range of a missile is limited to the range used in the data publised about tests.

    The result of all this, is that the real ranges are likely more near of the official or semiofficial given data, by sources like V Putin, than of the maximum data from tests published by the media.

    I find weird the disrespect to the words of V Putin, being one of the few persons with full access to the testing results of every weapon. Instead full credit seems to be given to the media publishing testing data.

    Also I find weird that this approach be used only with Russian and Chinese weapons.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:47 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Yes a cruise missile is any long range ground attack missile. Not built for range? Logic is not your strong point. AShMs are by definition built for range, and the P-700/P-500 are some of the best/if not the best in that department. If they can make a mach 2.5 missile go 600km, there sure as F can make a mach 0.8 one go 5 times as far today.  

    Also you left out the Granat in your comment.

    The definition of a cruise missile is a guided missile that flies at moderate speed and low altitude, hence none of your missiles meet the criterion.  Logic dictates you know the definition first.  

    Name doesn't matter. They used oniks for ground attack role in syria. A mach 3 missile is really hard to intercept if all your air defence soldiers aren't ready for it.

    At mach 3 you only need 20 min to go 1000km. Alerting air defence forces, moving Patriot semi mobile system and deploying it takes longer than 20 min. Intercepting it with a fighter is hopless.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2539
    Points : 3419
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:23 pm

    eehnie wrote:It has been published multiple times that modernized Tu-22, modernized Tu-160 and Tu-PAK-DA will share engines. LMFS is right the life of the Tu-22 will be exctended long time..

    It was decided it was too expensive to integrate the Tu-160 engines into the airframe so it will get a more conservative modernisation.

    In the refered to the Strategic bombers Il-38 and Tu-95/142 will be replaced before, very likely also with the Tu-PAK-DA.

    Tu-95, Tu-22, Tu-160 were all supposed to be replaced by PAK-DA. It looks like the future of strategic aviation will rely on the new Tu-160 which is fine if they can get the numbers on time. This of course is my worry with all of the delays.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 1133
    Points : 1131
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:54 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Vladimir79 wrote:
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Yes a cruise missile is any long range ground attack missile. Not built for range? Logic is not your strong point. AShMs are by definition built for range, and the P-700/P-500 are some of the best/if not the best in that department. If they can make a mach 2.5 missile go 600km, there sure as F can make a mach 0.8 one go 5 times as far today.  

    Also you left out the Granat in your comment.

    The definition of a cruise missile is a guided missile that flies at moderate speed and low altitude, hence none of your missiles meet the criterion.  Logic dictates you know the definition first.  

    Name doesn't matter. They used oniks for ground attack role in syria. A mach 3 missile is really hard to intercept if all your air defence soldiers aren't ready for it.

    At mach 3 you only need 20 min to go 1000km. Alerting air defence forces, moving Patriot semi mobile system and deploying it takes longer than 20 min. Intercepting it with a fighter is hopless.

    Your information is inaccurate they fired KA-61's which is the air to a ground version of the Onik's, not the anti-ship Oniks you can fire the 800's at land targets sure but they would be awfully inaccurate and chances are would do shit against precision strike, also the range of an Oniks at most is like 600KM.

    You are trying to describe a very limited scenario where the bombers would be allowed to freely close such a small gap and launch, they would be detected long before they reach their deployment zone and would be countered, Detection is a thing and Russia has no means of hiding it's aircraft like some godly ninja.

    No one does, just some aircraft are good at hiding from certain radars.

    Fighters cannot carry the oinks mind you, only the submarine version is 600km the aircraft version is short range like 400km the bombers or aircraft would be long intercepted before that point. Reality doesn't work like your head thinks things would go, Russia would never have such free reign air wise in a large scale war and that missile only goes 2.5M not 3.0M that is a big difference.

    It lacks the production capacity and the sheer numbers to overpower Nato's AF. Like Putin said "you'd have to me insane to take on NATO" against some third world banana republic SURE Russia could achieve the type of air superiority you are thinking.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2454
    Points : 2448
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Isos on Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:31 pm

    Your information is inaccurate they fired KA-61's which is the air to a ground version of the Onik's

    It was launched from a bastion p ground launcher. You saying bullshit.

    If a bastion P can launch it, a sub can do it. Detecting a sub 500km away is hard if not impossible for most militaries in the world.

    The range are increasing with better tech. Today it is 600km for oniks tmr it will be 1000km for hypersonic missiles.

    Sponsored content

    Re: PAK-DA: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:13 am