Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Kh-32 thread

    Share

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Sun Apr 01, 2018 6:35 pm

    I have been reading about this formidable missile. While all the talk now is about the latest hypersonic missiles, I really do not see any way to counter 40 of these being launched at a carrier group. Will the TU-22 continue with these or switch to Kinzhal? Or will they operate both concurrently. The KH-32 is a beast, I cannot see any ship being operational after a hit at 5000 kph from this thing. Anything smaller then a carrier would be sunk for sure.

    Hole

    Posts : 124
    Points : 126
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 41
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Hole on Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:41 am

    The trick is, they won´t need 40 to get trough to the carrier.

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:17 am

    Hole wrote:The trick is, they won´t need 40 to get trough to the carrier.


    How many TU-22s does Russia have in operation. Sure you don't need 40 but you want to overwhelm the defences and one tu-22 regiment can carry 40 so you may as well take out all the cruise missile carriers at the same time so they can't retaliate.

    Hole

    Posts : 124
    Points : 126
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 41
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Hole on Mon Apr 02, 2018 10:19 am

    Around 80 in Service + 60 - 80 in storage.

    One squadron of 10 Tu-22M3 could carry between 10 and 30 Kh-32´s. 20 should be more than enough for one carrier group.

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:14 pm

    Hole wrote:Around 80 in Service + 60 - 80 in storage.

    One squadron of 10 Tu-22M3 could carry between 10 and 30 Kh-32´s. 20 should be more than enough for one carrier group.

    They can fly out 2200 km and launch at ships 1000 km away..WOW..imagine looking at the radar in carrier group and detecting 40 targets at 5000 kph knowing they will hit in 6-10 minutes. Talk about a pant shitting scenario
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:40 am

    Indeed, but the Kh-32 is the old rocket propelled weapon, and Kinshal is the next generation scramjet powered hypersonic missile that is twice as fast and has double the range...

    Kh-32 is very under rated in the west because it looks exactly like a Kh-22M which has been in service for some time... ironically making the Backfire seem not so dangerous...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Hole

    Posts : 124
    Points : 126
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 41
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Hole on Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:20 am

    Use the Kinzhal to nail the Ticonderogas and Burkes and than use one or two Kh-32 to destroy the carrier. Or sneek a sub into position and finish the carrier with a Skhvall. KA-Bumm. Gluck, gluck.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1537
    Points : 1533
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Isos on Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:50 am

    KH 32 would be seen at very long range. It is meant to fly at 40 km in altitude while most standard missile can engage taret at max 20-30km

    The air defence on arleig burks and tico can engage it only when it dive for attack in the last part of its flight. So depend on the angle of attack it can or can't be intercepted.

    If it has a 90° attack then it will hit on the top of the ship so it can't be intercepted.

    If it dives slowly at small angle then it become an easy target because it flies at 40km so it will go a long way untill it hits the target. But most ground or sea radars can only see at 30km in altitude. If the burke wants to see it, it will need to activate its ABM capabilities to see higher. When doing this it can't see at low altitude if I'm not wrong. So if you lunch also some oniks they will go through easily undetected.

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:27 pm

    Isos wrote:KH 32 would be seen at very long range. It is meant to fly at 40 km in altitude while most standard missile can engage taret at max 20-30km

    The air defence on arleig burks and tico can engage it only when it dive for attack in the last part of its flight. So depend on the angle of attack it can or can't be intercepted.

    If it has a 90° attack then it will hit on the top of the ship so it can't be intercepted.

    If it dives slowly at small angle then it become an easy target because it flies at 40km so it will go a long way untill it hits the target. But most ground or sea radars can only see at 30km in altitude. If the burke wants to see it, it will need to activate its ABM capabilities to see higher. When doing this it can't see at low altitude if I'm not wrong. So if you lunch also some oniks they will go through easily undetected.

    This aeticle has an analysis of probabilty of interception. Does not seem good esp whne ripple fired
    http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/focus-analysis/naval-technology/6094-new-kh-32-antiship-missile-becomes-operational-in-russia-part-2.html

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:24 pm

    GarryB wrote:Indeed, but the Kh-32 is the old rocket propelled weapon, and Kinshal is the next generation scramjet powered hypersonic missile that is twice as fast and has double the range...

    Kh-32 is very under rated in the west because it looks exactly like a Kh-22M which has been in service for some time... ironically making the Backfire seem not so dangerous...

    I think that is also why it is so large. I would imagine if the they equipped TU-22 to carry Kinshal each TU-22 could carry 6-10 missiles each. Which would mean 4 planes could rain hades down on a carrier group from 5000 km radius with mach 10 missiles....O M G!!!
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 03, 2018 7:58 pm

    Just looking at the diameter of the Kinzhal on the MiG-31s I rather suspect it would only be able to be carried externally, so we are talking four at most... though with a big rear mounted solid rocket booster it could be further accelerated so that a lower flying slower aircraft like Tu-22M3 could get the same range and speed performance as from a MiG-31...

    The internal weapon bay of the Tu-22M3 would be free to launch the new cruise missiles they were developing for it with 1,500km range too... so 4 Kinzhals and 6 cruise missiles would be quite a payload...

    One 40km altitude airburst high radiation nuke bomb to blind radar for a few minutes while low flying missiles sneak in...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:38 pm

    KH-32 weights 5800 kg, and it can carry 2, so 6 on triple mounts should be no sweat. But you bring up a good point in regard to the launch envelope of Kinzhal, its possible TU-22 cannot get into the launch envelop so either boosters or just stick with the impressive KH-32s. Forget about nukes, use those an its all over.

    GarryB wrote:Just looking at the diameter of the Kinzhal on the MiG-31s I rather suspect it would only be able to be carried externally, so we are talking four at most... though with a big rear mounted solid rocket booster it could be further accelerated so that a lower flying slower aircraft like Tu-22M3 could get the same range and speed performance as from a MiG-31...

    The internal weapon bay of the Tu-22M3 would be free to launch the new cruise missiles they were developing for it with 1,500km range too... so 4 Kinzhals and 6 cruise missiles would be quite a payload...

    One 40km altitude airburst high radiation nuke bomb to blind radar for a few minutes while low flying missiles sneak in...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 04, 2018 6:46 pm

    If land based Russian aircraft are engaging US carrier groups you can be sure the mission of those carrier groups is not to shoot down some Tu-22M3s... it is probably to attack land targets or naval bases in Russia... so it is going to be a nuclear war anyway...

    The Tu-22M3 can carry three Kh-22M missiles which externally look identical to the Kh-32, so I suspect three would be the max payload of the current aircraft.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:09 pm

    GarryB wrote:If land based Russian aircraft are engaging US carrier groups you can be sure the mission of those carrier groups is not to shoot down some Tu-22M3s... it is probably to attack land targets or naval bases in Russia... so it is going to be a nuclear war anyway...

    The Tu-22M3 can carry three Kh-22M missiles which externally look identical to the Kh-32, so I suspect three would be the max payload of the current aircraft.

    They can carry no more then 3x KK32s which weight close to 6T each. But how many Kinzhal missiles can they carry that weight about 1.5T. I can see scenarios where it is not necessarily a nuclear war. For example, the US kills a bunch of Russians in an air strike in Syria, and Russia says it will not strike back if the US steers clear of Syria, removes it troops and pulls back its carriers. And the US refuses so Russia decides it has to extract payback. I don't think that would go nuclear..but it would be very dangerous and close.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:40 am


    They can carry no more then 3x KK32s which weight close to 6T each. But how many Kinzhal missiles can they carry that weight about 1.5T.

    Not really just about weight though... the three Kh-32s would go under the two main wing pylons and a central position where the internal weapon bay is located with the third missile semi recessed.

    An alternative would be to have two Kh-32s and use the rotary launcher in the internal bay for 6 x Kh-15 rocket powered short range attack missiles or a similar reduced size weapon they might be developing.

    Because of the diameter of the Kinzhal you would have to mount them externally so there are four main external weapon positions... two on the wings and two on the engine intakes where normally multiple ejector racks are used for carrying large numbers of iron bombs... there is talk of fitting 8 cruise missiles on these four positions but I have never actually seen anything but MERs and bombs there.

    And the US refuses so Russia decides it has to extract payback. I don't think that would go nuclear..but it would be very dangerous and close.

    The Americans would claim the Russians were killed because they were located with the enemy, whereas an intentional Russian attack deliberately intended to kill US personnel is something rather different and would likely be considered an act of war.

    Such an attack of retribution is rather unlikely... it would be more likely that a US manned position in Syria would be attacked with something like Iskander... or perhaps a Tu-160 delivering a Father Of All Bombs... to a location known to include US "advisers". The US wont be able to bleat about it because officially there were no US personnel there in the first place...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    mnztr

    Posts : 51
    Points : 59
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  mnztr on Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:22 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    They can carry no more then 3x KK32s which weight close to 6T each. But how many Kinzhal missiles can they carry that weight about 1.5T.

    Not really just about weight though... the three Kh-32s would go under the two main wing pylons and a central position where the internal weapon bay is located with the third missile semi recessed.

    An alternative would be to have two Kh-32s and use the rotary launcher in the internal bay for 6 x Kh-15 rocket powered short range attack missiles or a similar reduced size weapon they might be developing.

    Because of the diameter of the Kinzhal you would have to mount them externally so there are four main external weapon positions... two on the wings and two on the engine intakes where normally multiple ejector racks are used for carrying large numbers of iron bombs... there is talk of fitting 8 cruise missiles on these four positions but I have never actually seen anything but MERs and bombs there.

    And the US refuses so Russia decides it has to extract payback. I don't think that would go nuclear..but it would be very dangerous and close.

    The Americans would claim the Russians were killed because they were located with the enemy, whereas an intentional Russian attack deliberately intended to kill US personnel is something rather different and would likely be considered an act of war.

    Such an attack of retribution is rather unlikely... it would be more likely that a US manned position in Syria would be attacked with something like Iskander... or perhaps a Tu-160 delivering a Father Of All Bombs... to a location known to include US "advisers". The US wont be able to bleat about it because officially there were no US personnel there in the first place...

    They could do it with Kinzhal as well, seems likely it is capable of land attack. Maybe they will unleash a few for testing in Syria just to prove to they Americans they are an operational weapon, one that can be sold to Iran if political conditional deteriorate.... muh huh huh
    avatar
    dino00

    Posts : 124
    Points : 169
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Location : portugal

    Kh-32

    Post  dino00 on Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:05 am

    Is kh-32 the Kh-mt they were developing?
    Can Kh 32 hit land targets?

    Hole

    Posts : 124
    Points : 126
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 41
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Hole on Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:52 am

    To my knowledge:
    No.
    Yes.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:24 am

    They could do it with Kinzhal as well, seems likely it is capable of land attack. Maybe they will unleash a few for testing in Syria just to prove to they Americans they are an operational weapon, one that can be sold to Iran if political conditional deteriorate.... muh huh huh

    Getting to use new toys is fun, but the main problem there is that you are pretty much handing bits to the Americans, plus information that you really want to keep from them as long as possible... remember these missiles are likely made of the new high temperature metals they have developed... something the US would love to get its hands on...

    FOAB would contain more conventional materials, yet would obliterate the target to ensure a good kill count on an enemy HQ... of course the US will claim in advance it was a childrens hospital and a school and two churches they hit but who gives a fuck what they say these days?

    Can Kh 32 hit land targets?

    I can't confirm it with facts, but lets just say that the Kh-32 replaces the Kh-22M, which looks very very similar.

    The Kh-22M comes in almost a dozen different versions with different guidance and warhead options and is intended to be the primary weapon of the Tu-22M3 and also Tu-95. In its SEAD role of theatre long range strike there are models designed to hit coordinates on the ground... to attack known main runways or SAM sites or major command centres. There are also anti radiation models designed to destroy radars and SAMs and as a second launch weapon for use against well defended ships. There are also active radar homing models for use against large structures like bridges or ships.

    The Kh-32 therefore replaces the anti ship and land attack models of the Kh-22M. The question is... are there lots of different models of the Kh-32 or one multifunction model with a choice of nuclear or conventional warheads... I suspect the latter.

    Note that surface launched Russian anti ship missiles all seem to have been upgraded with land attack capacities too, so I suspect the same for air launched missiles too.

    Having said that I have seen no actual evidence, but I think my reasoning is sound.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Kh-32 thread

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:26 pm