Climbing up to this lower friction area requires moving against gravity, which slows the missile. Missiles do this in early stages of flight, when climbing up to operational altitude, on which they fly most of the path. In this phase they offset the loss of speed due to climbing up with having engine turned on. Once they get up there and shut their engine down, all the maneuvering should be yawing and rolling and no pitching.
Any energy they use climbing up they will get back coming down, but the higher they go the less drag and faster they can move for a given level of engine thrust...
He meant the altitude in which the missile travels: Kh-22 20km, Kh-32 40km.
I read in books about the F-14 in the 1990s after information was revealed from newly available Russian sources that the Kh-22M operated at different heights and one was the 40km height specifically to overfly the US fleet air defence systems... the Kh-32 didn't exist then...
Perhaps the model they were talking about was an upgraded version of the Kh-22, because there was a family of missiles with different guidance and warheads.
The main reason for the Kh-32 to travel at this altitude is to maximize the range of its radar against his prefered prey: aircraft carriers.
They don't launch them at empty space in the hope it can find something, most of their long range anti ship missiles acquired their targets in flight on their way to the target area... it doesn't fly that fast to need to detect the target at extended ranges to be able to find and hit them.
If AEGIS ships will be located too densely, Kinzhal may have a lot of moving to do to pass in between unnoticed. Many turns slow the the missile down, so it will have to be used in big numbers to guarranty a hit.
The big circles around AEGIS class ships is the effective range of their SAMs to hit normal aircraft... if you reduced the size of those circles to show the distance at which they can shoot down mach 9 or mach 10 manouvering non ballistic targets there would not be a circle...
I haven't seen any basis for assuming so high altitude. Anyway the missile should fly on a depressed ballistic trajectory, so it won't be as free as CMs to move anywhere. In the final stage it will be gradually decreasing, but the effect on speed is questionable, because the air drag will increase, too.
Operating at high altitude offers a lot of benefits... including lower drag, and being out of reach of enemy air defences... any energy lost getting to such altitudes pays off in lower drag and extended range in the thinner colder air, and that energy to climb is returned when it descends on the target.
When operating at 20km altitude the original Kh-22 flys at mach 3... it doens't reach mach 3 in the climb up to that altitude... it normally gets to that altitude at mach 1.5 or so and then levels off and accelerates to mach 3, and when it gets to the target it enters a 30 degree dive and normally accelerates to mach 4.2 by the point of impact with the ship at sea level.
The AAD altitudes alone aren't a problem in the US with their endo and exo athmospheric daydreaming. The thing is a ballistic trajectory is a particular thing. If those analysts say it has a range of cca 1000 km and a ceiling of 20 km...a ceiling of 40 km would mean it has a range of 5000 km.
It does not have a ballistic trajectory... that is the point... if it did then it would be easily interceptable... the S-400 can intercept targets moving at 4.8km per second which, as you can work out pretty quickly is rather faster than the 2.8km per second that Kinzhal moves at, or the roughly 2.5km/s the Zircon will be moving at... their speed in not the primary factor in the ability of the Americans to intercept them or not, it is the fact that they fly like a plane... they do not follow a predictable flight path or trajectory curve.
The altitude an aircraft climbs to means nothing in regard to the distance it will travel in terms of flight distance.
Decoys are smaller then real warheads. 3-headed Kinzhal could carry 2 heads and 5 decoys.
Kinzhal is based on the Iskander, which reportedly has one warhead but also carries jammers and decoys that can be released in flight... against similar targets I would assume the same for the air launched model.
S in VSTOL would be more useful than V. Since T-50 needs 330 m to takeoff, Su-57 with izdeliye 30 and lightly armed could take off the Kuznetsov with only light changes in design.
The Su-33 is bigger and heavier, with more drag and less powerful engines than those currently fitted to the Su-57 and with a full internal weapon load I would suspect the Su-57 even with its current engines could easily take off from the Kuznetsov... though landing without a tailhook might be an issue.
Slower speed means trajectory doesn't change so much after a turn, so you fire many interceptors and increase the chance of a hit as much as you can. Kinzhal's good, but not without flaws.
Slower speed means the interception points are not so far away from the missile, that doesn't mean you can intercept it... even with dozens of interceptors...
Besides orders are everything. Captain tells Pentagon what's happened and if they tell him to find till the last seaman, guess what happens. Imagine Trump pulling tail between his legs?
And American commander told British commander to attack VDV position at Pristina airport and the Brit told the Yank where to go...
After the fourth of 5th ship is hit and sinks the others are not going to stick around and trump wont have any say in the matter... the commander of the group was likely on the carrier... the first to get hit...
Now how long is Venezuelan coastline? Try to block all the ports, naval bases and oil rigs with Burkes and let's see if 10 existing Mig-31K are enough.
They can sink any ship that gets within 2,000km of their current flight location... they don't need to unblock all the ports at once or free all the oil rigs at once...
But then again Russians are known to be some smart planners, not wanting to bankrupt like SU. How much's a Zircon and how many cells are in the navy now.
Each of their new corvettes have 8 tubes... newer ones might have 16. Their new Frigates have 16 tubes but may get more... we were expecting their destroyers to have 32 but they are talking about over 100, which would be 102 at least as they are in multiples of 8.
Scramjet engines are not expensive exotic material fan blades, they are shapes and burn rates and computer controlled fuel systems... they could easily mass produce those in enormous numbers...
Lads although Kinzhal discussion is very interesting but this is PAK-FA thread. Perhaps admin can move those posts to the relevant thread?