I always wonder why russia still doesn't design such version of kalibr. That's the weapon they should have against NATO.
What makes you think they have not?
The AS-18 Kazoo is described as able to carry a submunition warhead... and Iskander also has the option of submunition warheads too...
And be shot down by the AAA or fast helos &/ fighters on CAP! The CM will need to be a big bomb truck to inflict lasting damage, not worth it!
Actually several UK Tornados were shot down in Desert Storm flying down Iraqi runways dropping submunitions in the very same job and a few of those were actually shot down... but then the whole point is to first deal with the air defence systems at the air field before you try to damage the runway...
And BTW why do they bother with anti runway submunitions if nothing can penetrate the air defences to deliver them?
Would it be better to send in some ARMs first and then a few cruise missiles, or some ARMs and some fighter bombers...
AAA would be good if it is connected to a network of radars and if it has the range to shoot them down. If the missile can release smart submunition from 2km altitude with some mannoeuvres, then AAA is useless too. Something like pantsir or tunguska missile would be the best and NATO doesn't have anything comparable. Only manpads which will have hard time acquiring a 2km altitude flying cruise missile.
BTW cruise missile are enough to make a big hole into the ground.
Cruise missiles would be very effective but an unmanned drone like Skat perhaps with four external Kh-31 ARMs and the internal bomb bay equipped with fixed KGMU submunition dispensers could be used... at 100km from the airfield it could search for radar emissions and launch all 4 Kh-31s at the targets... then approach in line with the runway at max speed at 20m altitude and release concrete piercing anti runway submunitions as it flys down the runway...
An Iskander with a 500kg HE warhead would make a big hole in a runway, but two KGMU-2 bombs could carry 20 odd BETAB-M concrete piercing submunitions 2 at a time down the length of the runway.
These munitions are designed to accelerate to enormous speeds and penetrate into the surface and then detonate to destroy the underlying concrete foundations... if the airfield is well defended you could send a dozen Skats that come in at the same time from each end.
If you do actually send a dozen you could load each with one KGMU-2 and one Kh-31 or Kh-29 to hit other targets of opportunity...
EW means can be used to confuse their altimeter sensors/radars, once they climb high enough, it's easier to detect & shoot them down with SAMs. A better strategy is to hit C4 sites, fuel/ammo dumps & a/c hangars instead.
It certainly can, but when do you use it?
And do you have it at every airfield the enemy wants to hit?
If you use it and they have UAVs with antennas listening for signals they might detect your jamming and launch a separate attack on your jamming equipment... or might send an encrypted command to the vulnerable platforms to go to inertial mode.
Fuel and ammo dumps, and hangars with planes in them are valuable targets but hitting airfields is also a valuable way of avoiding having to wipe out the enemies air force...
And above all and differently to the others you mention, it exists and is being already deployed.
Development of a longer air launched model will be interesting because that would mean if it was land launched it could exceed 500km range, but of course as long as it is not land launched it wont violate the INF treaty... but how long is that treaty going to last anyway.
Ok, some numbers for you: F-18 has 700 km radius, plus what MQ-25 adds to that (they talk about delivering 6800 kg of fuel at 900 km from the carrier) plus range of the LRASM >500 km. Now what is the use of your Zircon?
Zircon can be launched from any platform with the UKSK launcher... including corvettes and submarines and shipping crates... not every NATO ship operates with carrier escort...
Will still be shorter ranged and slower than Kinzhal.
Range is believed to be 1,000km and speed mach 7-8, with a scramjet engine providing power from launch to impact...
It will probably also be about 2.5 tons instead of the 5 tons of Kinzhal so an Su-33 could probably carry three of them.
A massive improvement but as explained above it does not have enough range to keep your capital ships safe from a CVN's air wing.
And that is why Russia needs carriers... with competent fighters with decent range and speed and missile payload capacity for air to air engagements.
The Kuznetsov will be ready in 3-4 years. Who says K is not compatible with a naval Su-57 and new carriers are necessary? What is 15-20 years in the future is the STOVL fighter and the fleet of LHDs
I personally would have liked to have seen a more ambitious upgrade of the K to include NPP and naval Su-57s... which would make 2 new CVNs good enough... one carrier in upgrade/overhaul and two operational/training at any given time.
What is this 15-20 years in the future LHD bullshit with STOVL aircraft... you already suggest that the current carrier is not good enough with the new missile, why cripple the future fleet with a pissant carrier and lame girly fighters that crash all the time?
Agreed that's why idea of small aircraft carriers fits good here.
The only time a small carrier is good is close to home... which means it is not the cheapest option... land based air power is much much cheaper and much more effective.