Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+69
Scorpius
Krepost
Lennox
Podlodka77
Arkanghelsk
franco
Mir
Lurk83
ALAMO
Daniel_Admassu
lancelot
Swede55
Sujoy
Kiko
RTN
ahmedfire
PhSt
owais.usmani
limb
KoTeMoRe
william.boutros
tanino
lyle6
ult
The-thing-next-door
calripson
Tsavo Lion
mnztr
thegopnik
George1
medo
verkhoturye51
bolshevik345
GunshipDemocracy
LMFS
flamming_python
dino00
Hole
ATLASCUB
magnumcromagnon
Big_Gazza
Arrow
Enera
x_54_u43
kvs
hoom
Tingsay
Azi
rrob
gaurav
arpakola
Rowdyhorse4
Teshub
TheArmenian
KomissarBojanchev
Rmf
Singular_Transform
Vann7
AlfaT8
JohninMK
Isos
Cyberspec
miketheterrible
max steel
PapaDragon
Mindstorm
Viktor
GarryB
Austin
73 posters

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 7959
    Points : 7947
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 46
    Location : Scholzistan

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Hole Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:25 pm

    The guy is like Piotr Butowski. As long as it´s about pure military or technical matters he is alright, but as soon as politics come up he follows the "official western narrative/line".

    GarryB, Big_Gazza, JohninMK, miketheterrible, LMFS and Rasisuki Nebia like this post

    franco
    franco


    Posts : 5577
    Points : 5607
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  franco Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:29 pm

    Hole wrote:The guy is like Piotr Butowski. As long as it´s about pure military or technical matters he is alright, but as soon as politics come up he follows the "official western narrative/line".

    Well, there is that "grant money" factor held over their heads Rolling Eyes

    GarryB, JohninMK and Hole like this post

    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible


    Posts : 7403
    Points : 7377
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  miketheterrible Sun Nov 28, 2021 1:27 am

    Isos wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    Rob Lee
    @RALee85
    ·
    1h
    A TASS source says that NPO Mashinostroyenia has begun serial production of the Tsirkon hypersonic missile

    I'm not a fan of the moron Rob Lee who keeps intentionally providing misinformation regarding Russia and events that happen. So I rather use direct links.

    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/13041523

    I disagree strongly with you.

    Most of the time he uses russian articles and does the effort to summurize them without commenting.

    He is quite reliable.

    And even when he gives his opinion it is never biased. Btw it is very rare to see him give his opinion. I follow him daily.

    He is the only reliable source out there on twitter. Most others are too much fanboys (both side).

    That is fine that you do, but it doesn't subside that he is very biased to being pro west. I mean, its obvious why he would be and I do not fault him for it. It is just that I rather just use official sources rather than someone who talks on behalf of the sources.

    I call anyone a useful idiot a moron. Even if I do understand their reasonings.

    And yes, I do agree to an extent, compared to most "experts" on twatter, he is the better ones.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 10222
    Points : 10208
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Isos Sun Nov 28, 2021 2:14 am

    It is just that I rather just use official sources rather than someone who talks on behalf of the sources.

    He summurize and always share the sources that are always russian. Like in my original post where I quote him.

    "A TASS source says that NPO Mashinostroyenia has begun serial production of the Tsirkon hypersonic missile"

    Where do you see biased or lies or pro west stuff there ?

    He does a great work translating and talking about stuff that non russian speakers wouldn't share.

    90% of his posts are similar to this one. That guy diserves credit and respect for his work. I only share its posts lile this. For the rest of its post he is free to have an opinion. I never share opinions, only real facts.
    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 1735
    Points : 1729
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Arrow Mon Nov 29, 2021 12:23 pm

    Another Cirkon test.  The missile flew 400 km.  Why are they still testing at such a short distance scratch

    https://m.tvzvezda.ru/news/202111291315-mUD07.html
    JohninMK
    JohninMK


    Posts : 11732
    Points : 11859
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  JohninMK Mon Nov 29, 2021 12:40 pm

    Arrow wrote:Another Cirkon test.  The missile flew 400 km.  Why are they still testing at such a short distance scratch

    Testing take off and landing?

    Its still a devastating weapon at that range, it arrives almost before the enemy has recognised its launch!
    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 1735
    Points : 1729
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Arrow Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:29 pm

    The range is very important, especially if you are attacking a group of aircraft carriers. The range of over 1000 km makes it possible to launch Cirkon from beyond the range of the aircraft carrier. With a range of 400km, you enter the range of the carrier group, putting your frigate at risk.
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 17841
    Points : 18346
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  George1 Mon Nov 29, 2021 1:36 pm

    LMFS likes this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 1735
    Points : 1729
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Arrow Mon Nov 29, 2021 2:34 pm

    Of course, the flight range of 400km + can be interpreted differently Very Happy
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 7959
    Points : 7947
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 46
    Location : Scholzistan

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Hole Mon Nov 29, 2021 7:52 pm

    Why should the Russians drop their pants? They know the data, how much fuel is left after 400 or 500km. Let the rest of the world guess , at least a few more month.

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 10222
    Points : 10208
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Isos Mon Nov 29, 2021 7:59 pm

    You also need to see how it does in terminal attack with half the fuel inside.

    Some targets will need to be deal with way under the max range.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 34846
    Points : 35364
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  GarryB Tue Nov 30, 2021 6:57 am

    This is just testing... it will be during training and exercises that they will be exploiting the natural range of the weapon... imagine the panic in the west when this thing is used during an exercise to 1,600km...

    I am sure they are still experimenting with the height this missile will be flying at, and unlike a rocket the onboard flight control system can adjust the thrust setting to change speed and altitude.

    With a normal car it makes sense on an open flat salt plain where you can drive in any direction where it is open and flat with no obstacles that for efficient long range driving that moving with the engine in idle you maximise your range by minimising your fuel consumption, but if you start the engine and then put it in first gear and idle along you might slowly get to 20km/h which is not fuel efficient at all. Actually using the accelerator pedal to burn fuel faster and then moving up through the gears to speeds of 80-90km/h where you are in top gear but the engine is running at idle will get you to your best max range with a full tank of fuel... it might even be that your efficient engine rev speed might be 2,500 rpm so in top gear that might be 150km/h it really all depends on the car.

    The point is that with an aircraft using a jet engine that climbing to higher altitudes where the air is colder and much thinner, not only is the air resistance much lower but the lower friction means you can fly much much faster using much less power, so for instance full thrust to climb to 30km altitude and mach 8 or 9, but because of the low drag design and lack of friction at that altitude maybe dial back the thrust to a flight efficient setting... perhaps 60% thrust... note in a normal jet engine the air coming through the engine has to be slowed down because it goes through the hot section where fuel is added and burned at subsonic speeds, but a scramjet the airflow can be the external airflow or even faster... so thrust can be significant and not at all reduced with altitude despite the air being much thinner the volume of air at that flight speed would be enormous.

    Remember this is a smart missile that knows where its target roughly is and has a radar and sensors to detect enemy radar and incoming ARH missiles and SAM sites and can fly around enemy defences on its way to its target and can jam and decoy interceptor missiles so it would also be able to change throttle settings to speed up or even slow down where it calculates it to be worth it.

    When engaging a target 1,000km away the fact that it flew at only mach 6 for the first 600km wont mean anything to the target when it screams into view at mach 9 at 40km altitude.

    Of course as it burns fuel it gets lighter...It might even perform a pop up climb over the last 100km so it can dive nearly vertically on target... something that would be rather hard to counter... even if it was moving much slower... the irony of it would be diving at 3km/s means a Phalanx leading the missile to get a hit would be firing into the deck of the ship with its lead before the missile to into effective firing range of the system.... Twisted Evil
    LMFS
    LMFS


    Posts : 4995
    Points : 4995
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  LMFS Tue Nov 30, 2021 10:28 pm

    Putin: Russia will be armed with sea-based hypersonic weapons from 2022

    The relevant tests were successful, the President of the Russian Federation noted

    MOSCOW, November 30. /tass/. A new sea-based hypersonic missile will be delivered to the Russian Armed Forces from the beginning of next year. This was stated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking at the plenary session of the VTB Capital investment forum " Russia is Calling!".

    "We have now tested, and successfully, and from the beginning of the year we will be armed with a new sea-based hypersonic missile-Mach 9. The flight time will also be five minutes before those who give orders, " Putin said.

    The President stressed that if strike complexes appear on the territory of Ukraine, the missile flight time to Moscow will be seven to ten minutes, and in the case of hypersonic weapons deployment - five minutes.

    On November 18, the Defense Ministry announced the successful test launch of a hypersonic Zircon missile from the Northern Fleet frigate Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov at a surface target in the White Sea. Earlier, a TASS source reported that the state tests of the Zircon will begin in November and continue in December. In total, it is planned to perform five launches on sea and coastal targets. It was also reported that two Zircon launches from the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine conducted for the first time on October 4 opened the way for state tests of a surface-launched missile.

    On August 24, at the Army-2021 international military-technical forum, a contract was signed for the supply of Zircons to the Russian Defense Ministry.

    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/13068939

    A not so subtle hint for some gentlemen sitting in Washington...

    George1, Rasisuki Nebia and Mir like this post

    dino00
    dino00


    Posts : 1677
    Points : 1714
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 35
    Location : portugal

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  dino00 Wed Dec 01, 2021 3:37 pm

    Bastion" for "Zircon". Where will the hypersonic missile land?

    Source in the defense industry complex: the coastal complex "Bastion" is being adapted for the "Zircon" missile


    "The Bastion complex will be just finalized for the use of Zircon, the corresponding project is already in place,” the source told Gazeta.Ru.

    https://m.gazeta.ru/army/2021/12/01/14268355.shtml

    GarryB, Big_Gazza, hoom, LMFS, Hole and Mir like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 34846
    Points : 35364
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  GarryB Thu Dec 02, 2021 12:25 am

    So shore based 1,000km range mach 9 anti ship and land attack missiles.... putting a few in Kaliningrad would stop that Baltic state from blocking Russia from using the Baltic Sea...

    dino00, Big_Gazza and Hole like this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4020
    Points : 4018
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Dec 02, 2021 4:04 am

    Any launch tube currently fitted with Kalibres or Oniks can handle Zirkon, albeit maybe with some slight upgrades and a software update. Twisted Evil

    The Murkans are a slow bunch, but even they can't have failed to sense the shift in the wind and the gathering of storm clouds. Razz

    Hole and Mir like this post

    RTN
    RTN


    Posts : 682
    Points : 661
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield, CT

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  RTN Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:30 am

    Hypersonic cruise missiles are fine but knowing actually know where to shoot to destroy a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) is difficult. A few major reasons why:


    1. The ocean is really big, and how hard it is to actually find a carrier seems to depend on who’s talking. I recall someone talking about a war game where a US carrier hid from the US for several weeks, but have I have been unable to find more information or what restrictions were placed on the US for the war game. I’ve also heard that any CSG is basically tracked by every nation with the desire to do so.

    2. Satellites seem to either be decisive observational platforms, the first targets of military action and irrelevant in a conflict, or only relevant for the opening few days of a conflict that it will take to destroy observational satellites in GSO. Also mentioned are the efficacy of satellite blinding and other non-kinetic countermeasures.


    3. A strike by aircraft either seems to totally give away the carrier’s position, or only be moderately useful information to an adversary.


    4. Adversarial submarines are either an enormous threat due to spotting/strike capability, or considered incapable of getting close enough to the carrier to matter.


    5. The effectiveness of the rest of the CSG as acting as a screening force, particularly in obfuscating the location of the carrier seems to either be making the carrier a bigger target or make little difference.
    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 1554
    Points : 1556
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  lancelot Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:19 am

    RTN wrote:Hypersonic cruise missiles are fine but knowing actually know where to shoot to destroy a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) is difficult. A few major reasons why:
    1. The ocean is really big, and how hard it is to actually find a carrier seems to depend on who’s talking. I recall someone talking about a war game where a US carrier hid from the US for several weeks, but have I have been unable to find more information or what restrictions were placed on the US for the war game. I’ve also heard that any CSG is basically tracked by every nation with the desire to do so.
    2. Satellites seem to either be decisive observational platforms, the first targets of military action and irrelevant in a conflict, or only relevant for the opening few days of a conflict that it will take to destroy observational satellites in GSO. Also mentioned are the efficacy of satellite blinding and other non-kinetic countermeasures.
    3. A strike by aircraft either seems to totally give away the carrier’s position, or only be moderately useful information to an adversary.
    4. Adversarial submarines are either an enormous threat due to spotting/strike capability, or considered incapable of getting close enough to the carrier to matter.
    5. The effectiveness of the rest of the CSG as acting as a screening force, particularly in obfuscating the location of the carrier seems to either be making the carrier a bigger target or make little difference.

    Satellites would be good enough to spot the major surface combatants in case of a limited conflict scenario. In case of a full blown conflict the satellite networks might be put down. But in that case you would still have spotter aircraft and drones. The major powers also have rapid launch capabilities which could easily put a limited satellite network back up in just a couple of days assuming spare satellites are available. Russia has Rokot, has demonstrated submarine launch of satellites, the US has the Minotaur and air launched Pegasus, and China has the Long March 11. The Long March 11 can be launch from a road vehicle or ship platform.

    Submarines can be an enormous threat and I think the threat will increase once they start putting spotter drones in submarines. Modern Russian submarine torpedos have increased range and much more modern cruise missiles than they had even in Soviet times.

    The destroyers protecting the carrier can't defend against hypersonic weapons. AEGIS was originally designed at massive expense to protect against Soviet supersonic weapons. Right now the US Navy has no defense against hypersonic weapons.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4020
    Points : 4018
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:37 am

    RTN wrote:blah blah blah

    More of the same debunked arguments.  You're trying hard to convince yourself (and others) but I doubt anyone will buy it.

    Hard to find carriers? Suspect

    Carriers are useless unless they are close enough to their targets to unleash their air power (they do no good skulking around the central Atlantic trying not to be seen...).  Getting within effective range of a peer competitor (Russia, China) puts them well within detection range, and well within range of the defenders strike forces. US defenses can't handle hypersonic maneuvering missiles, and pls don't insult us by claiming otherwise.  The palpable sense of panic emanating from the Pentagram tells us everything we need to know about Murkan confidence in the ability of CBG escort screens to keep the CVNs intact. Razz

    Carriers are very useful for gunboat diplomacy against minor nations (which is why China will procure some, and Russia will probably build one next decade) but lets not kid ourselves.  These days carriers are massive liabilities when faced with a peer military power - too vulnerable to risk, too few to absorb engagement losses, and stuffed to the gunnels with thousands of naval personnel such that a loss with most/all hands will be an unmitigated PR disaster of herculean proportions.

    Hole, lancelot, Mir and Broski like this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4020
    Points : 4018
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:45 am

    lancelot wrote:The destroyers protecting the carrier can't defend against hypersonic weapons. AEGIS was originally designed at massive expense to protect against Soviet supersonic weapons. Right now the US Navy has no defense against hypersonic weapons.

    Bingo, and its not a case of simply developing such defenses as hypersonic speeds radically change the relative difficulties of offense and defense to the clear advantage of the attacker. Physics simply is not kind to those who want to knock out maneuvering hypersonic weapons.

    Those who think that carriers can survive modern peer-to-peer warfare are akin to those who wanted to lay down new battleships in the early 1940s...
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2353
    Points : 2341
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  hoom Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:50 am

    The Bastion complex will be just finalized for the use of Zircon, the corresponding project is already in place
    Ah interesting, I was going to ask if anyone had heard of a coastal battery being in the works.

    1. The ocean is really big, and how hard it is to actually find a carrier seems to depend on who’s talking.
    Russia doesn't need to hunt down a Carrier in the deep Pacific.

    In the same way that the Russian fleet is generally restricted by the geography to limited areas around the main fleet bases, a US Carrier strike group threatening to strike Russia will have to be also within a restricted group of areas.
    How much noise, wake, EM emissions etc does a CVBG at 30kt & sweeping ahead for subs make? A lot.

    Martyanov has done some maths in this article http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2021/11/i-am-abusing-this-expression.html
    Short version: Assuming at least similar quality of seeker to Onyx, a Zirkon seeker should be able to find targets within about a 40km square.
    It would take about 4mins for a Mach 9 Zirkon to travel 500km.
    A Carrier at 30kt can move a maximum of about 4km in that time -> they need to know the location within only about 15km radius at launch.

    The question I have with that is how much can a Mach 9 missile correct its course in the last 10-15 seconds to close from target detection to impact?
    I suspect that is a much more limiting factor -> will need to get seeker lockon further out than 40km or a more accurate fix at launch.

    Hole and Broski like this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 1735
    Points : 1729
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Arrow Thu Dec 02, 2021 11:41 pm

    lancelot wrote:

    Satellites would be good enough to spot the major surface combatants in case of a limited conflict scenario. In case of a full blown conflict the satellite networks might be put down. But in that case you would still have spotter aircraft and drones. The major powers also have rapid launch capabilities which could easily put .

    The problem is that Russia still has very few satellites pointing to sea targets.  They currently have only one radar Pion NKS and 4 Liana ELINT satellites.  Much more radar satellites are needed.[/quote]
    thegopnik
    thegopnik


    Posts : 1190
    Points : 1196
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  thegopnik Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:18 am

    RTN wrote:Hypersonic cruise missiles are fine but knowing actually know where to shoot to destroy a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) is difficult. A few major reasons why:


    1. The ocean is really big, and how hard it is to actually find a carrier seems to depend on who’s talking. I recall someone talking about a war game where a US carrier hid from the US for several weeks, but have I have been unable to find more information or what restrictions were placed on the US for the war game. I’ve also heard that any CSG is basically tracked by every nation with the desire to do so.

    2. Satellites seem to either be decisive observational platforms, the first targets of military action and irrelevant in a conflict, or only relevant for the opening few days of a conflict that it will take to destroy observational satellites in GSO. Also mentioned are the efficacy of satellite blinding and other non-kinetic countermeasures.


    3. A strike by aircraft either seems to totally give away the carrier’s position, or only be moderately useful information to an adversary.


    4. Adversarial submarines are either an enormous threat due to spotting/strike capability, or considered incapable of getting close enough to the carrier to matter.


    5. The effectiveness of the rest of the CSG as acting as a screening force, particularly in obfuscating the location of the carrier seems to either be making the carrier a bigger target or make little difference.

    1. The ocean is big but satellites but that is why Russia has multiple satellites to monitor where ship are with their footprint detection range, otherwise why do we always get reports from tass of them being aware where are ships are at? GEO sats had their satellite resolution improve over the years that 100 meters or so would be enough to identify carriers especially with GEO satellites having the biggest footprints. I am sure you remember or have not forgotten that they have a underwater SONAR network close to their coasts, or can even making their SONAR detection be placed anywhere on this earth by using nuclear reactors where low frequency messages can be sent to their command of the location of their ships and using via satellites to pinpoint where that ship was at.

    2. I dont think the U.S. AFAIK is able to intercept MEO or GEO sats(they made a big deal of muh kessler effect from intercepting their normally high LEO satellite) but they can with LEO sats if your going as far as targetting satellites thats going to be some nuclear war kind of shit where the Russians in return will do the same in targetting our satelites and much of the targetting information on ships will gradually degrade. Russia has demonstrated their satellites can use black carbon cloud particle material to mask themselves from incoming interceptor missiles

    3. I think the kinzhal has a longer range than the combat radius of the F-35 if the F-35 flies passed its max combat radius from carrier than its going to have to land into the ocean. Either way the carrier or aircraft on patrol has to find the carrier of the kinzhal 1st.

    4. Missiles can be fired from underwater being 1000s kms away or even few hundred kilometers away from the carrier group, aircrafts on patrol will have absolutely a hard time finding an underwater submarine. The submarine can simply launch a barrage of zircons at the carrier strike groups from underwater and just drift away because their will be sunk ships and any aircraft on patrol is going to have to find land very close by or get ready to parachute sending a distress signal to find you floating in the cold sea hoping there are no sharks.

    5. I dont know what this mumble is about?
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 34846
    Points : 35364
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  GarryB Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:20 pm


    1. The ocean is really big, and how hard it is to actually find a carrier seems to depend on who’s talking. I recall someone talking about a war game where a US carrier hid from the US for several weeks, but have I have been unable to find more information or what restrictions were placed on the US for the war game. I’ve also heard that any CSG is basically tracked by every nation with the desire to do so.

    US carrier groups would be quite safe in and around US waters or in the southern Pacific or southern atlantic, but approaching Russian waters and they come in to view of ground based over the horizon radars which would detect objects the size of aircraft carriers from enormous ranges.

    Just as importantly the IR signature of US carriers and their escort vessels would give their positions away easily enough to satellites.

    2. Satellites seem to either be decisive observational platforms, the first targets of military action and irrelevant in a conflict, or only relevant for the opening few days of a conflict that it will take to destroy observational satellites in GSO. Also mentioned are the efficacy of satellite blinding and other non-kinetic countermeasures.

    Satellites will give a good indication of where everything is... if they are taken out then it is pretty obvious what is happening so you can jump straight to a full war scenario and those carrier groups wont have moved very far from the last place they were located at before the satellites went down.

    There are plenty of other assets tracking ships near Russian territory including ground and air and space based systems.

    And also systems under the water from sea bed sonar arrays to subs and corvettes and frigates in friendly waters.

    3. A strike by aircraft either seems to totally give away the carrier’s position, or only be moderately useful information to an adversary.

    Actually a strike by carrier based aircraft forces the carrier to operate much closer to enemy territory and makes them easier targets to find and engage.

    The limited effective range of F-35 and F-18 in the strike role limits the operational distances the ship can operate from... extending that range with inflight refuelling ties up more aircraft because they now use buddy refuelling instead of dedicated tanker aircraft.


    4. Adversarial submarines are either an enormous threat due to spotting/strike capability, or considered incapable of getting close enough to the carrier to matter.

    The US Navy knows from its own experience that SSKs are terribly dangerous and I rather suspect they realise that Yasen subs are probably pretty dangerous too... not to mention the improved kilo and Lada classes.

    5. The effectiveness of the rest of the CSG as acting as a screening force, particularly in obfuscating the location of the carrier seems to either be making the carrier a bigger target or make little difference.

    A screening force is supposed to give early warning and to be relatively expendable.... but is rarely the latter because spotting a carrier force is not as hard these days as it used to be...

    Submarines can be an enormous threat and I think the threat will increase once they start putting spotter drones in submarines. Modern Russian submarine torpedos have increased range and much more modern cruise missiles than they had even in Soviet times.

    The availability of long range cruise missiles also makes it rather useful to deploy further and farther as a threat from US forces in Europe leading to a cruise missile strike against the Pentagon will tell them to back off rather more vigorously than a similar strike to Brussels or Paris or Bonn.

    Carriers are very useful for gunboat diplomacy against minor nations (which is why China will procure some, and Russia will probably build one next decade) but lets not kid ourselves.

    Air power providing fighter and AWACS support is at the core of HATO air defence on land and at sea.

    For Russia it is an important addition that extends reach and vision that enhances performance.

    I rather suspect the best solution to hypersonic missile threats will be an energy weapon and that at sea would be the easiest place to deploy such a system though the volume required for such a system would be enormous so it will likely be Cruiser based... which would make defending CVNs useful to help protect such large ships.


    Those who think that carriers can survive modern peer-to-peer warfare are akin to those who wanted to lay down new battleships in the early 1940s...

    What you are trying to say there is that in the early 1940s the aircraft overtook the surface ship mounted gun battery because an aircraft carried bomb can reach further and faster than any ship mounted gun, while having radar in the air helped prevent surprise attacks which are so critical in wartime.

    What you are trying to infer therefore is that Hypersonic missiles has rendered aircraft based radar and aircraft based interceptors ineffective... and I disagree.

    I think when HATO gets hypersonic manouvering missiles that Russia will not withdraw Su-57s and Su-75s from service and get rid of all their biggest airfields and instead rely in small 200m motorway strips of pavement for basing helicopters and light aircraft because anything bigger would be dead.

    I would suggest the focus would be on the guidance of the threat... optical jammers, lasers, and missile interceptors will be part of the solution but detecting threats early requires AWACS and responding quickly means airborne fighters which in the Navy away from Russian waters means aircraft carriers.

    You get two choices with carriers... tiny useless ones with VSTOL fighters that are worse than useless, or big ones with Su-57 like fighters able to carry four internal and perhaps six external R-37Ms or their replacements perhaps even new missiles based on the S-550 SAM...

    The simple truth is that nothing gives you situational awareness like being able to send a small group of armed fighter aircraft to have a look at a blip on a radar screen.

    New photonic radar might allow you to look at the target visually and ID it but fighters can shoot it down if needed too... or just make it go away.

    The problem is that Russia still has very few satellites pointing to sea targets. They currently have only one radar Pion NKS and 4 Liana ELINT satellites. Much more radar satellites are needed.

    They go around the earth every 90 minutes, so 16 times a day it goes around the planet seeing the water around Russia.... how far do you think carrier groups could move in 1 and a half hours?

    They will have pins in maps showing the current location of all carrier groups for every country that has aircraft carriers and a couple of times a day most of those pins will move to follow the carriers themselves... someone shoots down the satellite and those carrier group locations near Russian waters become target number one and many of them could be eliminated within one hour using Kinzhal and MiG-31Ks.

    Flying up to 750km in 13 minutes and then having the missile then fly up to 2,000km at about 3km per second... so about another 10-15 minutes and boom.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 10222
    Points : 10208
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Isos Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:24 pm

    A US carrier in the middle of the pacific near Australian shores doesn't need to be found... it is not dangerous.

    Get closer to Russian or Chinese borders and it is easy.

    An awacs has a detection range of 600km against fighter so at least the same range against carriers. A flight of 3 hours over the sea and they will spot the carrier formation.

    The carrier group will also emmits lot of EM noise (radar, comms...). A radar with active range of 400km means its signal go 800km (2 way trip) and bounce on the detected object. That's a lot of power. ELINT plateforms can detect it from 800km easily.

    Carriers prodyce also huge noise and can be tracked by submarine from very far away. Afterburner engine produce 150 decibels. Thry can easily be tracked by sonars or sosus like sonars.

    And since their fighter have around 1000km max range it can't really hide if it is attacking.

    Russia is qyite safe against them.

    Hole likes this post


    Sponsored content


    3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile - Page 31 Empty Re: 3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:45 am